News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Ponzi Schemes Using Virtual Currencies (2014) [pdf]. Parent comment

Re:Ponzi Schemes Using Virtual Currencies (2014) [pdf] by TaylorGood on Tuesday October 03, 2017 @07:49PM (#15397208)
Same. A quick chat with an attorney who is an SEC specialist basically said "if it breathes" i.e. involves money that ICO is seen as a security. The SEC putting together the digital division which covers cryptocurrency tokens is part of what led to him saying this. Basically fish in a barrel.

It is in my opinion that any US-based ICO is now in a lottery as to whether they get the SEC visit.

Not legal advice at all, just sharing an excerpt from a coffee chat.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ponzi Schemes Using Virtual Currencies (2014) [pdf] by passwordreset on Tuesday October 03, 2017 @08:49PM (#15397499)
Can you ask him how a virtual currency can also be a security? Tulips could be a security, OK; but, didn't the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 exempt currencies from being considered a security?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ponzi Schemes Using Virtual Currencies (2014) [pdf] by TaylorGood on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @01:48PM (#15402463)
Found this interesting, and relatable:

https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2014-111

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ponzi Schemes Using Virtual Currencies (2014) [pdf] by xdeqx366 on Tuesday October 03, 2017 @07:58PM (#15397265)
What was your decision? Did you stay or leave?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ponzi Schemes Using Virtual Currencies (2014) [pdf] by TaylorGood on Wednesday October 04, 2017 @01:54PM (#15402548)
Pass.

Not sure why this isn't discuss more, but Erik Vorhees was fined for not registering as a security back in 2014: https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2014-111

Although it was just fines, not worth the exposure just for merely operating an above-board business. With SEC now having Cyber Unit, in theory their regulating now increases.

[ Parent | on HN ]