This suggests (to me) that SEC/courts intentionally use a very loose definition of money when defining a security to avoid loopholes.
If you read the actual definitions in the security act of 1933, you will see they use the term "for value" in the definition of a sale. The word "money" isnt even there, let alone dollar. So it doesnt matter if you sell your investment instrument for, or denominate it in dollar, gold, barrels of oil or bitcoin, as long as it has value.
As for the definition of a security, to say its broad is an understatement:
The term “security” means any note, stock, treasury stock, security future, security-based swap, bond, debenture, evidence of indebtedness, certificate of interest or participation in any profit-sharing agreement, collateral-trust certificate, preorganization certificate or subscription, transferable share, investment contract, voting-trust certificate, certificate of deposit for a security, fractional undivided interest in oil, gas, or other mineral rights, any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege on any security, certificate of deposit, or group or index of securities (including any interest therein or based on the value thereof), or any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege entered into on a national securities exchange relating to foreign currency, or, in general, any interest or instrument commonly known as a “security”, or any certificate of interest or participation in, temporary or interim certificate for, receipt for, guarantee of, or warrant or right to subscribe to or purchase, any of the foregoing.
