Topic: "Butterfly Labs...also received a subpoena" - page 2. (Read 3289 times)
Exchange of money to buy an actual product is not in the realm of this agency. Only psuedo financial products and transactions. You can insert your own jokes of what a real product is in regards to BFL i guess. Doesnt change what this agency is meant for. NY has a whole agency for consumer protection that exchange of money for product falls under.
Correct. The investigation has more to do with financial products and transactions, that is the only concern of this agency.
wrong that statement covers everybody. BFL receiving millions of dollars in funding is a financial transaction. Their statement involves every exchange and company that deals with bitcoin and virtual currencies.
Correct. The investigation has more to do with financial products and transactions, that is the only concern of this agency.
Is a money printer not a financial product, even in it's crudest sense?
Which law firm is representing BFL?
Correct. The investigation has more to do with financial products and transactions, that is the only concern of this agency.
Guys, understand what the New York Department of Financial Services does and you will realize this is about bitcoin as a currency, and fraud related to it ala Pirate40. In fact most likely a direct result of that case.
http://www.dfs.ny.gov/about/press2013/memo1308121.pdf
---
First, safety and soundness requirements help build greater confidence among
customers that the funds that they entrust to virtual currency companies will not get
stuck in a digital black hole. Indeed, some consumers have expressed concerns about
how quickly their virtual currency transactions are processed. Taking steps to ensure
that these transactions – particularly redemptions – are processed promptly is vital to
earning the faith and confidence of customers.
Second, serving as a money changer of choice for terrorists, drug smugglers, illegal
weapons dealers, money launderers, and human traffickers could expose the virtual
currency industry to extraordinarily serious criminal penalties. Taking steps to root out
illegal activity is both a legal and business imperative for virtual currency firms.
Finally, both virtual currency companies – and the currencies themselves – have
received significant interest from investors and venture capital firms. Similar to any other
industry, greater transparency and accountability is critical to promoting sustained, longterm investment.
We look forward to working with the virtual currency industry and other stakeholders as
our inquiry proceeds, and we move to put in place appropriate regulatory guardrails to
protect consumers and our national security.
Guys, understand what the New York Department of Financial Services does and you will realize this is about bitcoin as a currency, and fraud related to it ala Pirate40. In fact most likely a direct result of that case.
Is there a public copy of the subpoena anywhere? Is that information released normally?
Why didn't Bitsyncom get one?
Point is it now can, and should concern Bitsyncom enough to stopping running away from issues...
dude is confused about people complaining about late orders with hardware vs conversion
Why would you say that, he clearly identifies the service providers and then calls BFL a tech company. I don't think he is confusing the two at all. It also mentions in another article (WSJ I believe) that the subpoena was for information on a wide range of topics. One of which named specifically was consumer protection. It makes all the sense in the world they would want to talk to BFL.
Why didn't Bitsyncom get one?
If I were to hazard a guess, I might speculate that the Bitsyncom issue became a problem after all the paperwork and investigation had been done into this filing.
Why didn't Bitsyncom get one?
dude is confused about people complaining about late orders with hardware vs conversion
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-12/n-y-regulator-subpoenas-firms-over-bitcoin-crime-risks.html
"New York’s top banking regulator sent subpoenas to 22 digital-currency companies, including BitInstant LLC and Dwolla Corp., to determine whether new regulations should be adopted to govern the emerging industry, according to a person familiar with the matter."
...
"In addition to BitInstant, Dwolla and Coinsetter, the regulator sent subpoenas to the following service providers: BitPay, Coinabul, Coinbase Inc., CoinLab, eCoin Cashier, Payward, Inc., TrustCash Holdings Inc. and ZipZap, the person said."
"Butterfly Labs, a technology company, also received a subpoena, according to the person familiar with the matter."
Interesting times ahead.
"New York’s top banking regulator sent subpoenas to 22 digital-currency companies, including BitInstant LLC and Dwolla Corp., to determine whether new regulations should be adopted to govern the emerging industry, according to a person familiar with the matter."
...
"In addition to BitInstant, Dwolla and Coinsetter, the regulator sent subpoenas to the following service providers: BitPay, Coinabul, Coinbase Inc., CoinLab, eCoin Cashier, Payward, Inc., TrustCash Holdings Inc. and ZipZap, the person said."
"Butterfly Labs, a technology company, also received a subpoena, according to the person familiar with the matter."
Interesting times ahead.
Jump to: