Can I be held liable if a gateway vanishes?


I'm beginning to wonder what my liabilities may be once I start using a system like Ripple.

For example if a gateway I'm using (say Bitstamp) suddenly vanishes, could I, as a user of Ripple and Bitstamp, be held liable for some sort of debt (in addition to losing my balance on that gateway)?

Say I have 3 bitcoins on Bitstamp (and they're worth $1000 each) and transfer them to Ripple and I buy for $3000 of Litecoin. Then for whatever reason Bitstamp disappears and the price of bitcoin reaches $100 000 (it's just an example), would it be possible that the person/service I bought Litecoin from comes to me and say "You bought us for 3 bitcoins of litecoins and you got your litecoins from us, but your gateway disappeared and hence we never had our bitcoins. So you're liable of $300 000 to us".

Or could Ripple itself come to me and say: "Look, you used coins coming from Bitstamp to buy Litecoins but Bitstamp couldn't honor his word, so now we'll force the sale of...

0 0


In most if not all Crypto 2.0 systems, a Gateway can:

Charge the users for IOU deposits Charge the users for IOU withdrawals


In Ripple, a Gateway can set a percentage fee for whenever their IOU is transferred from one user to another. Say, at 1% fee, to send someone $100, one needs to spend $101. The recipient receives $100, while the Gateway's liabilities decrease by $1, giving them that much in profit.


In Ethereum, a Gateway can create an arbitrary contract for how its currency will be used. This contract can include any fee for currency being transferred or exchanged, demurrage, or anything else that can be coded in a smart...

0 0

Can/Could vs Be Able To

There is a huge interest in the difference between can or could and be able as can or could and be able to are two different usages made in the English languages and they both carry different senses with them. Can or could and to be able to are all verbs. Can is the present tense of could and could is the past tense of can. To be able to is a different verb. However, one can see that the use of can or could in the English language is much more common than the use of the verb be able to.

What does Can or Could mean?

Can is used to indicate the idea of possibility as in the sentence given below.

I can do the work.

This only gives the idea that ‘it is possible for me to do the work’. The same is true even in the case of could.

On the other hand, could is generally used as a past tense form of can as in the sentence mentioned below.

I could go.

This sentence means ‘it was possible for me to go’....

0 0
Can LocalBTC traders be held liable for illegal activity? | Localbitcoins


over the past month I have sold a substantial amount of bitcoins both online and locally - If someone who buys the coins from me ends up using the coins to facilitate illegal actions, like buying/selling drugs, can I be held liable?




You need to set a sales policy stating that if you are aware that your bitcoins are being used for illegal activity, you will no longer sell coins to that particular buyer/seller. I tell all of my locals the same thing and nothing more needs to be said.


If you get money from a bank to buy a knife to commit a horrible crime, is the bank or the knife manufacturer at fault?


There are well publicized cases of bitcoin sellers being prosecuted because the coins were used for illegal activities. And Apps analogy is just as...

0 0

Real talk here, I could use professional legal advice but I’m not willing to paying for it so I guess I’ll take regular advice. On the PKandDK show tonight they’re planning on playing a game that involves some controversial topics as it pertains to their relationship. I’m not saying there’s going to be a divorce that stems from this game…buuuuut I’m not saying that there won’t be a divorce that stems form this game.

While I’d hate to see them separate I’m also much too selfish to make this about their relationship. The real question is; if I was involved in helping craft the questions and topics for this game and then it does somehow lead to divorce can one of their lawyers take 1/3 of my shit? If so I’m going to need them both to sign waivers or give a sworn statement that I’m not to be held liable. I’m not giving up my dog and collection of Nintendo games, clearly the first things that they’d go for.

Your PKandDK show forecast calls for a 90% chance of a real...

0 0

Provided that it is consensual, the other person was not unconscious and not mentally disabled and she was not drugged to where she was not aware of what was going on, the answer is no for the past conduct. In the state of Pennsylvania, the charge of statutory sexual assault is defined as follows:

Except as provided in section 3121 (relating to rape), a person commits a felony of the second degree when that person engages in sexual intercourse with a complainant under the age of 16 years and that person is four or more years older than the complainant and the complainant and the person are not married to each other.

