Your source should be the link to the specific article you took information from, not the home page of the site.
It seems you got it a bit wrong, especially as to your understanding of security. The order of the SEC is actually in favor of Bitcoin. It didn't label Bitcoin as unsafe. It doesn't consider it as a security as well. The SEC considers Bitcoin as a commodity.
Security in this sense doesn't refer to "the state of being free from danger or threat" or risk, as you probably misconstrued.[1] It is meant as an "investment contract."[1] So, not classifying Bitcoin as a security doesn't mean it lacks security and Bitcoin supporters are not secured in having it.
This order is against the rest of the cryptocurrencies other than Bitcoin. However, taking into consideration the court decision on the SEC vs. Ripple, it seems Coinbase has now a more solid reason not to delist altcoins. The court ruling, after all, doesn't consider coins sold on exchanges as investment contract or security.
[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=security+meaning&oq=security+meaning&aqs=chrome.0.69i59.9367j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
[2] https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/what-makes-crypto-asset-security-us-2023-06-07/
Topic: All cryptocurrency are security asset except bitcoin - SEC (Read 116 times)
Let’s face the reality, Bitcoin is clearly not a security it doesn’t introduce through token sales. Also there’s no way SEC will sue Bitcoin since it’s creator is completely anonymous and the community is the one who rums the blockchain.
There is nothing to prevent the SEC from classifying bitcoin as a security, and since they have not yet done so, there is nothing to prevent them from doing so, but as I said earlier, the SEC has no final authority to judge any cryptocurrency to be a security or not.We have many altcoins with anonymous developers, and the community is decentralized however according to the rating above they are security.
This paper explains better https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2022/12/06/why-cryptoassets-are-not-securities/ but this will put us in front of a legal controversy that may take several years to issue a final ruling.
Why will bitcoin be labelled unsafe and other cryptocurrencies termed as security assets? In reality, we know that bitcoin is the security cryptocurrency, whilst others are not. This simply shows how hard the government is working to make the use of bitcoin difficult for users in that country.
Delisting all other cryptocurrencies except bitcoin would also have meant the end of cryptocurrency in the United States if other crypto sectors followed suit.
All of them are self-centered and opposed to Bitcoin because they want their people to support centralization.Delisting all other cryptocurrencies except bitcoin would also have meant the end of cryptocurrency in the United States if other crypto sectors followed suit.
We can all agree that this claim is false because there is no way to connect Bitcoin or exert control over it, thus all they want is centralization.
Despite these, Bitcoin will continue to be our primary priority because it is the only cryptocurrency that offers security.
Let’s face the reality, Bitcoin is clearly not a security it doesn’t introduce through token sales. Also there’s no way SEC will sue Bitcoin since it’s creator is completely anonymous and the community is the one who rums the blockchain.
I think all cryptocurrencies that introduce using token sales despite claiming a utility token will really fall to security tokens since they promised return by having this token during their token sales to the investors. Crypto companies before are using utility token disguised to get money from investors without facing legal charges for having unregulated public token sales.
I think all cryptocurrencies that introduce using token sales despite claiming a utility token will really fall to security tokens since they promised return by having this token during their token sales to the investors. Crypto companies before are using utility token disguised to get money from investors without facing legal charges for having unregulated public token sales.
The definition of securities is slowly expanding as several investment instruments emerge. I personally still hold to the traditional notion that securities are a reflection of a company's performance, hence the SEC's approach to proving it might be on the right track if they accuse non-PoW coins of being securities because those tend to be centralized.
As for me, any coin that has ICO, IEO or IDO are securities. Also any coin that is using proof of stake are securities. SEC needs to come up with a clear definition.
This is also what I understood that all POS cryptocurrencies are securities, and they include all coins or tokens that you can staking because your can get a return from investments in that blockchains, but not all altcoins are ICO, IEO, IDO DeFI are POS coins some altcoins are a hardfork of Bitcoin such as Litecoin, Bitcoin Cash or privacy coins like Monero and many more coins that fall into the PoW category.In any event, SEC has no final authority to judge any cryptocurrency to be a security or not.
https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2022/12/06/why-cryptoassets-are-not-securities/
Quote
An intriguing new paper, The Ineluctable Modality of Securities Law: Why Fungible Crypto Assets Are Not Securities,[4] points us to the right path. The paper analyzes the relevant caselaw and concludes there is scant legal basis to treat fungible cryptoassets as securities, and it sets out analytical approach that is far more satisfying. The paper separates capital raising transactions by blockchain project sponsors or other insiders in which a cryptoasset may be sold—which are typically securities transactions—from the treatment of the cryptoasset, which is not a security. This analytical framework addresses the now apparent challenges created by the SEC staff’s approach and appropriately focuses the SEC’s regulatory jurisdiction on capital raising transactions.
