So, stock exchange is not allowed in usa using bitcoins? - page 3.

galambo

sr. member

Activity: 966

Merit: 311

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on October 08, 2012, 05:22:25 PM

OTC-BB isn't the same thing as the Pink Sheets. OTC-BB stocks stocks must register with SEC, unlisted securities do not. The pink sheets are simply a centralized third party which maintains a list of independent brokers and the unlisted securities they trade. Note it isn't a requirement for an unlisted security to be on the pink sheets. Think of pinksheets as like a digital phonebook of brokers. Say you want shares of unlisted security xyz. Your broker can use the pinksheets to find that broker abc has shares of xyz (it may be the only broker in the world that does). Your broker can then buy shares from broker xyz and simply assign them in your account. Remember only broker dealers can trade in unlisted securities.

Pink sheets and OTCBB are the same thing. They are competitors.

The exemptions are very strict and your Regulation D exempt stock will have a restrictive legend on it that does not allow free trading (meaning no pink sheets).

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on October 08, 2012, 05:22:25 PM

Reg D BTW doesn't relate (directly) to what securities broker dealers can TRADE. It deals with the issuance (i.e. selling new shares) of securities. While GLBSE did multiple things normally these are separate actions. Reg D deals with the legality of a company issuing new securities. Broker dealers are required to trade unlisted securities.

Edited for clarity.

You do not need a broker-dealer or market maker. You need a Transfer Agent. Let's be completely clear -- a broker-dealer is not required.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: galambo on October 08, 2012, 05:18:07 PM

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on October 08, 2012, 08:52:03 AM

3) Work for within the system.
Get a broker dealer license, be regulated by SEC. Comply with all regulation including KYC and AML. Essentially the MtGox model except for securities. A broker dealer can trade any security even "unlisted" securities (meaning not filed with SEC). This is the so called pink sheets. In theory a broker could accept Bitcoins (potentially only accepting Bitcoins) and allow trade in Bitcoin denominated securities for its private clients. This option would require some significant legal research and has the highest cost. It probably isn't viable at this point but if Bitcoin continues to grow it likely is inevitable.

Complying with the law is the best option, and I'd like to enhance your knowledge of this process. A clean, legal SEC-registered OTCBB shell company will run higher than most people's idea of pocket change. Please do your Due Diligence, YMMV. Also, you certainly must be registered with the SEC, unless you are classified under a Regulation D exemption.

OTC-BB isn't the same thing as the Pink Sheets. OTC-BB stocks stocks must register with SEC, unlisted securities do not. The pink sheets are simply a centralized third party which maintains a list of independent brokers and the unlisted securities they trade. Note it isn't a requirement for an unlisted security to be on the pink sheets. Think of pinksheets as like a digital phonebook of brokers. Say you want shares of unlisted security xyz. Your broker can use the pinksheets to find that broker abc has shares of xyz (it may be the only broker in the world that does). Your broker can then buy shares from broker xyz and simply assign them in your account. Remember only broker dealers can trade in unlisted securities.

Reg D BTW doesn't relate (directly) to what securities broker dealers can TRADE. It deals with the issuance (i.e. selling new shares) of securities. While GLBSE did multiple things normally these are separate actions. Reg D deals with the legality of a company issuing new securities. Broker dealers are required to trade unlisted securities.

Edited for clarity.

galambo

sr. member

Activity: 966

Merit: 311

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on October 08, 2012, 08:52:03 AM

3) Work for within the system.
Get a broker dealer license, be regulated by SEC. Comply with all regulation including KYC and AML. Essentially the MtGox model except for securities. A broker dealer can trade any security even "unlisted" securities (meaning not filed with SEC). This is the so called pink sheets. In theory a broker could accept Bitcoins (potentially only accepting Bitcoins) and allow trade in Bitcoin denominated securities for its private clients. This option would require some significant legal research and has the highest cost. It probably isn't viable at this point but if Bitcoin continues to grow it likely is inevitable.

Complying with the law is the best option, and I'd like to enhance your knowledge of this process. A clean, legal SEC-registered OTCBB shell company will run higher than most people's idea of pocket change. Please do your Due Diligence, YMMV. Also, you certainly must be registered with the SEC, unless you are classified under a Regulation D exemption.

becoin

legendary

Activity: 3431

Merit: 1233

Quote from: Puppet on October 08, 2012, 03:33:44 PM

As the owner of the bond, you could sell them to whoever you want for whatever you want.

Of course, I can. I may need issuer's permission or not, depends on my contract with him. Certainly, I don't need your permission as a regulator to do that. Bitcoin changes almost everything. Find another job!

Puppet

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1040

Quote from: becoin on October 08, 2012, 03:19:59 PM

Quote from: Puppet on October 08, 2012, 02:30:02 PM

You can sell your gigamining bonds to me or anyone you want, and gigaVPS wouldnt have a clue

That will be the case if I sell for fiat currency. In bitcoins is different. He will know if he cares to know. Information for every bitcoin transaction becomes publicly available in 10 minutes via the information for the blockchain. Again, only people directly involved will know what this transaction is about. Again, there is no need for a trusted middleman to verify identity of transacting parties.

What are you blabbering about? It doesnt matter if you traded your gigamining bonds with me for bitcoin, swapped them for other securities, sold them for fiat. a pack of smokes or a date with your sister. As the owner of the bond, you could sell them to whoever you want for whatever you want. GigaVPS would have no say, yet his obligation would remain to the bondholder. Thats a security. And bitcoin doesnt change a bloody thing about it.

becoin

legendary

Activity: 3431

Merit: 1233

Quote from: Puppet on October 08, 2012, 02:30:02 PM

You can sell your gigamining bonds to me or anyone you want, and gigaVPS wouldnt have a clue

That will be the case if I sell for fiat currency. In bitcoins is different. He will know if he cares to know. Information for every bitcoin transaction becomes publicly available in 10 minutes via the information for the blockchain. Again, only people directly involved will know what this transaction is about. Again, there is no need for a trusted middleman to verify identity of transacting parties.

Puppet

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1040

Quote from: becoin on October 08, 2012, 02:19:01 PM

Quote from: Puppet on October 08, 2012, 01:41:48 PM

The topic of this thread is a stock exchange and GLBSE assets are not in your name

They ARE in my name. It is just another question that you don't know my name,

please, stop acting so stupid. They are not. You can sell your gigamining bonds to me or anyone you want, and gigaVPS wouldnt have a clue, wouldnt have to agree, he wouldnt even have to know, his obligations would remain to the bond holder, whoever that is. Thats a tradeable security.

Try the same with for instance a rental contract, or a work contract. Can you sell your house rental agreement or work contract to me, and would your employer then owe me your salary? No. so thats a non tradeable contract. Its not a security.

If you can really not see the difference, then i cant help you.

becoin

legendary

Activity: 3431

Merit: 1233

Quote from: Puppet on October 08, 2012, 01:41:48 PM

The topic of this thread is a stock exchange and GLBSE assets are not in your name

They ARE in my name. It is just another question that you don't know my name, but it is none of your business either as it is concerning me and my counterparty. Everything I purchase with bitcoins is in my name! Every bitcoin I spend contains both the contract and my signature. The reason for this is already stated several times. I can't pay with bitcoins if I don't sign it with my private key. A bitcoin marketplace does not need a trusted third party to verify identity! I fully understand your pain as a trusted middleman but can't help. You are not needed anymore!

becoin

legendary

Activity: 3431

Merit: 1233

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on October 08, 2012, 01:39:11 PM

Therefor Euro == Legal Tender.

In the eurozone, yes. Euro is the legal tender. In the US the legal tender is US dollar. Where is the fallacy?

Private currency is just private currency. What we are talking about is what is money? From Mr Bernanke's statement becomes clear that gold is not money. Therefore the only option left is the dollar. The dollar is the legal tender as well.

Puppet

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1040

Quote from: becoin on October 08, 2012, 01:21:44 PM

Quote from: Puppet on October 08, 2012, 12:49:34 PM

But if that contract is not in your name...

You really don't get it, do you? The contract IS in my name.

Everytime I get something in exchange for bitcoins I sign it with my name. My name is represented by the unique string called private key. Thus, unique alphanumerical string is generated representing ME and ONLY ME. This is my signature. And the message I send signed with this signature is concerning only ME and the other person I sending it to. It is none of your business or government's business to regulate MY PRIVATE relations!

