&gt; I don&#x27;t see how a distributed ledger can be compared, even remotely, to a notary.<p>You&#x27;re right. A distributed ledger is much securer and more reliable, far less vulnerable to any form of coercion or corruption, and so the comparison is kind of silly.<p>&gt; I could return the question to you, have a Bitcoin secured timestamp ever held up in court?<p>Since it is based on the same basic principles but in a much superior fashion, I, and everyone using Bitcoin-based timestamps, am comfortable in believing there&#x27;s a excellent chance the courts will not be unaccountably incompetent and reject them, until such time as shown otherwise. If you can&#x27;t provide any specific concrete reason they would reject Bitcoin timestamps other than &#x27;it has not been yet been tested in court&#x27;, then there&#x27;s nothing further to discuss.<p>&gt; So, if the purpose is not defending yourself in court, what is it? Winning Internet arguments?<p>That is not an answer I&#x27;m allowed to give now. (And in any case, you have shown yourself sufficiently unpleasant and arrogant I wouldn&#x27;t answer it anyway.)