Topic: Got off the phone with the Guy from the S.E.C - page 9. (Read 28522 times)

Sorry, I did not see this but here is what I don't understand (also I would like to know if anyone here has taken the Series 7 exam) how can SEC be involved in this problem both for pirate and BFL.  Securities Exchange Commission deals with registered securities so who registered with them from either group?  Companies such as BFL become state problems in which they are legal entities for and same with any pirate ventures as well.  As for GLBSE again did they register as a US entity and trade company securities and not bitcoin developed or funded properties.  Again SEC would work with the state the company was established in and they also not discuss the status of an individual who is under criminal investigation.  

Basically if an SEC agent did call which could happen it is someone trying to make a name for themselves.  Any SEC investigation will yield nothing but if you wanted to have teeth in this I would have been worried if you said Secret Service since they handle currency issues which Bitcoin does that since it used to transfer funds arround the world.  

As for BFL not sure why SEC would care since they are a privately held company but if that is not the case let me know so I can get some stock or bonds.  

We use the terms stocks and bonds but that does not mean that SEC has jurisdiction over them since it is not a registered or recognized instrument.  If that was the case, the next bogus coupon you see or even coupon managment at the grocery would fall under SEC if we follow this train of thought.  I really don't want to get broker dealer license just to by some milk but maybe you do.

Enjoy and yes I do have a finance background and I have worked with the SEC.  

BFL????what need is there to fuck BFL with SEC?

They both netted a pretty good haul.  That's the way I see it anyway at the time of this writing.

Put another way: 'subscribing'.

The guy has a few Single SCs on order (4 I think), so he should probably avoid screwing over BFL...

True, but then again they are cutting themselves from a big portion of customers who never heard of / used TOR.

Lol, so whats the relationship between Pirate thing and BLF?

Depends what you mean by helpful. If you mean "help conceal the facts of the matter", then no. Otherwise, yes.

Temporarily at least. There's other ASICs in the pipe that would end up eating his lunch anyway.

The thing about BFL sort of came out of the blue.

~pyotr

It would be prudent for all Bitcoin services which do not require a physical nexus or an interface with the legacy banking system to operate anonymously on Tor like Silk Road does to insulate them from future changes in the law and/or extra-legal regulatory harassment.

Getting BFL involved in this is nonsensical and frankly, childish by the OP. Wont go anywhere.

However, it could be worth mentioning bitcoinica to them. Im sure they would be a whole lot more interested in that.

Information should ideally be provided by nefario or PPT operators' lawyers.  If not lawyers, then at least knowledgable and respected forum members.

BitcoinINV runs a GPU farm based GLBSE asset (ironically more at odds with the SEC than BFL is) and would benefit from the government hassling BFL.  In fact, he would only benefit if BFL is not a scam but the government hassles them anyway, as if BFL is a scam an investigation would not change the availability of ASIC devices.

I must admit this is sad that the Internet is not decentralized enough to prevent such moves. TLD .com is managed by Verisign which is based in US, therefore it would be prudent to move GLBSE onto a different TLD, with a registrar and the TLD registry based in some liberal place.

Who should it be provided by?  Or are you saying that we are supposed to not talk about anything that it is being investigated by the SEC?

QFT. There are some valid concerns about BFL, but trying to get them shut down or cause them issues for no reason doesn't help anyone.

Is there a case where the registrar was based outside the United States and the .com was shut down by the US Government? The best example to the contrary is thepiratebay.org where the PIR registry is based in the United States but the registrar is not. GLBSE.com is not registered by a US based registrar.

I don't think posts implying that GLBSE has not been legitimate in the past are going to be helpful to any investigation of its activity.  The DoJ has a long reach and where your business is based is often less material to their powers than whether you are conducting business with people in the US (see online poker debacle).  A number of countries have laws which make it illegal to offer unregulated securities to people who don't qualify as "sophisticated investors".  You may or may not be in the clear, but don't assume that you are purely on the basis of location.

Get legal advice now.  Even if you're cleared of any wrong-doing, the cost of complying with investigations by financial regulators can be devastating.

No offense to BitcoinINV, but I would prefer that information about bitcoin that will be used IN COURT is not provided by random forum users.

In addition, please do not inadvertently link BFL to pirate's scam.  BFL has not violated an SEC regulations as far as I know.

American regulatory agencies aren't exactly famous for respecting their jurisdiction when it comes to shutting down .com sites...

IANAL

It becomes money what is what bitcoin has been since it was first created. In fact all governments will avoid the vast majority of  regulatory problems and cans of worms by simply treating bitcoin the same way they treat foreign currency. The SEC is simply following the lead of the Brazilian regulators and treating bitcoin like what it really is and regulating securities in the United States based on BTC that same way they would regulate securities in the United States based on CAD or EUR or any other non USD currency, as is their mandate under existing law. As for what a BTC transaction was worth in terms of USD in the past this is trivial to establish since one has both a blockchain time stamp and easily established published historical BTC / USD exchange rates.

By the way stealing bitcoins is subject to that same laws for theft that apply any valuable item. For example if one steals bitcoins in a jurisdiction where the punishment for theft is the amputation of one right hand, then the fact that the law in question proceeded the invention of bitcoin by over 1300 years does not negate the applicability of this law, in that particular jurisdiction, to the theft of bitcoins.