A powerful blockchain association, the Digital Chamber, has entered the legal battle surrounding inactive Bitcoin wallets. The organization, which unites over 250 market participants—from crypto exchanges to investment giants—filed an amicus brief with the New York State Supreme Court. It contains a categorical demand to dismiss a lawsuit that threatens the very principle of self-custody of digital assets.
The essence of the claims by the plaintiffs, who are acting under the pseudonyms Noah Doe and two companies from Wyoming, is simple and dangerous: they seek recognition of ownership rights over bitcoins that have shown no on-chain activity for years. According to their logic, such coins are "abandoned property" and therefore must be transferred to the "finder." However, as the Digital Chamber rightly notes, this creates a "cloud of uncertainty" over the entire industry.
"Find" or Public Data?
The history of the lawsuit is unique. In 2024, Noah Doe developed an algorithm to search for "sleeping" addresses and identified 42,001 wallets. He recorded his "finds" on USB drives, handed them over to a police station, and received receipts. The association leaves no stone unturned in dismantling this logic: "What he 'found' was not the wallets themselves, but electronic records of addresses—that is, public keys." This is not property, but publicly available information from the blockchain.
After this, the plaintiffs sent notifications to the owners via OP_RETURN, giving them 90 days to "wake up." Of the 42,001 addresses, 2,932 were excluded—including 424 whose owners had conducted transactions. The remaining 39,069 addresses (with approximately 3.799 million BTC) were declared abandoned. This list even included wallets linked to Satoshi Nakamoto and the Mt. Gox hack.
The Problem of Private Keys
Even if the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs, they will face an insurmountable challenge: how to gain control over the coins without private keys? The Digital Chamber emphasizes that a court ruling would only provide a "paper title of ownership," unconnected to actual access to the assets. This would create a precedent where legal title is detached from actual possession.
Additionally, Bitcoin lawyer Ian Cohen, who previously filed his own amicus curiae, pointed out a fundamental error: the law on found property was created for physical objects, not for the results of scanning a public blockchain. Moreover, under the law, such property should revert to the state, not to a private individual.
Sleepers Awaken
Amid the legal battle, an intriguing process is unfolding: owners of "sleeping" addresses are starting to show activity. According to Galaxy's Head of Research, Alex Thorn, in June 2026, 31 addresses from the plaintiffs' list transferred 17,527 BTC. In February, movement was recorded for only five addresses totaling 4,834 BTC. On July 5, address 1KV47, which had been inactive since August 2011, sent 30 BTC worth approximately $1.88 million.
This is no coincidence. Owners, upon learning of the claims, are proving their right to the assets through on-chain actions. As noted by the pseudonymous defendant John Doe 33, who filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, the suit is directed against "blockchain address strings," which are not legal entities.
My analysis: This lawsuit represents one of the most serious legal attacks on the principles of decentralization and self-custody. If the court grants it, it would create a dangerous precedent where the absence of transactions is equated with abandonment of property. CryptoQuant has already called the wave of selling "old" bitcoins the "largest release" of long-term supply in history. The market sees the threat and is reacting. The court's decision in this case could fundamentally change the legal landscape for all holders of crypto assets.