[CRYPTOSTOCKS] Labcoin Official Thread - Self-Moderated - page 46.

MikeyVeez

full member

Activity: 896

Merit: 102

Quote from: superduh on October 24, 2013, 04:44:15 PM

everyone STOP. just stop posting for a bit.
nothing new here at all. everyone is repeating themselves.
few more days for sam to show up and bring amazing news

Lmao yes cant wait to hear we added another TH so we are at 6th instead of the promised 12th. Dont worry next week we will have 500000 billion th with our calculations.

MikeyVeez

full member

Activity: 896

Merit: 102

Quote from: Puppet on October 24, 2013, 05:03:29 PM

Quote from: TheCoinBull on October 24, 2013, 04:55:54 PM

Quote from: MikeyVeez on October 24, 2013, 04:36:59 PM

Im surprised no one has called fabrizio and called him a bitch.

What his #. Ill call him rite now!

PHone number of Zopo in shenzhen:
0086-185-2080-5768

Just ask for Fabrizio Tatti from international marketing department. But its 5am there now. Consider recording the call.

Tell them you are a wealthy oil shiek wanting to buy their products, look at their website for a product they sell. Or tell then your an oil baron from the early 1900s lol.

If you get a chance ask fabrizio why he admitted to being Sam on a chat. After you call him a bitch. Yeah please record it for the lols.

Puppet

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1040

Quote from: TheCoinBull on October 24, 2013, 04:55:54 PM

Quote from: MikeyVeez on October 24, 2013, 04:36:59 PM

Im surprised no one has called fabrizio and called him a bitch.

What his #. Ill call him rite now!

PHone number of Zopo in shenzhen:
0086-185-2080-5768

Just ask for Fabrizio Tatti from international marketing department. But its 5am there now. Consider recording the call.

SebastianJu

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 1083

Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile

I remember that german stocks that wanted to find their fortune in USA-exchanges not always did well. Though they couldnt get out of the us. Because they are bound to us-law as long as a us-citizen owned a share bought from that usa-venture. Though... usa-citizens could easily buy german securities before too... at german exchanges. That did not lead to these stocks falling under US-Rules. Only when they were traded on their exchanges.
So now this reminds me on the ongoing question. If a us-citizen is buying stocks at a german exchange and this doesnt mean the security falls under us-law then. So why should this be different for a chinese exchange then?

TheCoinBull

full member

Activity: 126

Merit: 100

Quote from: MikeyVeez on October 24, 2013, 04:36:59 PM

Im surprised no one has called fabrizio and called him a bitch.

What his #. Ill call him rite now!

superduh

hero member

Activity: 602

Merit: 500

everyone STOP. just stop posting for a bit.
nothing new here at all. everyone is repeating themselves.
few more days for sam to show up and bring amazing news

MikeyVeez

full member

Activity: 896

Merit: 102

Im surprised no one has called fabrizio and called him a bitch.

TheCoinBull

full member

Activity: 126

Merit: 100

I agree with Nine Lives on hiring help to track down fab/sam. I also have a good amount of money to add, making sure we catch this scammer

Ytterbium

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: kingcrimson on October 24, 2013, 03:50:52 PM

It's more that it would give them an easy target... like Al Capone/tax evasion.

They already have an "easy target" drug dealers, terrorists, etc. Anyway, I'm not really a fan of colored coins anyway. Since shares have to be issued by issuers, you don't really need any sort of 'decentralized' share exchange, just have issuers manage share transfer using a standard protocol.

kingcrimson

legendary

Activity: 1025

Merit: 1000

It's more that it would give them an easy target... like Al Capone/tax evasion.

Ytterbium

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: crumbs on October 24, 2013, 02:35:06 PM

Quote from: Ytterbium on October 24, 2013, 02:04:48 PM

...
The key question is whether or not a virtual bitcoin share qualifies as a "security", or share under HK law. The key question is whether or not the virtual shares represent "interests, rights or property", and clearly from the btct.co terms of service they did not.
...

