BTMUSD
Bytom / United States dollar
crypto

They usually do. There's no insurance that covers what someone else does when they stop using your service. This is akin to someone being scammed via snail mail and us finding the post office liable.
The services are agnostic and open to all by design. If someone abuses that privilege to commit a crime, you go after the criminal, not the service. Good news is public blockchain records make pursing such criminals entirely possible, just not cheap.
The real issue, is that regional law enforcement want a quick win and since they can't figure out how to stop criminals from Romeo scamming people from abroad, they go after an innocent bystander whose only crime was he sold a perfectly legal digital token to someone who wanted to buy it from him.
At what point do we take personal responsibility for the mistakes we make according to the law? Unless the BTM provider was in on it somehow, they have no business disrupting his business, damaging business asset, and creating bad PR under the auspices of what? "Someone scammed this family and we need someone to blame"

We've always know that. It's the courts and the general public that seem to think that somehow selling someone BTC means you are liable for what someone else does with it.
Digital Assets have some of the qualities of cash instruments. It should therefore be treated as such in some legal scenarios.
Regardless of how we view it, going after the BTM provider because someone sent BTC they bought from them to someone they regret sending it to, makes zero legal sense.

They usually do. There's no insurance that covers what someone else does when they stop using your service. This is akin to someone being scammed via snail mail and us finding the post office liable.
The services are agnostic and open to all by design. If someone abuses that privilege to commit a crime, you go after the criminal, not the service. Good news is public blockchain records make pursing such criminals entirely possible, just not cheap.
The real issue, is that regional law enforcement want a quick win and since they can't figure out how to stop criminals from Romeo scamming people from abroad, they go after an innocent bystander whose only crime was he sold a perfectly legal digital token to someone who wanted to buy it from him.
At what point do we take personal responsibility for the mistakes we make according to the law? Unless the BTM provider was in on it somehow, they have no business disrupting his business, damaging business asset, and creating bad PR under the auspices of what? "Someone scammed this family and we need someone to blame"

We've always know that. It's the courts and the general public that seem to think that somehow selling someone BTC means you are liable for what someone else does with it.
Digital Assets have some of the qualities of cash instruments. It should therefore be treated as such in some legal scenarios.
Regardless of how we view it, going after the BTM provider because someone sent BTC they bought from them to someone they regret sending it to, makes zero legal sense.