>You can Google the legal arguments, but suffice it to say that the legislation creating the SEC is old and vague, and anyone, including the SEC, who says that

>You can Google the legal arguments, but suffice it to say that the legislation creating the SEC is old and vague, and anyone, including the SEC, who says that their characterization of tokens is absolutely correct is misleading you. You've got that backwards. It's the crypto boosters who really, really, really want to avoid securities regulations who are misleading you with nonsensical, contorted non-arguments. The SEC's characterization of tokens is absolutely correct, and the only people telling you otherwise are those who had hoped to make a buck off of avoiding regulatory scrutiny. >This doesn't mean these companies are willfully ignoring the law or aggressively pushing the envelope Yes, it does, without question. The companies doing this are trying to run exactly the sorts of scams and schemes that the laws were designed to protect against.