Pages:
Author

Topic: [ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated] - page 99. (Read 771280 times)

sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 250
IIIIII====II====IIIIII
Ken seizing and selling the ActM shares to cover the We-Ex debt, besides being somewhat morally suspect, is almost certainly not legal.

Fellow shareholders - I think this above quote will worry a lot of people. This is an open forum, this is the Official thread, and this point needs addressed IMO. You might not like this discussion because you think it's not relevant but I do so I will continue. Do not read our exchange if you don't want to.

So.....

Ken seizing and selling the ActM shares to cover the We-Ex debt, besides being somewhat morally suspect, is almost certainly not legal.

The shares are not legal
ACtM is not legal
Bitfunder was not legal

Most of the BTC industry is not legal. So how will Ukyo argue in court that Ken is acting illegally when his shares do not fall within the framework of the legislation?

One analogy I will offer. If a drug dealer is selling from his home and a customer comers round and steals his drugs while the dealer is not looking and runs out the door can the drug dealer go to a lawyer and raise a charge against the thief? Will that charge end up in court? Will the thief be found guilty of theft? In this world the answer is no. I have said all I want to on this. If you don't think it's legal maybe you and Ukyo can get together and take ACtM to court. But I don't think Ukyo will be too keen on visiting any court for quite some time - i.e. the rest of his life.
hero member
Activity: 602
Merit: 500
myBitcoin.Garden
Let it go please guys.  If everyone else is like me, this 'legal' discussion isn't even being read.  Why not start a pm discussion between yourselves and save the rest of us from it?
legendary
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1004
Ken would have to notify any other registered parties that Ukyo owes money to about this sale of the assets, and would have to distribute any proceeds over and above what is owed to them.

We are in a grey area as you have indicated. Little in the BTC industry operates within the letter of the law as it is currently written.

The action Ken is taking is within the spirit of the law - that which is the underlying intention. That intention is that an individual or company can hold the assets of a debtor and sell them to recover their losses if the debtor does not or can not pay up. That is as far as you can go.

You are implying that Ukyo could take Ken to court but what legislation would he use? The shares he will claim to own are not registered securities, the BTC he used to buy them is not a legally recognised currency, the exchange he set up was not registered etc etc. Do you see the problem? In other words if Ken can't do X because the legislation does not appply then Ukyo cannot do Y (bring him to court) because the legislation does not apply.

At the end of the day common sense needs to be applied in any Grey Area. So I would maintain that Ken is doing the right thing.

Actually, it isn't in the spirit of the law. Construction liens and garage owners liens are designed to protect tradesmen who invest time, materials and money into your house/car/etc. If they do that and you don't pay them for the work, they are able to put a lien on that item. Even then, there are specific ways they have to go about resolving the lien. If you don't pay your roofer he can't put a lien on your car or cottage, and a garage owner can't put a lien on your house if he worked on your car. If you refuse to pay your roofer after you get shingles installed and he takes your car until you pay him, both he and everyone else who might be owed money on the car have every reason to go after you.

I have no idea what sort of corporation/LLC/entity Ukyo's businesses were registered as, but Ken seizing and selling the ActM shares to cover the We-Ex debt, besides being somewhat morally suspect, is almost certainly not legal.
sr. member
Activity: 330
Merit: 250
Since I know when the Next batch of Chips Will arrive, And the total Speed of that chip Batch :-)
But I will Let Ken Announce it
I am Under an agreement not to announce it

If anyone wants Out I am Paying 0.006 btc Per share.
I believe in the Company and if you dont then Please sell your shares and GTFO and off this thread, I will gladly take your shares off your hands at 0.006 each

Hmm....
0.006 is quite near ATH of the share price.

There are a few options here:
1) You are bluffing, and won't buy anything from anyone. I don't know why, but you seem to have interest in maintaining an illusion that the shares are worth > 0.006.
2) You actually know something about the chips, and that it looks good.

You have a PM, check your inbox.
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 250
IIIIII====II====IIIIII
Sorry, I thought it was an interesting and relevant debate on the current situation which Ken mentioned today.

hero member
Activity: 658
Merit: 500
decentralize EVERYTHING...
FFS I'm about to ignore the shit outta you two… knock it off.
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 250
IIIIII====II====IIIIII
Ken would have to notify any other registered parties that Ukyo owes money to about this sale of the assets, and would have to distribute any proceeds over and above what is owed to them.

