If an entity promises fair delivery of a commodity, but the…

If an entity promises fair delivery of a commodity, but then rug-pulls, it CAN be prosecuted criminally. Perhaps the entity could win that lawsuit, but from the evidence provided so far, it's unlikely in this case as the miner has done other shady stuff not exactly screaming "honesty".

But you're right, the other miners, even with less than 1% hashpower, can simply orphan the majority-hash entity. And will.

The father of BitCoin has already warned everyone of this, but almost no one bothered to understand it. Time for everyone to read up on "Stackelberg Games". The "leader" doesn't at always win, and that's definitely already proven true MANY times in the history of BitCoin but in other areas as well; or, at least (in bitcoin) if you believe the version of the future where btc & bch will go to zero bc it's not backed by anything, and real bitcoin will overtake it, as I am certain.

You're also correct that Craig/BA hasn't yet won in court, but they don't need to win in court for BSV in particular as no one is challenging that. For more general bitcoin, no other parties have shown any teeth except Craig. Law requires action, not idle filings with the Copyright Office. Craig has done so; none of the others has done anything to assert their claims.

Again, as usual, CSW is correct to use the law to assert his claims. You may think he'll lose, but he's the only one actually doing anything, and that will likely count as far as I can predict.

If the world deems BitCoin not a commodity, which to me would be as absurd as declaring that electricity or cloud computing are bad, then I guess anything can happen. But if "anything happens", then congrats to all the anarchy fans, and good luck holding onto your houses, cars, wives, daughters. Unliked CSW, I believe anarchy exists, but it's quite ugly and not a place an industrious person would want to live. But if you're really good at "warlording"….

SLictionary.com/CreateWord/WARLORDING/@/@/