{"id":5151,"date":"2017-04-17T14:38:02","date_gmt":"2017-04-17T18:38:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ncjolt.org\/?p=5151"},"modified":"2020-06-04T20:52:54","modified_gmt":"2020-06-04T20:52:54","slug":"bitcoin-breaking-bad-breaking-barriers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/articles\/bitcoin-breaking-bad-breaking-barriers\/","title":{"rendered":"Bitcoin: Breaking Bad or Breaking Barriers?"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"page\" title=\"Page 1\">\n<div class=\"layoutArea\">\n<div class=\"column\">\nFor nearly the past decade, Bitcoin has found itself in a state of non-regulation, ambiguous regulation, and conflicting regulation, with several interested agencies vying for effective regulation of an often misunderstood technology. Early run-ins with large-scale criminal enterprises in large part created the multi-directional regulatory attention Bitcoin \u201cenjoys\u201d today. Even while many businesses and individuals interested in Bitcoin have sought, unsuccessfully, consistent governmental policy, Bitcoin\u2019s popularity has continued to rise, and its relative volatility continues to subside. There is no better time than now for federal agencies to align their stances and policies relating to this technology, establish consistent criminal and civil regulation, and allow Bitcoin to reach its fullest potential: as a form of security.\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>For nearly the past decade, Bitcoin has found itself in a state of non-regulation, ambiguous regulation, and conflicting regulation, with several interested agencies vying for effective regulation of an often misunderstood technology. Early run-ins with large-scale criminal enterprises in large part created the multi-directional regulatory attention Bitcoin \u201cenjoys\u201d today. Even while many businesses and individuals <a href=\"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/articles\/bitcoin-breaking-bad-breaking-barriers\/\" class=\"more-link\">&#8230;<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[5,74,76],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5151"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5151"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5151\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7078,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5151\/revisions\/7078"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5151"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5151"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.unc.edu\/ncjolt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5151"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}