There are separate legislations here in the United Kingdom but I won't go into in detail but in the United States, the majority of states in the US have implemented the uniform commercial code.

Article 2 of the UCC governing contracts for sales of goods and other exchanges. and this also covers commodities.

Bitcoin is a commmodity.

The UCC rules concerning sales contracts are mandatory and cannot be mitigated or removed using a warranty

So, where software warranties state that the merchantability doesn't matter, this is not valid.

The implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose that comes under UCC section 2-315 does not allow you to exclude parts of the software and being that the bitcoin White Paper promises protection to the buyer and not merely the possessor, this cannot be excluded.

Ownership is defined within the White Paper (p. 2, 6.)

Possession is not.

If you wonder why I have studied international law and letters of credit, why I wrote about documentary credit contracts before bitcoin,

https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/legal/guidance/commodities-types-of-contract-disputes

It becomes necessary to remember that bitcoin is a commodity. As a commodity it is covered under a variety of different acts There was always a reason for not making bitcoin an account based system

CSW
May 3, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1620074377419900?thread_ts=1620074377.419900&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2182