We are in a grey area as you have indicated. Little in the BTC industry operates within the letter of the law as it is currently written.

The action Ken is taking is within the spirit of the law - that which is the underlying intention. That intention is that an individual or company can hold the assets of a debtor and sell them to recover their losses if the debtor does not or can not pay up. That is as far as you can go in this unregulated industry.

You are implying that Ukyo could take Ken to court but what legislation would he use? The shares he will claim to own are not registered securities, the BTC he used to buy them is not a legally recognised currency, the exchange he set up was not registered etc etc. Do you see the problem? In other words if Ken can't do X because the legislation does not appply then Ukyo cannot do Y (bring him to court) because the legislation does not apply.

At the end of the day common sense needs to be applied in any Grey Area. So I would maintain that Ken is doing the right thing.
legendary
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1004
And while the mechanic or garage owner can place a lien on your car, they can not sell your car to pay your debt.

570.305 Garage keeper's lien; enforcement; sale of vehicle at public sale.
Sec. 5. (1) A lien under section 3 shall be enforced only as provided in this section.
(2) If charges described in section 3 are not paid, the garage keeper may sell the vehicle at a public sale
described in this section

https://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(uddgwv552ot3ew453natxq55))/documents/mcl/pdf/mcl-Act-312-of-1915.pdf


