Topic: [BTC-TC] Virtual Community Exchange [CLOSED] - page 26. (Read 316534 times)

Yeah its all pretty meaningless isnt. Two bitcoin stock exchanges were forced closed so far, at least one of which after consulting with lawyers, the biggest asset issuer on that exchange (giga vps) got legal counsel that concluded he couldn't legally continue the way he did,  the law clearly states these bitcoin denominated assets are securities, the SEC explicitly states it, its upheld in court now (and if you like being pedantic by ALL judges in ALL bitcoin security related cases Im aware off), but somehow it just isnt true because Ytterbium, Ytterbium & Associates thinks it isnt or it shouldnt be.

Welcome to my ignore list.

Thanks for the laugh in this dark hour.

If I were a bettin' man, I'd bet that Deprived has nailed this explanation correctly in almost every detail.

the securities that had backup plans in place for something like this.  AM comes to mind.

Let me explain what the most likely scenario is - and what the answers are then to your question and some other common ones.

Burnside retained legal counsel to advise on what to do to ensure BTC-TC was legally fine (that's already known).
His lawyers advised that there was no way he should continue doing what he's doing and that he needed to stop doing it.  And that he needed to stop doing it without creating further liability for himself.

• At that point he CAN'T explain what his lawyers advised him - as to do so involves admitting that he was breaking the law.
• And he can't sell the exchange as a going concern to anyone else - because if his lawyers told him BTC-TC was illegal then they'd also have told him that he couldn't sell it (as a going concern) to anyone else.  It's a bit like if you'd been dealing drugs : your lawyer would very strongly advise you NOT to sell your stock to some other dealer.
• And once your lawyers have told you that you must not do something then you lose the ability to claim that you believe it to be OK.  As if your lawyers strongly advise you on a course of action and you choose not to follow it they are typically going to ask you sign a statement that they advised you NOT to do what you're doing - so their ass is covered.
• He MAY be able to sell the code-base - as that isn't illegal.  But obviously he's not going to even consider doing that until the exchanges are fully shut down.

It seems highly unlikely to me that he's been told to close down by the SEC or any LE.  Were that to have happened then closure would have been more of a case of pulling the plug out than the gradual winding down that has been announced.  This feels far more like being told to stop by his own lawyers than a cease-and-desist or seizure by some government agency - they don't give you a month to sort things out in, they want immediate cessation of activity.

Although I ran multiple securities on LTD-Global/BTC-TC I was provided with no more information than the rest of you (and that IS how it should be).  As recently as yesterday I was in contact with him about sorting out a problem with the locking state of a new security I was working on.  I had, of course, already realised there was a pretty decent likelihood of BTC-TC closing or removing access from US investors/issuers - that became evident as a possibility as soon as signups/creation of securities was disabled without any explanation (plus the rushed addition of withdrawal addresses for issuers).

+1 this. Weak hands + Panic Sells = Sweet Profit  

+1 on this. I am impressed how Ken has been dealing with this situation and has definitely instilled confidence on the matter.

ActM already has a contingency plan -> BF.

sure, the question is, which are cheap shares and which bag shares?

If I was btc-trading-pt holder, I would have dumped to 0.00001 all my shares and bought Asicminer-pt, that have direct shares to refuge back.

But actually I only have activemining shares and I'm not sure how the things will go for those, Ken seems to have a backup plan, but who knows

smart people are cashing in on cheap securities...

Catching up with this topic...

Shiiiiiiiiiiiiiit!!111!

btct shuts down due th sec, all shares being dumped, owners of btc-trading and ltc trading shares are bagholders... missed something?

See here.

Wait, WTF did happen while I was sleeping?

I can't wait!

Paging MPOE-PR to tell us all "I told you so"

I don't understand. What prevents you from telling us now? Did the sec put a gag order on you?

One judge, in one case, that hasn't even gone to trial.  That was just a pre-trial motion about whether or not he could even be prosecuted. It's still not clear he'll actually be convicted. It's only relevant to that trial.  

One judge in one case in one courtroom does not make the law for the entire united states.  Let alone the entire world.



Yes, similar regulations exist around the world, but they are not identical.  Not by a long shot. Additionally the SEC cannot over-step it's bounds when it comes to the borders of the United States.  

That said, yes it's a huge problem for US asset issuers like ActM.  That's one of the reasons why I thought it was a bad investment.  It's hugely risky to do a virtual company based in the U.S.  

I've just posted on this matter here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=125629.msg3215388;topicseen#msg3215388

Basically, we need moar developers to finish the damn thing. (Or, maybe, moar funding to get moar developers.)

People who have something to say on this matter are welcome to PM me.

Labcoin provided an update: