I thought this is going to scare people away from ICO but looking at Aventus ICO today, this is the beginging … because human being is design to find away around things like this …
This issuers are apparently based in the UK. They’re
ostensibly emboldened by the belief that the “use value” token is a valid defence against their ICO being classified as an investment security. That incorrect belief was apparently fostered by a Coinbase white paper.
This blog argues they are mistaken.
The ICO craze will have a deadcat bounce and continue until the regulators start punishing people for breaking the securities law.
When the regulators get serious, start forcing delistings from exchanges, confiscating bank accounts and assets of issuers and affiliates, and throwing some issuers in jail who don’t have enough assets for rescission, then we will see who still wants to buy these scalding hot potatoes.
Apparently punishment will originate in Asia and then presumably later work its way over to the West given that the SEC has already issued several warnings in the context of their investigation into The DAO.
https://www.google.com/search?q=regulation+of+ICOs+in+the+UKhttps://www.coindesk.com/icos-eu-will-slow-giant-regulate-tokens/http://www.jeremybarnett.co.uk/international-regulation-of-icos-cryptocurrency-lawyerThe definitions of ‘securities’ across jurisdictions are myriad. However, most of them seem to involve elements of shared ownership or control and an expectation of profit. In the United States, for instance, the definition of a ‘security’ includes ‘a certificate of interest or participation in any profit-sharing agreement’ or a ‘right to subscribe to or purchase the same’. In a similar vein, the UK Financial Conduct Authority defines a ‘security’ to include instruments with the following characteristics: ownership, control and a periodic monetary return. One may possibly argue therefore, that a ‘token’ or a ‘coin’ with profit sharing or governance rights is a ‘security’.
While securities regulators around the world are coming to terms with this new form of business entity and fundraising, entrepreneurs using ICOs are acutely aware that there lies a possibility that such tokens or coins would come under the ambit of securities law.
Regulators also probably need to weigh the benefits vs. risk outcomes. So they may be waiting to observe what happens with ICOs such as this one. To see if the risk to the naive investors is great enough to justify enforcement action.
With only a cursory glance, Aventus appears to have perhaps a valid use case, capable team, and presumable solid technology (although I did not read their white paper), so this wouldn’t be the best example of an ICO that most needs to be stopped.
They will say that is premine. and sell them. No one can block crypto world 
