The U.S. Court of Appeals has ruled that the Federal Bureau of Investigation cannot be held liable for wiping a hard drive reportedly containing around 3,443 Bitcoin ($BTC )—worth an estimated US $345 million at today’s market price. The hardware was seized from a defendant following his conviction, and the court found his claim unpersuasive because he hadn’t previously declared ownership of that volume of BTC during legal proceedings.

The case underscores how critical documentation, timing and transparency are when it comes to on‐chain assets in the courts. Even though Bitcoin is digital and tied to decentralised networks, access still hinges on a single private key or piece of hardware. Losing that key or device means losing the asset, regardless of market value or speculative claims of ownership. From a Web3 standpoint, it’s a potent reminder that custody remains a structural challenge—even in high‐value contexts.

For creators and researchers in the crypto ecosystem, the takeaway is twofold. First: legal rights around digital assets must be clearly established and preserved early, not retroactively claimed. Second: the decentralised promise of crypto doesn’t erase real‐world legal and operational vulnerabilities. When assets are locked behind keys, devices or wallets, the physical and procedural dimensions matter just as much as token supply or protocol logic.