5 ms·
I think the issue of what constitutes a security is very well defined in the US...it’s just no one has framed their token in such a way it’s not a security (des
by will_brown 8y ago
I think the issue of what constitutes a security is very well defined in the US...it’s just no one has framed their token in such a way it’s not a security (despite all the claims to the contrary) and otherwise the ICOs have not complied with securities laws because...well move fast break things.
I’m not sure why a company doesn’t just come out and do an ICO: a) with a token that’s not a security or b) a token that is a security and comply with securities laws.
- thinkmassive 8y agoThey have, see https://coinlist.co/ https://coinlist.co/
- hndamien 8y agoIf your innovation requires a new monetary system, it is probably a Ponzi.
- vkou 8y ago> a token that is a security and comply with securities laws Because if you do that, there's no point having an ICO. Just do an IPO - the token is an expensive, pointless distraction from their mission to democratize the world's dogsitters, or whatever they want to do.
- A2017U1 8y ago> Just do an IPO A token is virtually frictionless and costs nothing to setup or trade globally, dividends can be paid out directly to token owners. An IPO is an incredibly lengthy, arduous process requiring a small army of lawyers and accountants simply to offer shares to a restricted subset of sophisticated investors in one country.
- hndamien 8y agoYou are referring to an STO and not an ICO.
- CPLX 8y agoBecause the only reason for tokens is to create a little confusion that allows people to think they'll be allowed to violate securities laws.