> The whole idea of crypto is that if you send it and it's confirmed you can't get it back, which makes fraud (on the payers side) nearly impossible.
I consider "obtained somebody's credentials or private key through illegal means and then used that to purchase a good with stolen BTC" to be fraud. That the network considers this to be a normal transaction is not relevant.
I wonder, is there any legal precedent for that? Analogy with other transactions could support either interpretation. (Spending stolen cash is not fraud, but using a stolen credit card is.)
I consider "obtained somebody's credentials or private key through illegal means and then used that to purchase a good with stolen BTC" to be fraud. That the network considers this to be a normal transaction is not relevant.