You are talking about bitcoins again and no one is arguing they are illegal. The topic of this thread is a stock exchange and GLBSE assets are not in your name, you can trade them freely with anyone and the asset issuers obligations trade with them. Those are therefore securities and trading unregistered securities is (almost always) illegal.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: becoin on October 08, 2012, 01:29:05 PM

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on October 08, 2012, 01:11:47 PM

Where do you get this idea that money = legal tender?

Mr. Bernanke "Gold is not money"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyTBhsEliUE

If gold is not money in the US then only money is the dollar bill. The dollar bill is the only legal tender in US!

That is a logical fallacy if I ever heard one.
So these must also be legal tender in the US right?

In the US:
Euro =/= Gold.
Euro == Money.
Therefor Euro == Legal Tender.

Lets take it to the next level.

http://www.ithacahours.com/
A private currency in the US (New York).

Ithaca hours =/= Gold.
Ithaca hours == money.
therefore Ithaca hours == legal tender. Who knew!

becoin

legendary

Activity: 3431

Merit: 1233

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on October 08, 2012, 01:11:47 PM

Where do you get this idea that money = legal tender?

Mr. Bernanke "Gold is not money"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyTBhsEliUE

If gold is not money in the US then only money is the dollar bill. The dollar bill is the only legal tender in US!

Quote

Any kind of object or secure verifiable record that fulfills these functions can serve as money.

There is a big difference between "can serve as money" and "is money"?! Over the course of human history, many things have been used as money: metals, stones, shells, grains, livestock, fuel, land.

becoin

legendary

Activity: 3431

Merit: 1233

Quote from: Puppet on October 08, 2012, 12:49:34 PM

But if that contract is not in your name...

You really don't get it, do you? The contract IS in my name.

Everytime I get something in exchange for bitcoins I sign it with my name. My name is represented by the unique string called private key. Thus, unique alphanumerical string is generated representing ME and ONLY ME. This is my signature. And the message I send signed with this signature is concerning only ME and the other person I sending it to. It is none of your business or government's business to regulate MY PRIVATE relations!

Mushroomized

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1002

Hello!

Quote from: Mike Hearn on October 07, 2012, 04:47:49 PM

I'm hopeful that in future if decentralized bond/stock markets become popular, the law will be amended to ensure the requirements are proportional and handle jurisdictional issues better. Most likely, waiving some of the requirements if the securities are below a certain size and dropping the requirements to follow a countries laws if a security is merely purchasable there. That sort of thing already happens, we just need more of it. I doubt anonymous securities will ever be allowed unless somebody can find a really compelling use case for them.

Great post, if anything, we will get a more secure exchange from this.

That's the cool thing about bitcoin, if something gets hacked or scammed, we fight back and make something that is more secure

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: becoin on October 08, 2012, 12:10:59 PM

Bitcoin is not money. Money === legal tender. Bitcoin != legal tender.

One of those three is correct.
Where do you get this idea that money = legal tender?

Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money

Money is any object or record that is generally accepted as payment for goods and services and repayment of debts in a given socio-economic context or country.[1][2][3] The main functions of money are distinguished as: a medium of exchange; a unit of account; a store of value; and, occasionally in the past, a standard of deferred payment.[4][5] Any kind of object or secure verifiable record that fulfills these functions can serve as money.

Nope nothing about legal tender in there. Hmm a "secure verifiable record that fulfills the function of a medium of exchange, a unit of account, and a store of value" what does that remind me of?

Quote from: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/money

mon·ey [muhn-ee] Show IPA noun, plural mon·eys, mon·ies, adjective
noun
1. any circulating medium of exchange, including coins, paper money, and demand deposits.
2. paper money.
3. gold, silver, or other metal in pieces of convenient form stamped by public authority and issued as a medium of exchange and measure of value.
4. any article or substance used as a medium of exchange, measure of wealth, or means of payment, as checks on demand deposit or cowrie.
5. a particular form or denomination of currency.

Nope not here either.

While the US Dollar is BOTH money AND legal tender in the United States (technically in the jurisdiction of the US courts) it is only money outside the US. Try settling a debt in Spain arguing that because the dollar is money it is legal tender.

Legal tender status in the US derives from 31 USC 5103 which doesn't even mention the word money.

