Topic: [CRYPTOSTOCKS] Labcoin Official Thread - Self-Moderated - page 47. (Read 96854 times)

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.

Clearly financial services in Hong Kong have to follow Hong Kong law.  However, doesn't violate HK law then there wouldn't be any problem. The SFC, presumably, isn't going to target people who follow HK regulations.

Now, again. You've provided no proof, zero, that bitcoin "virtual" stocks would even qualify as "Financial Services" under HK law, and what regulations would apply to those services.

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.

Now, on the other hand if Sam was a con artist then presumably he may have broken some other law in HK, like fraud. Same with Pirateat40 in the US.  But that has no baring on the legality of stocks that are not fraudulent.

First off we all know everyone has US envy and loves to pretend the US has no authority world wide. Why dont you ask all the extradited foreigners in US jails, about foreign authority.

Or even better US agents come to your country kidnap you and charge you. Its been done before and the US courts deemed it to be legal. You think piss poor 3rd world country or any other country for that matter is going to do anything about it? Besides a little bit of talk.

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.

ROFL.


Bravo, you have started to read. Good for you. Yes, the article is about hedge funds. Now can you also read the paragraph in its entirety?

When are you subject to SFC regulation?
As a general principle, the SFC has stated that it will not seek to regulate the provision of financial services that are conducted from outside Hong Kong and over the Internet, unless such activities are targeted at people residing in Hong Kong or are detrimental to the interests of the investing public in Hong Kong or to the market integrity of Hong Kong.


This is a general principle, explaining what "targeting people residing in hong kong" over the internet means. its not limited to hedge funds in any way and the idea that targeting HK investors for hedge funds would be different from future contracts or other securities is just ridiculous. Moreover, I did link to the original laws earlier, but hey, with your reading comprehension skills I thought the above article might be easier to digest. I guess not.

Now carry on trolling.


edit:
http://en-rules.sfc.hk/net_file_store/new_rulebooks/h/k/HKSFC3527_3568_VER11.pdf

You've been saying the same BS for months now and you've been proven wrong at every turn. Dont you ever get tired of being wrong or are you that stupid that you dont realize it?

Sorry, meant to say a checkbox + other precautions.  But that said, the the thing you quoted has to do with solicitation for hedge fund investment not for issuing securites. 


You do understand the difference between a hedge fund and a security right? If so why are you quoting a page about marketing hedge funds in HK as if it had something to do with issuing virtual securities? It seems like you're the one with zero reading comprehension here.

You still haven't quoted a single law from a single country other the then the US that makes bitcoin stocks illegal in any way.  US law specifies that it's against the law to offer unregistered securities for "value", such as bitcoin.

So far you've never offered a single shred of evidence for your assertion that it's illegal to sell bitcoin securities "everywhere" - and the quoted article has nothing to do with issuing securities, it's about marketing hedge funds.

too fucking tired of correcting this a gazillion times. Some people are just too dumb or too stubborn.


"A simple check box on a website for a person to indicate that he or she is, or is not, a Hong Kong resident would not by itself be a sufficient precaution."

I guess in your case its too stupid. F for reading comprehension.

Nope.  US government has no authority over activities that take place outside of US borders. BTCT was run from the US, and therefore the person running it had to abide by US law. As far as bitfunder is concerned they're just being cautious, and he may want to do business in the US in the future.

If you look at the actual HK law that's been posted, it's clear that it doesn't apply to companies so long as they do something as simple as post a checkmark for people to click to indicate they are not HK residents.


Yes. If you want to prove your point, that's what you have to do. 

As far as I can tell, it's not illegal for an HK company to issue shares to people outside of HK.  Also 796.com seems to be operating perfectly legally in HK.

You run around posting "This is all illegal!!!1111" based only on US law, as if it applies everywhere in the world, which it doesn't.

There are illegal numbers so you are correct, governments are stupid enough to attempt to regulate math. But just like with regulating file sharing it will fail and for the same reasons. Unlike sharing files we are talking about sharing money now. Nothing will stop people from sharing money. Even in an all out war people are still sharing money.

Bitcoin allows people to share money over the Internet while Colored Coin and Mastercoin built on top of Bitcoin allows for Bitcoin to take over the entire global economy and replace virtually every function.

I think Bitcoin may end up being money 2.0 and there is no way any government can stop that. People have killed and died over money and governments pay their troops with money. So how exactly are you going to stop money with laws? You can stop money by offering more money or better money than Bitcoin.

I don't think the US government or any government wants to do that though. They will just build on top of Mastercoin and Colored Coin for their own purposes when the time comes.


If the king were to outlaw bread do you think it would stop peasants from eating bread during a famine?
The laws will be rendered unenforceable due to the particular condition of the economy.

When there is no viable alternative for people, it wont matter what the law says. Ultimately the law enforcement are supposed to protect and serve the community. The laws if they don't protect the community probably aren't going to be followed by many people. People still gamble for example even if you make that illegal, and copyright infringement is illegal but probably everyone you know does that.

Consider that the government of the US does decide to crack down on Bitcoin? The people who break the law and ignore the regulations would become millionaires. Those millionaires would be the people smart enough to leave America and live where there aren't any regulations on Bitcoin being enforced.

So if the US is stupid enough to crack down then people will start leaving the US and working overseas instead. Then they'd start businesses over there and pay taxes to some other country. That other country will use the tax money to spy on US interests. It would be smart if the US actually kept it's tax base in the US by either not enforcing certain regulation or changing the law.

How would they go after an idea? Ban the source code? Also at that point no ban will stop it.

If Colored Coin or Mastercoin works then nothing stops either of them except if the protocol fails. Hundreds of trillions of dollars. The derivatives market is 180 trillion in the US alone. The US economy is only 10-12 trillion.

What this means is that Colored Coin and Master Coin are more valuable as a protocol than the entire US economy. Who is going to ban that during a recession?

Also if those protocols do happen then each coin Bitcoin will be worth around a million dollars potentially and it wont take very long to reach that. It might take 5-6 years and the block reward halving built into the protocol will push it up to a around a million dollars a coin.

This is all speculation assuming the protocols do work and most people are unsure if Colored Coin or Mastercoin can work. If you fear regulation and don't take risks you wont have any rewards.

The governments of the world will react how they react to innovation.

That wasn't an ad hominem. That wasn't even any sort of argument at all, making categorization of the logical form irrelevant. It was just a sarcastic quip.

"Your assertion that 'Bitcoin is special because not every computer program is Bitcoin' is flawed because you're nearsighted and your body odor is offensive enough that simply posting on this board leaves readers half a world away in tears" would be an example of an ad hominem.

ad hominem?

Gee, good point. Did Pirate hire you yet to chair his legal defense team?

Every computer program is not Bitcoin - that's why Bitcoin is special. That's why Bitcoin is Bitcoin.

every computer program could be considered algebra, that doesnt magically make it elude legislation.

I forget who said it, but they likened a fight against Bitcoin to a fight against Algebra. Good luck with that. Colored Coins are the future.

essentially every bitcoin client will become part of a distributed unregulated security exchange, which might be considered illegal by regulators just about anywhere.  Now whether or not such interpretation would stand up in court, I have no idea, but Id rather not see them get the chance to try it.

Putting the Blockchain at risk? Please elaborate.

It's to late for that. 

Alternatively, Sam could act like a responsible adult and communicate.

any gov involvement hurts investors at this point as well.
lose, lose, lose is the game