6 ms·
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 Exch
by 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.