A new lawsuit filed in New York Supreme Court argues that Bitcoin held by Satoshi Nakamoto, the pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin, should be classified as “lost property” under state law, a legal theory that could set a novel precedent for how courts treat dormant cryptocurrency wallets.
What the Lawsuit Alleges About Satoshi’s Bitcoin
The case, filed in New York County Supreme Court, centers on the argument that bitcoin associated with Satoshi Nakamoto’s known wallet addresses qualifies as lost property. Court filings listed on the New York State Courts Electronic Filing system show the case has been docketed, though the full scope of the plaintiff’s demands remains subject to the court’s review.
The lawsuit appears to invoke New York’s personal property law, specifically Article 7-B of the state’s Abandoned Property Law, which governs procedures for claiming property deemed lost or abandoned. The plaintiff’s theory rests on the observation that Satoshi’s estimated 1 million BTC have remained untouched since Bitcoin’s earliest days.
Filing a claim does not establish that the bitcoin is, in fact, lost property. That determination would require the court to evaluate ownership, intent, and whether existing law even applies to decentralized digital assets in this way.
Why the ‘Lost Property’ Argument Raises Legal Questions
Classifying cryptocurrency as “lost property” tests boundaries that existing statutes were not designed to address. Traditional lost-property frameworks assume a physical object separated from its owner, not a digital asset secured by cryptographic keys on a decentralized network.
For the claim to succeed, the plaintiff would likely need to argue that the original holder has permanently lost access or abandoned any intent to reclaim the bitcoin. Dormant wallets, however, do not automatically equal abandoned wallets. The holder could simply be choosing not to move funds.
New York has its own unclaimed property statutes that define when assets can be considered abandoned, but applying those frameworks to Bitcoin raises questions courts have not yet answered at scale. The case appears to test ownership theory rather than establish fact by itself.
What the Case Could Mean for Bitcoin and the Satoshi Narrative
Any legal action touching Satoshi Nakamoto’s bitcoin holdings attracts intense interest because those coins represent both the largest known dormant BTC supply and a symbol of Bitcoin’s founding ethos. A court entertaining claims over those holdings revives long-standing speculation about whether the coins are truly inaccessible or simply untouched.
The practical market impact of the lawsuit is likely minimal in the near term. No court order can move bitcoin without the corresponding private keys. But if the case gains traction, it could prompt broader regulatory conversations about how dormant wallets should be treated under property law.
The lawsuit arrives at a time when Bitcoin’s legal and institutional landscape is shifting rapidly. Developments like CME’s push toward round-the-clock Bitcoin futures trading and corporate treasury moves, such as Sequans recently unwinding its Bitcoin reserve position, underscore how the asset class is inviting more legal scrutiny.
Meanwhile, blockchain networks are also evolving their governance and fee structures, as seen with Optimism’s recent experiment with stake-based gas priority, highlighting how quickly the crypto regulatory landscape is developing across multiple fronts.
The case is worth watching chiefly for its precedent value. If a New York court seriously engages with the “lost property” theory applied to cryptocurrency, the resulting legal reasoning could shape how jurisdictions worldwide approach dormant digital assets.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Cryptocurrency and digital asset markets carry significant risk. Always do your own research before making decisions.
