Read on Twitter
Very interesting cryptocurrency-related opinion out of New Zealand. See below thread for why this is an interesting & good result for crypto holders: 
https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="👇" title="Down pointing backhand index" aria-label="Emoji: Down pointing backhand index"> https://twitter.com/CourtsofNZ/status/1247770583737102336">https://twitter.com/CourtsofN...
if Cryptopia was holding the cryptocurrency for users in trust, then users had the better claim to get paid first; if there was no trust, then users were just general creditors like all others" title="https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="⚖️" title="Scales" aria-label="Emoji: Scales">if Cryptopia was holding the cryptocurrency for users in trust, then users had the better claim to get paid first; if there was no trust, then users were just general creditors like all others" class="img-responsive" style="max-width:100%;"/>
creditors argued that cryptocurrencies are not "property" and therefore cannot be part of a "trust"https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="⚖️" title="Scales" aria-label="Emoji: Scales">one possible argument is that "information" is often not treated as "property" and cryptocurrencies are just "information"" title="https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="⚖️" title="Scales" aria-label="Emoji: Scales">creditors argued that cryptocurrencies are not "property" and therefore cannot be part of a "trust"https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="⚖️" title="Scales" aria-label="Emoji: Scales">one possible argument is that "information" is often not treated as "property" and cryptocurrencies are just "information"" class="img-responsive" style="max-width:100%;"/>
court rejected this view while giving us an international survey of court opinions on related issues--at one point analogizing stealing cryptocurrencies to unauthorized copying of a CCTV footage video file, which was deemed a "taking" of property in another NZ case!" title="https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="⚖️" title="Scales" aria-label="Emoji: Scales">court rejected this view while giving us an international survey of court opinions on related issues--at one point analogizing stealing cryptocurrencies to unauthorized copying of a CCTV footage video file, which was deemed a "taking" of property in another NZ case!" class="img-responsive" style="max-width:100%;"/>
the court analogizes the information involved in cryptocurrency allocation to "the words in a contract"; https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="⚖️" title="Scales" aria-label="Emoji: Scales">just as words in a contract being information does not prevent them from determining property rights, so, too, with crypto data" title="https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="⚖️" title="Scales" aria-label="Emoji: Scales">the court analogizes the information involved in cryptocurrency allocation to "the words in a contract"; https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="⚖️" title="Scales" aria-label="Emoji: Scales">just as words in a contract being information does not prevent them from determining property rights, so, too, with crypto data" class="img-responsive" style="max-width:100%;"/>
Overall, very interesting (if somewhat unsurprising) case. Nice to have these matters reasoned out and confirmed. Going forward, expect that creditors of exchanges will assume cryptocurrency deposits are not up for grabs in a bankruptcy and to insist on other protections.
h/t to the awesome Canadian cryptoattorney @evanmthomas who alerted me to this opinion