The only other possible charge for future conduct is Corruption of Minors which is as follows:

Whoever, being of the age of 18 years and upwards, by any act corrupts or tends to corrupt the morals of any minor less than 18 years of age, or who aids, abets, entices or encourages any such minor in the commission of any crime, or who knowingly assists...

0 0
0 0

Can a "Good Samaritan" be held liable if he or she acts negligently even though they are trying to help?

"Good Samaritan" laws are designed to provide protection to those who render emergency aid to people in distress. The idea behind the statute is that someone should not be sued if they are trying to do a good deed and help someone even when there is no legal duty to help another. The policy reason behind good Samaritan laws is that without such laws, some people may avoid helping others for fear of being sued.

These laws vary from state to state, but most provide protection from ordinary negligence. The good Samaritan must be really, really negligent (called "gross negligence") in order to be liable. Tennessee's good Samaritan law provides protection to those who render emergency aid unless those individuals act with gross negligence. Texas law provides protection to those who in "good faith administer emergency care" unless they are "willfully or wantonly...

0 0

Both can and be able to can be used to talk about ability. In some cases they are interchangeable.

Using can

Can is used in the present tense. It is used to talk about our ability to do things.


I can swim. She can speak English well. I can swim across that stream.

Be able to is also possible in these cases; however, it sounds a bit more formal here.

I am able to knit. (Less natural than ‘I can knit.’) She is able to speak English well.

To talk about our past ability, we use could. Was/were able to is also possible.

Study the examples given below.

She could read when she was three. OR She was able to read when she was three.

Again, in spoken English, we are less likely to use was able to.

As you can see in all of these sentences, we were talking about general ability. Things that we can or we could do at any time in the present or in the past.

To talk about things that we managed to do on specific occasions in...

0 0

Republican Representative Gary Glenn, a Michigan lawmaker who co-authored the Michigan gay marriage ban legislation, says that school officials should pay dearly if they tell students, “It’s OK to be gay,” and then a child contracts a sexually transmitted disease.

Rep. Gary Glenn stated his belief that school officials should be held criminally or financially liable if a student contracts an STD after being told by school officials that it is OK to be gay in a documentary he participated in. The interview was filmed in 2013 before Gary Glenn took office, according to MLIVE. The short documentary featuring Gary Glenn’s staunch anti-homosexual beliefs has made the news in June 2015, after an upload to YouTube by Right Wing Watch.

Rep. Gary Glenn gets into his anti-gay views in the 30-minute film which featured other politicians and faith leaders. The short film was entitled, “Light wins: How to overcome the Criminalization of Christianity.”

“If some young person...

0 0

Accidents happen every day. Car wrecks, choking, drowning and other types of accidents happen in private homes as well as in public. If you witness an accident, you may wonder: Could I be sued for not stopping to help? Depending on the situation, you could end up in front of a judge.

In most situations, a witness has no duty to rescue a person in distress. Some may call this cruel, but you could become liable if your action worsens the situation. Some states including Kansas have “Good Samaritan laws” that protect a witness that tries to help from civil liability.


Despite witnesses not being liable in a vast majority of accidents, there are a few exceptions. Although a witness has no duty to rescue, if you played a part in creating the dangerous situation, you generally have a duty to rescue the person in distress. In other words, your negligence can lead to a lawsuit. Having a special relationship with the distressed person, such as a parent-child...

0 0

Signing a lease to rent an apartment or home is a big decision. Tenants might mistakenly believe that if they don't sign a lease then they can't be held accountable to the terms of the lease agreement. Signing a lease is a definitive acceptance of the lease agreement terms, but assuming the terms of an agreement, such as paying rent on time, is also a sign of acceptance of the agreement, and the terms may be fully enforceable.

Nature of a Lease

A lease plays the role of distinguishing an agreement, either written or oral, between landlord and tenant. The lease dictates the agreement for the landlord to deliver a properly maintained property for the tenant to take possession of, use, and make periodic rental payments for. Regardless of how the agreement is made, a periodic rental agreement or lease defines the tenant's right to use the property and the landlord's expectations regarding upkeep and collection of rent payments.

Verbal and Written...

0 0

Extracts from this document...

