Bitcoin Investor Robbed of Cryptocurrency Blames AT&T

[Lucian Armasu]

An investor filed a lawsuit against AT&T claiming they were negligent with his phone number, resulting in the loss of $24 million in cryptocurrency tokens.

Bitcoin Investor Robbed of Cryptocurrency Blames AT&T : Read more

 

[soccerdude84]

I don't know why he's seeking punitive damages unless he can prove ATT intentionally defrauded him. That sounds ridiculous.

 

[rix340]

He's seeking punitive damage hoping they will settle for the $24 million instead of the $200. Those are just tactics.

 

[araczynski]

the $200 million is to cover lawyer fees. i'd say this suit would be funny to watch, but I seriously don't give a F about cryptocurrency or anything that happens to anyone that enjoys gambling in it.

 

[cryoburner]

So, he kept $24 million protected by his phone number? And how do we even know that his number getting stolen wasn't an inside job, and that he didn't orchestrate the "theft" himself? And where do $200 million in punitive damages come from? The whole thing sounds a bit shifty, much like cryptocurrency in general.

 

[Zaporro]

Lol,

Good for him and this whole crypto scam. Hate people like that leeching on others, pretending they work, not contributing anything to society.
Goes for both these wannabe "Crypto investors" and people who live off others work using stock markets and alikes.

 

[owhansson]

Yet another lesson in the dangers and pointlessness of cryptogarbage.

 

[gggplaya]

If a user needs a new sim card, they should just mail it out to their house or they should prove their identities in a local store for a more immediate solution. Doing a sim swap over the phone is too dangerous, you simply don't know who is on the other end.

 

[evilpaul]

Punitive damages are to punish like the name suggests.

Punitive damages aren't to cover attorney's fees. You ask the court to "award attorney's fees" to cover attorney's fees.

I'm not sure how anyone's supposed to know whether or not this is a sinister conspiracy theory involving an "inside job", or somebody just did some social engineering on AT&T. My gut would say the latter.