3 ms·
No no, what happened is the DAO imploded on its own a whole year before the SEC even looked at it. The DAO was hacked in June of 2016, and the SEC didn't relea
by toomim 9y ago
No no, what happened is the DAO imploded on its own a whole year before the SEC even looked at it.
The DAO was hacked in June of 2016, and the SEC didn't release that article until July of 2017.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_DAO_(organization) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_DAO_(organization)
When the SEC says:
> The Commission has determined not to pursue an enforcement action in this matter based on the conduct and activities known to the Commission at this time
What they mean is:
> We chose not to beat a dead horse, because it's already dead.
- cal5k 9y agoI don't see why that matters. They clarified that DAO tokens are securities but decided not to pursue any action for a number of reasons, one of which being (and they've stated this elsewhere) that prior to their clarification there was ambiguity on this issue. The tl;dr is that they are clearly securities under existing law. Now that the SEC has clarified that fact companies are free to issue Tokens if they comply with the law.
- JumpCrisscross 9y ago> When the SEC says...what they mean is: we chose not to beat a dead horse, because it's already dead The SEC charged Bernie Madoff's auditors after the scheme had been revealed [1]. In respect of the DAO, the SEC appears to be taking a "wait and see" approach. (With ICOs, on the other hand, we've seen enough.)
- overdrivetg 9y ago[1] http://www.businessinsider.com/sec-charges-madoff-auditor-with-fraud-too-2009-3 http://www.businessinsider.com/sec-charges-madoff-auditor-wi...