Part of any solid business plan has to consider the threat governments pose to your business. His mistake was a foolish one for sure but the idea that a crime was committed when no one was hurt makes it pretty clear what the SEC is about.
I have some sympathy (it's far easier for rich people to raise capital because they can sell privately and/or employ experts to ensure compliance) but the old "no one was hurt" thing doesn't cut it. It's a bit like saying, "there is no speed limit and you're fine to pass school buses dropping off kids unless you hit someone, so go for it".Besides, it wasn't a crime in the sense that the guy now has a criminal record. Rather it was an offence and he is liable to pay a fine and suffer a ban on issuing securities.
True it was naver a crime , but the rule is if you set up some thing new with money , you cant use local infrastructures!
That should have been part of his basic business plan. Threat analysis is crucial and his lack of due diligence allowed them to shake him down.