BTCT terms of service clearly stated that "virtual shares" represented absolutely nothing, and the site itself was, to put it bluntly, a game server, provided for "educational & entertainment purposes only."
As the playmoney nervous rich discovered, such statements hold no legal merit, no matter how clearly stated.

It didn't help Pirateat40, but he also sold shares directly on bitcoin talk, without the benefit of the waver. He was also committing a clear cut case of fraud. The same thing would have happened to him if he were issuing legally registered securities, which is what Bernie Madoff was doing.

That case has nothing to do with the overall legality of "virtual" bitcoin shares overall, especially outside of the US.

Oh, and far as Puppets worry about things like colored coins or whatever "making bitcoin illegal" by contaminating the blockchain, the government is a lot more worried about things like drug dealers, terrorists, or the Iranian Government transferring money around then it is about amateur investment banking. At least with respect to drug dealing, that's already on the blockchain.

kleeck

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

https://karatcoin.co

Quote from: Ytterbium on October 24, 2013, 02:27:27 PM

Quote from: Puppet on October 24, 2013, 02:21:26 PM

Are you really saying company shares are not securities, just because the company business is somehow related to bitcoin asics instead of cell phone asics, oil, gas or Chinese pastry? Or are you saying that because we trade these securities for bitcoins instead of dollar or CNY that they are not securities?

Something is a security if it meets the legal definition of a security under Hong Kong law, which means it needs to be an "interest, right or [a piece of] property". Yet, the btct.co terms of service clearly indicate that virtual shares confer no legal rights, are not property and no grant no interest. So how are they securities?

Quote from: Puppet on October 24, 2013, 02:25:27 PM

Quote from: Ytterbium on October 24, 2013, 02:21:02 PM

snip

I knew you would quote that. I knew you wouldnt be able to read that document and understand what it says, thats why I linked that article earlier.

Anyway, Im done arguing this with you, whether you are just unbelievably obtuse or trolling, back to ignore you go.

Bye, dumbass.

And keep it real, you didn't even know about that article until I linked to it. You quoted it from a comment someone posted earlier without even knowing what it was about. The actual government document doesn't say anything about internet investment being illegal, only that it has to comply with HK law.

Aaaaaaand scene!

Thanks for stopping by Puppet.

crumbs

full member

Activity: 210

Merit: 100

Quote from: Ytterbium on October 24, 2013, 02:04:48 PM

...
The key question is whether or not a virtual bitcoin share qualifies as a "security", or share under HK law. The key question is whether or not the virtual shares represent "interests, rights or property", and clearly from the btct.co terms of service they did not.
...

BTCT terms of service clearly stated that "virtual shares" represented absolutely nothing, and the site itself was, to put it bluntly, a game server, provided for "educational & entertainment purposes only."
As the playmoney nervous rich discovered, such statements hold no legal merit, no matter how clearly stated.

Ytterbium

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: Puppet on October 24, 2013, 02:21:26 PM

Are you really saying company shares are not securities, just because the company business is somehow related to bitcoin asics instead of cell phone asics, oil, gas or Chinese pastry? Or are you saying that because we trade these securities for bitcoins instead of dollar or CNY that they are not securities?

Something is a security if it meets the legal definition of a security under Hong Kong law, which means it needs to be an "interest, right or [a piece of] property". Yet, the btct.co terms of service clearly indicate that virtual shares confer no legal rights, are not property and no grant no interest. So how are they securities?

Quote from: Puppet on October 24, 2013, 02:25:27 PM

Quote from: Ytterbium on October 24, 2013, 02:21:02 PM

snip

I knew you would quote that. I knew you wouldnt be able to read that document and understand what it says, thats why I linked that article earlier.

Anyway, Im done arguing this with you, whether you are just unbelievably obtuse or trolling, back to ignore you go.

Bye, dumbass.

