Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does a court even have a mandate over something that it cannot enforce anyways? What's the point of a court deciding something about Bitcoin ownership? I'd just embarass itself, wouldn't it?
I think my point is that Bitcoin isn’t different (in some aspects) compared to other asset. If a company accidentally sent a bundle of cash via registered mail to the wrong person, the recipient (if known) would probably have to return that cash after a court ruling. If Coinbase made an erroneous transfer of BTC to one of their customers (whose identities they know), the recipient would probably have to return the bi…
Re-generating a private key for outputs that have spendable Bitcoins isn't like sending letters to the wrong person.