The basic principle of lien is that you recover your losses. If you can't sell the assest you hold/sieze then there is no point to lien.
While I suppose I should have been more specific, you're quoting that out of context.
Quote
(3)
To enforce a lien under section 3, a garage keeper or authorized agent shall, not more than 105 days
after the date the lien attached as provided in section 3, apply to the department, in a format prescribed by the
department, for a certificate of foreclosure of garage keeper's lien and bill of sale accompanied by a fee of
$10.00 paid to the department. The department shall, not more than 30 days after the postmark date of a
complete application received by mail or the date a complete application is hand-delivered by the garage
keeper or authorized agent to the department, provide to the garage keeper or authorized agent the names and
addresses of all owners of record and of all lienholders of the vehicle as shown by the records of the
department.
(4)
After complying with the requirements of subsection (3), the garage keeper shall notify the owner or
owners, all lienholders, and the department of state, bureau of automotive regulation, Lansing, Michigan, of
the proposed sale of the vehicle in order to satisfy the lien of the garage keeper by a notice sent by certified
mail return receipt requested to the last known address of the owner or owners, the lienholders and the bureau.
The garage keeper shall send all the notices required by this subsection not more than 30 days after the date
placed on the certificate of foreclosure of garage keeper's lien and bill of sale by the department. The notice
shall include all of the following:
(a)
An itemized statement of the garage keeper's lien showing the amount due at the time of the notice and
the date on which the amount became due.
(b)
A demand for payment in the amount necessary to satisfy the lien authorized under section 3(1). The
demand for payment must give the owner or owners not less than 30 calendar days after the postmark date of
the notice to satisfy the garage keeper's lien.
(c)
A statement that all lienholders are being notified of the delinquency, that a lienholder has the right to
satisfy the garage keeper's lien plus any storage charges provided for under section 4 and obtain possession of
the vehicle as provided in section 5(Cool, and that a lienholder is required to notify the garage keeper before the
proceeds are distributed under section 6 if the lienholder desires to claim any of the proceeds from the sale of
the vehicle under section 6(1)(a).
(d)
A statement of daily storage fees, if any.
(e)
A statement of the date, time, manner, and place that the vehicle will be sold.
(5)
Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the sale shall be held not less than 75 calendar days
after the date placed on the certificate of foreclosure of the garage keeper's lien and bill of sale by the
department. The bureau may object to a sale only if it has reason to believe that the garage keeper has failed
to substantially comply with this act, the rules promulgated under this act, the motor vehicle service and repair
act, 1974 PA 300, MCL 257.1301 to 257.1340, or the rules promulgated under the motor vehicle service and
repair act, 1974 PA 300, MCL 257.1301 to 257.1340, in the repair transaction involving the vehicle that is the
subject of the lien. If the bureau objects to the sale within the 75-day period, all of the following conditions
shall apply:
(a)
The bureau shall complete an investigation of its objection within 150 calendar days after the date
placed on the certificate of foreclosure of the garage keeper's lien and bill of sale by the department.
(b)
Upon completion of the investigation or the expiration of the 150-calendar-day period, whichever
occurs first, the bureau shall do 1 of the following:
(
i
)
Remove the objection to the sale.
(
ii
)
Complete service upon the garage keeper of a written notice of alleged violation that alleges a specific
violation of the motor vehicle service and repair act, 1974 PA 300, MCL 257.1301 to 257.1340, or the rules
promulgated under that act, and extends the bureau's objection to the sale indefinitely until resolution under
this section.
(c)
The garage keeper may, within 10 days after the personal service or postmarked date of the notice of
alleged violation, notify the bureau, in writing, that the garage keeper wants to contest the notice of alleged
violation. If the garage keeper contests the notice, the bureau shall conduct an immediate review of its reasons
for the objection. After this review, the bureau shall do 1 of the following:
(
i
)
Remove the objection to the sale.
(
ii
)
If the objection is sustained, the bureau shall, in writing, offer the garage keeper an opportunity to have
the bureau's objection resolved under the administrative procedures act of 1969, 1969 PA 306, MCL 24.201
to 24.328, as a contested case proceeding under the motor vehicle service and repair act, 1974 PA 300, MCL
257.1301 to 257.1340. If a contested case proceeding is pursued under this section, the bureau may include in
that proceeding's complaint any other outstanding alleged repair act or rule violation against the garage keeper
that may be pursued through a contested case proceeding. If the garage keeper fails to respond to the offer for
a contested case proceeding within 10 days of receiving the offer from the bureau, the bureau's objection to
the lien shall be deemed permanent.
(d)
Storage charges provided for under this act shall not accrue during the period that the bureau objects to
the sale.
(e)
The 225-day period provided for in section 3(2) shall be extended by the number of days that the
bureau objects to the sale.
(6)
A sale of the vehicle shall be held at the facility of the garage keeper or at the nearest suitable place.
(7)
Before a sale of a vehicle pursuant to this section, the owner or owners may pay the amount necessary
to satisfy the lien, in addition to the reasonable expenses or fees incurred by the garage keeper under this act,
and redeem the vehicle. Upon receipt of this payment, the garage keeper shall return the vehicle to the owner
or owners in the same condition, or substantially the same condition, as the vehicle was in when the lien
attached under section 3(1).
(Cool
Not less than 30 calendar days after the garage keeper's notice is mailed to the owner or owners, and
prior to the sale, a lienholder may pay the garage keeper the amount of the garage keeper's lien as calculated
under sections 3(4) and 4, or another amount to which the lienholder and garage keeper agree. Upon receipt of
this payment, the garage keeper shall return the vehicle to the lienholder in the same condition, or
substantially the same condition, as the vehicle was in when repairs were completed and it was stored by the
garage keeper or, if no repairs were authorized by the owner, in the same condition or substantially the same
condition, as the vehicle was in when it was received by the garage keeper. If the garage keeper performed
diagnostic tests on the vehicle for which a lien is claimed, the garage keeper shall include a written
explanation of the results of the diagnostic tests performed when the garage keeper returns the vehicle to the
lienholder. The amount of a payment made under this section shall be added to the amount of the prior
lienholder's lien.
(9)
The amount payable to the garage keeper shall not exceed the market value of the vehicle.
(10)
Upon the public sale of a vehicle under this act, the garage keeper shall complete the certificate
described in subsection (3) as indicated on its face and give the completed certificate to the purchaser of the
vehicle. In addition to other information that may be required by the secretary of state, the purchaser shall
submit this certificate to the department when making an original application for a certificate of title or a
vehicle registration for the vehicle in the name of the purchaser.
(11)
The garage keeper may bid for and purchase the vehicle at the sale. If the garage keeper directly or
indirectly purchases the vehicle at the sale, the lien granted under this act is extinguished in full.
(12)
A person who in good faith buys a vehicle at a sale conducted pursuant to this act takes the vehicle
free of a security interest created by the seller even though the security interest is perfected and even though
the buyer knows of its existence.