Under what circumstances can an employer be held vicariously liable for the torts committed by his/her employees? Why should one person be held liable for the tortious acts of another? Introduction The essay topic relates to situations in which one person is responsible for the torts committed by someone else; this is known as vicarious liability. Vicarious liability arises where the employer has done nothing wrong but where a tortuous act has been committed by an employee. This means that the employer who is not at fault will still have to pay damages. The essay seeks to answer the following questions: 1. What is the difference between employees and self-employed? 2. What is vicarious liability? 3. Why should one person be held liable for the tortious acts of another? 4. Under what circumstances can an employer be held vicariously liable for the torts committed by his/her employees? Employees and independent contractors To begin with,...

0 0

Dear Rita: I am the administrative manager for a small nonprofit. The executive director (ED) recently hired a new administrative assistant (AA) and wants to classify her as exempt to avoid paying her overtime when she attends evening board meetings and fundraising events. This new AA's main duties are typing board agendas, ordering office supplies, and serving as the general "go-to" person for out-of-office errands.

I know the new AA should be classified as non-exempt and receive overtime pay. The Executive Director says that if we pay her a salary and she agrees to being exempt, she can be exempt. I've given up trying to convince the ED, but I've heard that management can be held individually liable for non-payment of required overtime. Should I be worried about being held personally liable? -- Fearful

Dear Fearful: You may not have too much to worry about but your boss sure does. To protect yourself and your organization I recommend insisting that you and...

0 0

Only available on StudyMode

Download(s) : 608 Published : January 12, 2013

Please sign up to read full document.

The question asked basically has two parts. In the first part of my essay I will try to shed some light on circumstances where an employer can be held liable for the torts of his/her employees. And after that I will focus on some of the reasons why one person is held liable in certain situations for the torts committed by another person. And then I will finally finish the essay with a conclusion at the end. Vicarious liability is where one person is held liable for the torts of another, even though that person did not commit the act itself. For an employer to be held liable for the tort of her/his employees, three conditions must be fulfilled. First, it should be a tort. Second, the one who committed the tort should be an employee. And third, he/she should be working in the...

0 0
What must I do to make taxable retail sales in Ohio? Are there different vendor's licenses for different types of businesses? Are vendor's licenses transferable? Can my vendor's license be suspended or revoked? When a county's sales tax rate increases, will I be reimbursed for the cost of programming my cash registers? How and when is the tax collected? What records must be kept? What is the tax base? When do I file a tax return? Can I file my return via the Internet? What do I do if my check has not cleared my bank? What if my bank does not honor my check? Can sales tax be remitted by electronic funds transfer (EFT)? Can my filing frequency ever be changed? Can I report two or more licenses on the same return? What are the penalties for not filing tax returns on time...
0 0

These are hypothetical cases. But they point toward some underappreciated rules of thumb when it comes to American hotels and a traveler's possessions.

First is this: Every state makes its own civil codes limiting the responsibility of hotels for a guest's possessions, and though most follow the same general pattern, different states set different dollar limits on how much can be recovered. For instance, California's ceiling is $250, or, in some unusual cases, $1,000; Colorado's is $5,000.

But when you ignore a hotel's offer of a safe-deposit box, you're basically excusing the hotel from liability if your valuables vanish. (Evidence of hotel negligence can change this sometimes, but authorities say it's difficult to predict how a state court will choose to define negligence.) Here's a look at the laws and limits in some frequently visited states.

* California: If you can persuade the hotel or a court that there was negligence or dishonesty among hotel...

0 0

Our frequently asked questions can help you reduce your exposure to fraud when trading online.

Please return to these pages on a regular basis as this section will be updated frequently. If you have any specific fraud related questions not mentioned here, email us at


Q. Why does authorisation not guarantee payment?

A. When a transaction is authorised, an authorisation code is given by the card issuer on the basis that there are sufficient funds in the cardholder’s account at the time of the request and the card has not been reported lost/stolen. Authorisation does not confirm the authenticity of the card and/or the presenter. The introduction of Chip and PIN gives comfort that the person entering the PIN should be the authorised cardholder and therefore limits your liability should the transaction be disputed.

For mail and telephone order transactions, where the card and cardholder are not present, you are unable to take...

0 0