HB639-FN: relative to the use of and disputes over blockchain and digital currencies.

Related law links

RSA references from bill data

• 100-C · reference

  ice of the superior court and shall be entitled to the compensation and benefits provided to all such justices under applicable law, including, but not limited to, RSA 491-A:1 and RSA 100-C. IV. The workload of the presiding justice of the blockchain dispute docket shall be the matters before that docket. The presiding justice may be assigned to any other matter within the jurisdiction of the superior c

• 359-V · reference

  ll purposes, including motion practice, discovery, injunctive relief, alternative dispute resolution, and hearing on the merits with or without a jury: (a) Claims arising out of RSA 359-V. (b) Claims arising from breach of contract or fiduciary duties, fraud, misrepresentation, business tort, or statutory violations arising out of blockchain technology dealings or transactions. (c) Other complex disp

• 359-V:1 · reference

  The parties have consented to the jurisdiction of the blockchain dispute docket by agreement or stipulation; and (b) The dispute concerns “blockchain” technology as defined in RSA 359-V:1. II. The governor, with the consent of the executive council, may appoint the first presiding justice of the blockchain dispute docket, who shall be qualified by reason of such person's knowledge and experience in matt

• 399-G · reference

  on a blockchain protocol. II. A person engaged in home digital asset mining or a digital asset mining business shall not be required to obtain a money transmitter license under RSA 399-G. III. Operating a node or a series of nodes on a blockchain protocol shall not require an individual or business to obtain a money transmitter license under RSA 399-G. IV. A person engaging in the act of digital ass

• 421-B · reference

  staking solely with that person’s own funds or digital assets and not the funds or digital assets of another, shall not be deemed to be offering or selling a security pursuant to RSA 421-B. V. A digital asset exchange that offers to provide staking as a service to any person shall not be deemed to be offering or selling a security pursuant to RSA 421-B provided that: (a) The digital assets staked

• 491 · amend

  f provisions or applications, judicial injunction or construction, or any other just and proper remedy. 4 New Section; Courts; Superior Courts; Blockchain Dispute Docket. Amend RSA 491 by inserting after section 7-b the following new section: 491:7-c Blockchain Dispute Docket. I. Without limiting the jurisdiction vested in any court in the state, and subject to the appointment of a presiding justi

• 491-A:1 · reference

  n associate justice of the superior court and shall be entitled to the compensation and benefits provided to all such justices under applicable law, including, but not limited to, RSA 491-A:1 and RSA 100-C. IV. The workload of the presiding justice of the blockchain dispute docket shall be the matters before that docket. The presiding justice may be assigned to any other matter within the jurisdiction of

• 554-A · reference

  sts created to hold cryptocurrency. Furthermore, it does not specify if a smart contract is governed by existing contract laws. The bill does not directly reference the existing RSA 554-A (Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act). These ambiguities could lead to more litigation and, consequently, increased costs. The Branch states this bill could possibly result in an increase in civi

RSAs mentioned by this document

• RSA 100-C · JUDICIAL RETIREMENT PLAN
• RSA 399-G · LICENSING OF MONEY TRANSMITTERS
• RSA 421-B · UNIFORM SECURITIES ACT
• RSA 491 · SUPERIOR COURT
• RSA 491-A · JUDICIAL SALARIES
• RSA 554-A · REVISED UNIFORM FIDUCIARY ACCESS TO DIGITAL ASSETS ACT
• RSA 491-A:1 · Salaries Established