The garage owner can't just sell the car, as he doesn't own it.
He can apply to the government with the claim, and wait a month for a list of the owner and other lien holders.
He then has to notify my certified mail all the owners and lienholders and give them a chance to pay, after which he can wait yet again and then sell the car.
The garage owner has no right to just unilaterally sell the vehicle.

Even in the bizarro world where you're merging the shares and the WE-EX debt into one item so a garage-holder's lien would apply to this case, Ken would have to notify any other registered parties that Ukyo owes money to about this sale of the assets, and would have to distribute any proceeds over and above what is owed to them.
newbie
Activity: 39
Merit: 0
I already sent a PM. I need the money for those boring real life things, so I will be happy to part of my 911 shares. What I'm curious about is how it can be done if there is no exchange active?
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
If anyone wants Out I am Paying 0.006 btc Per share.
I believe in the Company and if you dont then Please sell your shares and GTFO and off this thread, I will gladly take your shares off your hands at 0.006 each

That's a good offer but not a surprising one. I hope you get some takers, especially the trouble makers, but I'm aiming higher than that - and like you also think we can take large parts of the budget and higher end of this market within the next few months.
sr. member
Activity: 644
Merit: 250
If anyone wants Out I am Paying 0.006 btc Per share.
I believe in the Company and if you dont then Please sell your shares and GTFO and off this thread, I will gladly take your shares off your hands at 0.006 each

Prepare for full inbox  Grin

Unless you're missing an extra 0, I've got plenty (but not all) of my shares for you!
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
Co-Owner Of DCMCo-Op Mining Farm at 3.5 th/s
If anyone wants Out I am Paying 0.006 btc Per share.
I believe in the Company and if you dont then Please sell your shares and GTFO and off this thread, I will gladly take your shares off your hands at 0.006 each
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 250
IIIIII====II====IIIIII
Everyone just hold your shares when they start trading and new investors will quickly be buying at that 0.01 level, and then to the moon after that.  

New investors getting involved is key. I wouldn't say ACtM are low profile but we could certainly do better on the publicity side. We need the latest 55nm chip news release put on CryptoTrade and we need a higher profile in the community. This company is a good proposition right now. If I wasn't invested I would want to be. So yes new interest is guaranteed now but we still need to up our profile.
hero member
Activity: 630
Merit: 500
what about those of us who have shares on cryptostocks?  when would we expect dividends?  would these shares be transferred to crypto-trade?
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 250
IIIIII====II====IIIIII
And while the mechanic or garage owner can place a lien on your car, they can not sell your car to pay your debt.

570.305 Garage keeper's lien; enforcement; sale of vehicle at public sale.
Sec. 5. (1) A lien under section 3 shall be enforced only as provided in this section.
(2) If charges described in section 3 are not paid, the garage keeper may sell the vehicle at a public sale
described in this section

https://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(uddgwv552ot3ew453natxq55))/documents/mcl/pdf/mcl-Act-312-of-1915.pdf


The basic principle of lien is that you recover your losses. If you can't sell the assest you hold/sieze then there is no point to lien.
hero member
Activity: 602
Merit: 500
myBitcoin.Garden
I would agree that it would be fairer to pay out the backdated divs before trading starts, otherwise those trading will be affected as people hold who would have otherwise have sold.  Not sure how this could work though, do the divs not get paid through CT and would need all the shares to be listed before being able to pay out?  Would it be a massive undertaking for Ken to do this in advance?
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
Does anyone know if the 53.86 btc in that blockchain link account for all divs owed to date?

They are.
hero member
Activity: 602
Merit: 500
myBitcoin.Garden
Does anyone know if the 53.86 btc in that blockchain link account for all divs owed to date?
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
[14:16] That is the point... ActM is a mining company whose intention is to add hashing power through the production of its own miners. If the CEO of that company says "we will be adding...", then it only makes sense to assume he is talking about the miners the compnay is producing.
[14:16] Of course people speculated that, what else would they speculate it was?
[14:17] I'm not going to argue with you on what shareholders expected
[14:17] I'm simply saying it was never said
[14:17] and was just assumed

Lol
full member
Activity: 304
Merit: 102
Everyone just hold your shares when they start trading and new investors will quickly be buying at that 0.01 level, and then to the moon after that. 
Pages:
Jump to: