It’s like having that policeman warn you that something you’re doing is illegal, but he won’t tell you what - just that if you keep driving he’s going to pull you over and give you a ticket.

From what I heard SEC didn't tell Coinbase what was illegal or not or what they should do though?

Coinbase has actually sued them for failure to follow the law in this regard. The lawsuit is still open.

Ignorance of the law is not an excuse.

Tell me which law saying crypto is a security

You can hear it straight from the horse's mouth:

>Rather than initiate new rulemaking, Chair Gensler has repeatedly stated through speeches and testimony that the vast majority of digital tokens are securities, and has asked issuers and exchanges that offer, sell, and trade them to come in and register. We disagree that the majority of digital assets are securities. For those digital assets that are securities, registration under the current rules is, for many market participants, either not possible or not economically viable given the associated and unnecessary compliance burdens. Additionally, when existing regulations are unworkable, some market participants may be less willing to invest the resources necessary to follow the rules. Failure to resolve these shortcomings leaves investors unprotected due to a lack of regulatory clarity, prevents market participants from leveraging the efficiencies new technology can offer, and materially impairs capital formation in the blockchain technologies that underlie digital assets. This is wholly inconsistent with the SEC’s mission.

https://assets.ctfassets.net/c5bd0wqjc7v0/5NRidtW8lvwVEfSHpn...

The SEC has been clear that most cryptocurrencies are securities. Coinbase is well aware of this. There is no confusion and no lack of clarity. Coinbase just doesn't like the rules.

They have no obligation to give free legal advice. It is the job of a company to keep in compliance, not the job of the SEC to be their outside counsel. If you think this should change, write to your senator.

This is all hypothetical, since the SEC has given clear guidance for years. Coinbase ignored this guidance because they didn't like it.

you seem very stuck up on legal words I think. ANy normal thinking human realize the one enforcing rules, must obviously also tell what rules are ok or not

How should this "outside council" learn the rules, if they can not ask the ones making or ruling with them? You are just shifting the problem down one notch

>since the SEC has given clear guidance for years

So Coinbase is lying about no guidance?

> ANy normal thinking human realize the one enforcing rules, must obviously also tell what rules are ok or not

I do agree that things should be this way. In some countries, it is much more clear. In the US, it is very much not like this. Nobody can list everything that is unlawful. You can only pay for opinions.

It sucks, but it's not some unique quirk or the SEC or whatever.

> Nobody can list everything that is unlawful.

Whats the law book for then?

But, a policeman’s job is not to provide such advice.

It literal is yes. At least part of it. How else can he judge what is legal or not?

A policeman's job isn't to distinguish definitely legal from questionably legal.

Their job is to find some portion of things that are definitely illegal. They don't need to have comprehensive knowledge of the law, just enough to know that the things they are enforcing against are definitely illegal.

If you're asking the police whether something you're doing is definitely legal, you're asking the wrong person.

It's part of his job, otherwise how can he do it?

In this case, from what I've seen, SEC can not even say what is "definietly illegal" like you say. So they can not be trusted

In the US, the police have no requirement, legally or otherwise, to hold your hand in avoiding a crime. Police can literally advise you how to commit a crime, and it is on you to not do so. The onus is on you to not be a criminal. Sometimes that means being extra careful. Sometimes that means hiring an expert lawyer and getting them to come up with a regime, and in fact that's like their whole job other than litigation. But your expert lawyer can be wrong.

Coinbase hired expensive lawyers who told them "we think if you do it this way it's not a crime", the SEC disagrees, and it's up to the courts who is correct.

Arguably the SEC doesn't actually make the rules, and is only tasked with enforcing them, and thus they can't actually give advice on the law because their interpretation of the law might not be correct!

You are mixing up the general moral of someone making a law vs some specific country though.

anyhow, then they can of course give you advice what NOT to do, and will do. Otherwise, as i said, how can they enforce something unless they know about it? I don't even get your point, it honestly sound quite stupid ?

>Arguably the SEC doesn't actually make the rules,

Sure, but they should at least tell which rules they follow? I don't get how so many people on HN seem to favour SEC here, a community of programmers who use logic at work

I understand your logic, and some officers try their best to know the law, and some are very familiar with the law, but they are most definitely not accountable to knowing the law and they are most definitely not responsible for educating you on it. Further, they have authority to lie to you about the law.

The policeman doesn't have to answer, and can literally lie to you.

So how do you know which laws to follow then? Sounds utterly stupid