And keep it real, you didn't even know about that article until I linked to it. You quoted it from a comment someone posted earlier without even knowing what it was about. The actual government document doesn't say anything about internet investment being illegal, only that it has to comply with HK law.

Puppet

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1040

Quote from: Ytterbium on October 24, 2013, 02:21:02 PM

snip

I knew you would quote that. I knew you wouldnt be able to read that document and understand what it says, thats why I linked that article earlier.

Anyway, Im done arguing this with you, whether you are just unbelievably obtuse or trolling, back to ignore you go.

Ytterbium

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: Puppet on October 24, 2013, 02:21:26 PM

Quote

Bitcoin investments "meet the definition of investment contract, and as such, are securities,” the judge added.

http://rt.com/usa/bitcoin-sec-shavers-texas-231/

Are you mentally retarded? Why are you posting about a court case in the US.

For the n'th time. You haven't given any evidence that bitcoin virtual stocks, as traded on btct.co, or 796.com for that matter, qualify as securities under Hong Kong law.

Puppet

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1040

Quote from: Ytterbium on October 24, 2013, 02:04:48 PM

Why are you quoting a totally unrelated article from some random website that isn't about bitcoin stocks at all as if it has anything to do with whether or not bitcoin stocks are illegal in Hong Kong.

You moron. Straight from the SFC website

2.1 This Guidance Note clarifies the Commission's regulatory approach
associated with the conduct of the following activities over the Internet:
2.1.1 securities dealing, commodity futures trading, leveraged foreign
exchange trading, and related advisory businesses;

Are you really saying company shares are not securities, just because the company business is somehow related to bitcoin asics instead of cell phone asics, oil, gas or Chinese pastry? Or are you saying that because we trade these securities for bitcoins instead of dollar or CNY that they are not securities?

Quote

The key question is whether or not a virtual bitcoin share qualifies as a "security", or share under HK law. The key question is whether or not the virtual shares represent "interests, rights or property", and clearly from the btct.co terms of service they did not.

You may think the key question is whether or not the earth is flat or round, but everyone else is long past that point. If you want me to dig up the legal defintion of securities for whatever your favorite country, you will have to start paying me. But anyone that had any doubt that a bitcoin denominated investment contract is legally a security in the US should start reading up on Pirate's court case.

Quote

Bitcoin investments "meet the definition of investment contract, and as such, are securities,” the judge added.

http://rt.com/usa/bitcoin-sec-shavers-texas-231/

Ytterbium

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

MikeyVeez

full member

Activity: 896

Merit: 102

Quote from: Ytterbium on October 24, 2013, 02:06:25 PM

Quote from: MikeyVeez on October 24, 2013, 02:00:02 PM

Secondly, Labcoin has accepted US sharesholders funds, so it falls under US laws. 9 out of 10 of these companies all do business with US customers therefore US law is pretty much world wide.

I'm not talking about labcoin specifically, rather Puppet said that all bitcoin securities were illegal everywhere, which would include 796.com and their ASICMiner shares in Hong Kong. Do you think 796 is illegal?

Yes if it accepts US customers. I'm sure developed countries have laws about unregistered securities. Even if they didn't, the fact is 9 out of 10 of these companies have US customers therefore they blanket thenselves under US laws making it basically world wide.

Ytterbium

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Quote from: MikeyVeez on October 24, 2013, 02:00:02 PM

Secondly, Labcoin has accepted US sharesholders funds, so it falls under US laws. 9 out of 10 of these companies all do business with US customers therefore US law is pretty much world wide.

I'm not talking about Labcoin specifically, rather Puppet said that all bitcoin securities were illegal everywhere, which would include 796.com and their ASICMiner shares in Hong Kong. Do you think 796 is illegal?

If Sam committed fraud, obviously that would be illegal.

Topic: [CRYPTOSTOCKS] Labcoin Official Thread - Self-Moderated - page 46. (Read 96854 times)