Did courts ever rule if early crypto deals were stocks, property, or money?

"alleging that Defendants violated the Securities Act of 1933 (the "Securities Act" or the "Act"), 15 U.S.C. §§ 77a, et seq., by selling unregistered securities through an initial coin offering of t"

"The High Court has declined to extend the traditional tort of conversion to crypto assets"

"Zentralafrikanische Republik streicht Bitcoin als gesetzliches Zahlungsmittel."

"Lower courts rejected that claim, determining instead that “although virtual assets do not correspond to traditional tangible objects, they constitute ‘objects deemed to be confiscated’ under the Criminal Procedure Act as electronic tokens premised on electronic transactions or transfers, making the seizure disposition legal.”"

"The dispute stemmed from a January 2020 money laundering investigation in which police secured 55.6 bitcoins held in a custodial exchange account under Mr. A’s name, valued at about 600 million won, or roughly $416,600, at the time."

"The U.K. High Court has ruled that Chinese law governs the property claims of Chinese investors seeking to recover more than 61,000 bitcoins seized in Britain’s largest cryptocurrency money-laundering case."

"The court has not yet decided whether the investors hold property rights in the bitcoins under Chinese law."

"The decision could limit the roughly 16,000 Chinese victims who have joined the U.K. recovery proceedings to recovering their principal and interest, rather than a share of the bitcoins’ gains."