Bits + Bips: Is Crypto Privateering Even Legal?

Summary

Austin Campbell and Chris Perkins discuss legal objections to Trump's cyber privateering memo, including international piracy law, attribution risk, non-uniformed combatant status, and war powers. Chris argues the status quo is failing and private-sector enforcement is the best available solution, partly because crypto's on-chain traceability supports accountability. They also examine whether pig butchering syndicates extend beyond crypto into banking and cash. The discussion is policy-focused but carries a positive structural implication for crypto as a transparency-enhancing asset class.

• Austin dismisses criticism based on international piracy law as weak because international law is not self-enforcing.
• Chris argues government-only cyber enforcement is failing and private-sector speed, scale, and talent are the best solution.
• Chris highlights crypto's on-chain traceability and analytics as national security advantages.
• Austin raises that pig butchering syndicates are corporate-scale and operate across crypto, banking, and cash.
• Chris says the memo targets criminals rather than states, so participants likely are not non-uniformed combatants.
• Austin criticizes line-drawing inconsistency: if prior U.S. military actions were accepted, privateering should not be the legal red line.