As for me, any coin that has ICO, IEO or IDO are securities. Also any coin that is using proof of stake are securities. SEC needs to come up with a clear definition.
That makes sense, but problem is that some that meet the criteria you mentioned (like Ethereum forum example) are not seeing as security by SEC while some very similar (at least from what I know about those alts) like Solana or Cardano are seeing as security. This is 2018 news:
https://cassels.com/insights/sec-declares-bitcoin-and-ether-as-non-securities/#:~:text=On%20Thursday%2C%20June%2014%2C%202018,Ether%20or%20Bitcoin%20as%20securities.
Quote
On Thursday, June 14, 2018, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Director of Corporate Finance, William Hinman (Hinman), announced that the commission would not be treating Ether or Bitcoin as securities.
From around 2020 but which I may not be exactly accurate about, SEC has been going tough on ether too. Or probably when it goes from proof of work to proof of stake.
Last year or early of this year, SEC sees ether too as securities which I have seen on the news many times. But Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) sees ether as a commodity.
https://cointelegraph.com/news/cftc-calls-eth-a-commodity-in-binance-suit-highlighting-the-complexity-of-classification
Quote
CFTC calls ETH a commodity in Binance suit, highlighting the complexity of classification. The suit claims Binance used Ether as a commodity in its financial products, experts explained, which says little about the basic nature of the coin.
But this is what I know about the SEC:
SEC lawsuits: 68 cryptocurrencies are now seen as securities by the SEC
https://cointelegraph.com/news/sec-labels-61-cryptocurrencies-securities-after-binance-suit
Quote
SEC Chair Gary Gensler, however, has claimed that “everything other than Bitcoin” is a security that falls under the agency’s remit. Crypto data site CoinMarketCap lists around 25,500 cryptocurrencies in existence.
And truly, ether is a security.
As for me, any coin that has ICO, IEO or IDO are securities. Also any coin that is using proof of stake are securities. SEC needs to come up with a clear definition.
That makes sense, but problem is that some that meet the criteria you mentioned (like Ethereum forum example) are not seeing as security by SEC while some very similar (at least from what I know about those alts) like Solana or Cardano are seeing as security. Why will bitcoin be labelled unsafe and other cryptocurrencies termed as security assets? In reality, we know that bitcoin is the security cryptocurrency,
Bitcoin is safe and has a secure blockchain, but I think the volatile nature is what people do refer to when saying it is not safe. But if you can hold, you will later enjoy bitcoin as a store of value.This did not take us to any news in particular.
Delisting all other cryptocurrencies except bitcoin would also have meant the end of cryptocurrency in the United States if other crypto sectors followed suit.
I think this would be too hash, but almost all cryptocurrencies are securities, including ether. There are few that are now like litecoin and few others. Problem is that SEC doesn't have a very clear criteria how is something determined to be a security or not.
As for me, any coin that has ICO, IEO or IDO are securities. Also any coin that is using proof of stake are securities. SEC needs to come up with a clear definition. Why will bitcoin be labelled unsafe and other cryptocurrencies termed as security assets? In reality, we know that bitcoin is the security cryptocurrency, whilst others are not. This simply shows how hard the government is working to make the use of bitcoin difficult for users in that country.
Its actually the opposite and in this case SEC (or more exactly Gary Gensler) is on the side of Bitcoin by claiming that it's not a security (btw being/not being security has nothing to do with being safe/unsafe), unlike all other altcoins. Problem is that SEC doesn't have a very clear criteria how is something determined to be a security or not.
According to the CEO of Coinbase, the SEC (US Securities and Exchange Commission) urged them to halt all cryptocurrency trading except bitcoin before suing them. This was only recently exposed, but they sued Coinbase few months ago for failing to register as a broker.
Coinbase CEO; Brian Armstrong said;
Why will bitcoin be labelled unsafe and other cryptocurrencies termed as security assets? In reality, we know that bitcoin is the security cryptocurrency, whilst others are not. This simply shows how hard the government is working to make the use of bitcoin difficult for users in that country.
Delisting all other cryptocurrencies except bitcoin would also have meant the end of cryptocurrency in the United States if other crypto sectors followed suit.
Source: https://watcher.guru
Coinbase CEO; Brian Armstrong said;
Quote
“They came back to us, and they said… we believe every asset other than Bitcoin is a security. And, we said, well how are you coming to that conclusion, because that’s not our interpretation of the law. And they said, we’re not going to explain it to you, you need to delist every asset other than Bitcoin.”
Why will bitcoin be labelled unsafe and other cryptocurrencies termed as security assets? In reality, we know that bitcoin is the security cryptocurrency, whilst others are not. This simply shows how hard the government is working to make the use of bitcoin difficult for users in that country.
Delisting all other cryptocurrencies except bitcoin would also have meant the end of cryptocurrency in the United States if other crypto sectors followed suit.
Source: https://watcher.guru
Jump to: