4 ms·

I am no libertarian, but this feels thoroughly unfair on a human level. EtherDelta was a noble pursuit in my book - it was useful, entrepreneurial and did not e

by vvpan 8y ago

I am no libertarian, but this feels thoroughly unfair on a human level. EtherDelta was a noble pursuit in my book - it was useful, entrepreneurial and did not exploit anybody.

bouncycastle 8y ago
Yes, I'm also having a hard time understanding why is this illegal.
- wmf 8y ago
  ICOs are mostly illegal unregistered securities so any service that trades those tokens is also illegal.
  - anonu 8y ago
    ICOs are securities so must be registered with the SEC. Exchanges that trade securities must also be registered. You can trade ICOs on an exchange as long as both are registered according to their respective laws...
  - bouncycastle 8y ago
    I'm not talking about ICOs. In fact, EtherDelta was one of the few projects that launched without an ICO, and before the ICO craze.
    - browsercoin 8y ago
      the SEC doesn't give a shit. if it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, it's probably one in their eyes.
      - solveit 8y ago
        Coburn never would have settled if the SEC were that sloppy. You might disagree with the laws involved, but I'm pretty sure they had a decent legal case.
        browsercoin 8y ago
        he's not in the clear from civil lawsuits which I'm sure this SEC settlement sets a precedent.
    - wmf 8y ago
      EtherDelta allows you to trade illegal securities, therefore EtherDelta is also illegal.
      - bouncycastle 8y ago
        It allowed you to trade any ERC-20 token, indiscriminately. If you point an ERC-20 contract address to it, it would add it automatically to the user interface. Also, I'm not talking about if it's illegal or not, the point that I can't get over is that the ED guy didn't scam or hurt anyone. It was an honest, transparent, open source project.
        covemarkets 8y ago
        there are several issues at play: rules around trading securities and securities fraud. EtherDelta broke certain rules and that/s why the founder got fined about 400k in total. You are correct that EtherDelta wasn't a fraud or a scam - and that's why there is no criminal proceeding, no accusation of securities fraud.
elliekelly 8y ago
There's no doubt EtherDelta's system addressed many of the reasons traditional markets required regulation but EtherDelta is still a clear violation of the Exchange Act. All securities exchanges must be registered, most tokens are securities and EtherDelta was running an unregistered exchange selling those securities. That being said, this is a classic example of the law failing to keep pace with technology. Up until a few years ago it was a given that exchanges required a neutral third party to facilitate transactions and that, in the interest of fairness and full disclosure, those market makers needed to be registered and regulated. The law simply does not contemplate a self-regulated exchange governed by smart contracts and a decentralized ledger. U.S. regulators also tend to focus on compliance with black-letter law without giving much credence to compliance with the spirit of the law. In my opinion, this all-or-nothing approach stymies innovation because regulators and innovators become adversaries when they could and should be allies.
- hirseypie 8y ago
  >EtherDelta is still a clear violation of the Exchange Act. All securities exchanges must be registered, most tokens are securities and EtherDelta was running an unregistered exchange selling those securities. Let me get this straight: Old men write words on dead trees. Old men send men with guns to blow your brains out if you do not agree to their words. These old men get their salary by stealing tax payer money and allowing convenience stores and gas stations to prey in the poor and all unfettered exchange of cash for lottery tickets. But god forbid that a man wants to invest in a token startup.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

by vvpan 8y ago

I am no libertarian, but this feels thoroughly unfair on a human level. EtherDelta was a noble pursuit in my book - it was useful, entrepreneurial and did not exploit anybody.

bouncycastle 8y ago

Yes, I'm also having a hard time understanding why is this illegal.

wmf 8y ago
ICOs are mostly illegal unregistered securities so any service that trades those tokens is also illegal.
- anonu 8y ago
  ICOs are securities so must be registered with the SEC. Exchanges that trade securities must also be registered. You can trade ICOs on an exchange as long as both are registered according to their respective laws...
- bouncycastle 8y ago
  I'm not talking about ICOs. In fact, EtherDelta was one of the few projects that launched without an ICO, and before the ICO craze.
  - browsercoin 8y ago
    the SEC doesn't give a shit. if it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, it's probably one in their eyes.
    - solveit 8y ago
      Coburn never would have settled if the SEC were that sloppy. You might disagree with the laws involved, but I'm pretty sure they had a decent legal case.
      - browsercoin 8y ago
        he's not in the clear from civil lawsuits which I'm sure this SEC settlement sets a precedent.
  - wmf 8y ago
    EtherDelta allows you to trade illegal securities, therefore EtherDelta is also illegal.
    - bouncycastle 8y ago
      It allowed you to trade any ERC-20 token, indiscriminately. If you point an ERC-20 contract address to it, it would add it automatically to the user interface. Also, I'm not talking about if it's illegal or not, the point that I can't get over is that the ED guy didn't scam or hurt anyone. It was an honest, transparent, open source project.
      - covemarkets 8y ago
        there are several issues at play: rules around trading securities and securities fraud. EtherDelta broke certain rules and that/s why the founder got fined about 400k in total. You are correct that EtherDelta wasn't a fraud or a scam - and that's why there is no criminal proceeding, no accusation of securities fraud.

elliekelly 8y ago

There's no doubt EtherDelta's system addressed many of the reasons traditional markets required regulation but EtherDelta is still a clear violation of the Exchange Act. All securities exchanges must be registered, most tokens are securities and EtherDelta was running an unregistered exchange selling those securities. That being said, this is a classic example of the law failing to keep pace with technology. Up until a few years ago it was a given that exchanges required a neutral third party to facilitate transactions and that, in the interest of fairness and full disclosure, those market makers needed to be registered and regulated. The law simply does not contemplate a self-regulated exchange governed by smart contracts and a decentralized ledger. U.S. regulators also tend to focus on compliance with black-letter law without giving much credence to compliance with the spirit of the law. In my opinion, this all-or-nothing approach stymies innovation because regulators and innovators become adversaries when they could and should be allies.

hirseypie 8y ago
>EtherDelta is still a clear violation of the Exchange Act. All securities exchanges must be registered, most tokens are securities and EtherDelta was running an unregistered exchange selling those securities. Let me get this straight: Old men write words on dead trees. Old men send men with guns to blow your brains out if you do not agree to their words. These old men get their salary by stealing tax payer money and allowing convenience stores and gas stations to prey in the poor and all unfettered exchange of cash for lottery tickets. But god forbid that a man wants to invest in a token startup.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]