4 ms·

> SEC rulings only apply to American entities/business This is wrong. SEC rulings apply as soon as your investors are US residents. [1] I know neither of us ar

by hudon 9y ago

> SEC rulings only apply to American entities/business This is wrong. SEC rulings apply as soon as your investors are US residents. [1] I know neither of us are lawyers, but at least back up what you claim if it might put people's money at risk. [1] https://www.sec.gov/divisions/corpfin/internatl/foreign-private-issuers-overview.shtml https://www.sec.gov/divisions/corpfin/internatl/foreign-priv...

52-6F-62 9y ago
I tried to be clear, but I can see where there is possible ambiguity. I said business, not businesses. The impact would be on their existence within the US, but not internationally. Not with regard to the SEC alone. edit: Okay, you started as snark, then tightened it up a bit after an edit, but my point still stands.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- hudon 9y ago
  I see what you're saying: people not in the US should not be concerned. But that's not what the post is about and that's not what my question is about. The question is whether or not what the Ethereum Foundation sold to US residents are securities in the SEC's eyes?
52-6F-62 9y ago
Replying here because we reached max comment count. I can see how our wires got crossed. I interpreted your original comment as questioning whether or not this was a threat to the specific tech or foundation at large, and not just isolated to the US region. So, I guess the argument is moot -- seems like my mistake. It's certainly up in the air in the US at this point. I do find the progression of events interesting, regardless. In spite of what I said, the US does have a social impact with decisions like this -- just maybe not so much right now as in recent years[0]. I get argumentative because I see a lot of promise. I like technical discussion about it vs. regular degradation, so I usually have something to say. [0] http://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/imf-predicts-canada-will-pass-the-u-s-to-top-g7-growth-this-year/wcm/82ed88fe-25d6-44a7-8168-a69d2e384858 http://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/imf-predicts-...

by hudon 9y ago

52-6F-62 9y ago

I tried to be clear, but I can see where there is possible ambiguity. I said business, not businesses. The impact would be on their existence within the US, but not internationally. Not with regard to the SEC alone. edit: Okay, you started as snark, then tightened it up a bit after an edit, but my point still stands.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
hudon 9y ago
I see what you're saying: people not in the US should not be concerned. But that's not what the post is about and that's not what my question is about. The question is whether or not what the Ethereum Foundation sold to US residents are securities in the SEC's eyes?

52-6F-62 9y ago

Replying here because we reached max comment count. I can see how our wires got crossed. I interpreted your original comment as questioning whether or not this was a threat to the specific tech or foundation at large, and not just isolated to the US region. So, I guess the argument is moot -- seems like my mistake. It's certainly up in the air in the US at this point. I do find the progression of events interesting, regardless. In spite of what I said, the US does have a social impact with decisions like this -- just maybe not so much right now as in recent years[0]. I get argumentative because I see a lot of promise. I like technical discussion about it vs. regular degradation, so I usually have something to say. [0] http://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/imf-predicts-canada-will-pass-the-u-s-to-top-g7-growth-this-year/wcm/82ed88fe-25d6-44a7-8168-a69d2e384858 http://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/imf-predicts-...