> If you look up the definitions of "security", "financial instrument", "commodity", and "currency", it is pretty clear that a plain vanilla crypto-currency like Bitcoin is no ordinary security nor a financial instrument. It is not a claim on something else, even less so than a traditional bank note. It is more like a commodity. Since when is "aluminum" a security?

This is an excellent opinion but it just doesn't line up with how securities and commodities are regulated.

The definition of a security is based on the Howey test, which has three prongs.

1. Investment of money (check).

2. In a common enterprise (check).

3. With the reasonable expectation of profits derived from the efforts of others (check).

The SEC published a full explanation of how to apply Howey to crypto assets. [1] If you disagree with certain aspects of this framework you're welcome to see Gary in court too.

The list of things you're comparing 'crypto' to are either not securities (where's the common enterprise in 'a bushel of corn') or be securities however they are specifically exempted from securities regulation in the law.

[1] https://www.sec.gov/corpfin/framework-investment-contract-an...