Topic: SCAM IPO [Bakewell] - Finally, a 'transparent' investment that will 'grow'! - page 12. (Read 47857 times)

What the fuck, so for any amounted have to verify?

Have you been contacted by GLBSE regarding claim tickets or  closure in general?  Don't forget the spam folder, just in case.

From http://www.gov.ns.ca/nssc/faq.htm :

"
 The first step is to try and determine whether in fact a provision of the Nova Scotia securities laws has been broken. This may require you to consult with a lawyer. Our Staff is also available to discuss your concern or to meet with you and try to sort out whether a violation of the law, in its letter or its spirit, has occurred. Call (902) 424-6179 or contact us via e-mail and your request will be directed to the most appropriate branch for dealing with your question.

In general, where there is no intent to break the law, and no negligence or wilful blindness, our aim will be to work with you to address the breach. Another objective will be to see that steps are taken to avoid any repetition of the events and circumstances that caused the violation to occur.

While it is impossible to predetermine what specific actions might be taken, given the variety and uniqueness of each set of circumstances that may result in the breaking of the law, our approach to unintentional or inadvertent breaches is oriented toward promoting a culture of compliance with securities laws and usually stops short of a more draconian enforcement approach. A more severe approach is generally reserved for cases where there has been a wilful attempt to evade or avoid the laws or some negligence resulting in harm to the public or whenever there is a real risk of danger to the public calling for stronger measures.
"

-MarkM-

I've seen bank robbers arrested, tried, and jailed. I've never seen a bitcoin miner collecting initial funds via GLBSE having any legal troubles.  Not saying it won't happen, just saying it never happened.

The point is that it has value. That the value is derived from computer calculations is irrelevant. I dont see an exception for securities based on running compute intensive code.

As for it being a contract; yes its a contract, but the important point is that it is a tradable contract, aka as a security.


You can speculate if robbing a bank is legal, but its not prudent to assume it might be.

It really is a contract to run calculations, and results of calculations (hashes lower than target) happen to have some market value. Just like numerical modeling of heat exchangers for power plants.  This is certainly a reasonable point of view, even if particular court or a regulatory body might come up with a different perspective. If and when I see a court or an SEC ruling (or whatever it is called) naming a particular mining operation in the context of securities, I'll agree that they've interpreted it that way. Until then, we are speculating.

I have started setting up an "OTdemo" Open Transactions server anyone can issue assets on so people can actually play around with setting up an asset helping potential customers get set up to access it and so on.

For demonstration / play / etc purposes only of course, any asset subject to being shut down upon court order, not to be abused etc etc usual kind of do not mess with our machines stuff.

-MarkM-

Not that I disagree with your post (particularly getting bitcoin foundation involved), but out of curiosity, did whoever claimed "it is simply a contract to run computer calculations, and it's perfectly legal"  have any relevant credentials ? I kinda doubt it.  While Im not a lawyer myself, and things might be different in Canada, SEC regulation is pretty clear that these kinds of mining bonds are securities. That the bond relates to mining bitcoins rather than mining coal is of no importance.

I wouldn't rely on a single lawyer's opinion in such a novel matter. The opinions seem to range from "it's a security and it's illegal" to "it is simply a contract to run computer calculations, and it's perfectly legal" - whatever the case may be, nothing like Bitcoin has happened before. Ian, if you decide you need more input regarding legality, I suggest you contact other Canadian mining funds, specifically James @ Havelock. They are incorporated in Ontario, though, not Alberta. Finally, Bitcoin Foundation is out there, and is collecting membership fees - helping with these kinds of questions is exactly what they are supposed to be doing.

And get legal advice.

Since you are in the same boat as a lot of other asset issuers, why not pool some money to get one lawyer? I dont mean to get your money back from GLBSE, but to continue running a bitcoin security.  Giga was getting legal counsel I believe, you  might want to chip in, to get his opinions.

Alternatively, you could save that money and assume its illegal and a bad idea (which is the most likely legal conclusion IMO).

Just to clarify: what I meant was that Bakewell should only recognize whatever comes from GLBSE, and investors can then make arrangements between themselves. Ian, if you are comfortable spending time managing share transfers between investors, that's great. I was thinking that it might be too much (for both logistic and legal reasons), so  investors can make arrangements between themselves and not bother you at all. You just keep paying dividends according to the GLBSE information.

We can make a Transparent Board of Trustees, wich handle the trades an "shares".
Bakewell should not be a normal share for speculation, it should be an longtime invesment like a Rig owners club...

greets Chuck

Assuming a delisting process will take place with the help of GLBSE staff, we have several options. Bakewell can get re-listed on Havelock, cryptostocks, or any other similar platform. Alternatively, Ian may simply collect the claim tickets and pay dividends based on that. I definitely suggest him not to offer any trading or order books. Things are grey enough already. If you wish to "trade" your share, make arrangements with other users directly.

So admirable. Can we clone you and have the clones run other assets? 

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/possible-sale-of-ltc-global-site-code-to-someone-who-wants-to-run-a-btc-exchange-115553 something like this to run your own security on ?

In other news... Have we got the rigs hashing yet, how are they going?

Ultimately there is noting we can do right now, so we should continue with ensuring we have everything else under control, i.e. Get a google docs spreadsheet up with accounting info.

if GLBSE closes, I imagine there will be a claim code system similar as when Goat was delisted, so you will know who your shareholders are.

Frankly, Id more more worried about the potential consequences of running an unregistered security. You are not alone in that of course, but you are far from anonymous and you might want to talk about that with your lawyer.

Before securities, like stocks, bonds and notes, can be offered for sale to the public, they first must be registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Any stock that does not have an effective registration statement on file with the SEC is considered "unregistered." To sell or attempt to sell a financial security before it is registered is considered a felony.

Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/08/unregistered-securities.asp#ixzz28PML2jew

Have you started mining? In case you need to liquidate, few coins can be added into the pile.

If these problems are really due to a legal action (goat, SEC, whatever), I would imagine Nafario would eventually be able to continue trading or at least close the shop and facilitate transfer of the share ownership information. It is not likely that this information would remain hidden forever. Wishful thinking, I know.

One of the other exchanges might facilitate a transfer in  the best case scenario.

Are the rigs built?
Are we mining yet?