Quote

31 USC § 5103 - Legal tender
United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues. Foreign gold or silver coins are not legal tender for debts.

Puppet

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1040

Are you really that stupid or just doing a terrible job of playing devil's advocate?

No one here is saying bitcoins are illegal. No one is saying you cant use them to purchase goods or services, heck, you can almost certainly even use them to buy registered securities.

What you cant seem to comprehend is that trading unregistered securities is almost always unlawful. It doesnt matter what you pay these securities with, it doesnt matter if these securities are about fiat, oil, gold, corn, bitcoins or chicken feed.

As to what constitutes a security, Ive give you the legal definition. If thats too hard to understand, consider that any contract that is publicly tradable is usually a security. You can make your own private contract between you and Giga to rent his mining rigs, pay for it in bitcoins, and AFAIK, that would be fine. But if that contract is not in your name, and you can sell that contract and giga's obligations are to anyone owning that contract, ie, if giga sells tradable contracts to the public against anything of value, then it becomes a security and subject to regulation. Bitcoins dont have anything to do with it, it would be the exact same thing if giga's bonds pertained to producing cows and were traded for bales of hay.

becoin

legendary

Activity: 3431

Merit: 1233

Quote from: JoelKatz on October 08, 2012, 11:07:39 AM

This wasn't about possession, but it was about issuing and creating a market.

Issuing what? Paying with what? Paying with alphanumerical text strings representing what? To have a market you must have money circulating on it! Because this is the definition for market - buying and selling against money.

Bitcoin is not money. Money === legal tender. Bitcoin != legal tender. If government changes tax laws and allows individuals to pay taxes with bitcoins only then they will have the right to interfere in private relations based on bitcoin!

JoelKatz

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1012

Democracy is vulnerable to a 51% attack.

Quote from: becoin on October 08, 2012, 08:57:11 AM

Quote from: JoelKatz on October 08, 2012, 08:24:14 AM

Lawyers have told me that if it represents an interest in something else and is easily traded, it would generally be considered a security.

Then every digital asset is a security, because it represents an interest in something else and can be easily traded due to its digital form...

I guess I'm not sure what you mean by "digital asset". For example, a Bitcoin is a digital asset, I would think. But it doesn't represent an interest in something else.

Quote

By definition:

Quote

A digital asset is any object of text or media that has been formatted into a binary source that includes the right to use it. A digital file without the right to use it is not an asset.

It doesn't represent an interest in something else though, at least not so far as I can tell. In any event, there isn't really such a thing as a "right to use" under US law.

Quote

What your lawyer basically told you is that you have no right to possess digital assets without government permission and regulation by respective government agencies? Why would anyone need blessing from the government to use THEIR OWN digital assets if those assets include the right to use them? And you say the law is clear?!

This wasn't about possession, but it was about issuing and creating a market. You don't need any sort of blessing to use anything. Nobody was talking about use.

justusranvier

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1013

Many people are operating under the flawed assumption that law enforcement is about rules. It's actually about power.

If the people with power to enforce their will don't like what you are doing they will use their power to stop you. Law is one of the tools they can use, and they go to great lengths to maintain the pretense that law is objective and consistent, but don't fool yourself that you can depend on a superior understanding of it to protect yourself.

Many, many people have lost liberty or property because they mistakenly believed they could use superior legal arguments to fend off the government. It's a form of magical thinking.

Don't rely on magical incantations to protect yourself - use technology to make yourself a hard target.

becoin

legendary

Activity: 3431

Merit: 1233

Quote from: JoelKatz on October 08, 2012, 08:24:14 AM

Lawyers have told me that if it represents an interest in something else and is easily traded, it would generally be considered a security.

Then every digital asset is a security, because it represents an interest in something else and can be easily traded due to its digital form...

By definition:

Quote

A digital asset is any object of text or media that has been formatted into a binary source that includes the right to use it. A digital file without the right to use it is not an asset.

What your lawyer basically told you is that you have no right to possess digital assets without government permission and regulation by respective government agencies? Why would anyone need blessing from the government to use THEIR OWN digital assets if those assets include the right to use them? And you say the law is clear?!

Topic: So, stock exchange is not allowed in usa using bitcoins? - page 3. (Read 11624 times)