5 ms·

> everything not BTC/ETH is a security, please register them Coinbase tried repeatedly to register them with the SEC and was turned away, which seems to be los

> everything not BTC/ETH is a security, please register them Coinbase tried repeatedly to register them with the SEC and was turned away, which seems to be lost on your point. From the article: > The SEC will not let crypto companies “come in and register” – we tried. > The Wells notice comes out of the investigation that we disclosed last summer. Shortly after that investigation began, the SEC asked us if we would be interested in discussing a potential resolution that would include registering some portion of our business with the SEC. We said absolutely yes. Specifically, the SEC asked us to provide our views on what a registration path for Coinbase could look like – because there is no existing way for a crypto exchange to register. We developed and proposed two different registration models. We spent millions of dollars on legal support to build these proposals and repeatedly asked for the SEC’s feedback. We got none. We also reiterated that we stand by our listings process – we don’t list securities today – and repeatedly invited the SEC to raise any questions about any asset at all on our platform. They raised none.

e63f67dd-065b 4y ago
> Coinbase tried repeatedly to register them with the SEC and was turned away, which seems to be lost on your point My entire point is that the SEC doesn't like them, to them saying "please register" is the same as saying "get bent". I specifically mentioned that those registration papers are going straight into the trash.
- mistercheph 4y ago
  "Please register" is disingenuous bureaucrat speak for "get bent" in the same way that calls for "clarifications on the SEC's policies" are disingenous bureaucrat speak for "get bent".
- everfree 4y ago
  If that was your point, then wouldn't the correct conclusion be that calls for SEC clarity are genuine, not disingenuous? Saying "please register" when you really mean "get bent" doesn't count as SEC clarity in my book. The SEC stonewalled Coinbase at every attempt to submit a registration. It's not like Coinbase registered and was declined.
  - e63f67dd-065b 4y ago
    I think "all these crypto projects are securities" is a perfectly clear stance. Coinbase clearly disagrees, so their calls for clarity are actually calls for "please change your mind". People then go ahead and launch public offerings anyways, and act all surprised when SEC files enforcement actions. Some call it regulation by enforcement, but really I see all along the SEC has been clear in saying that it's all securities. Now, enforcement actions go in front of a court and the court may disagree with the SEC, which then clarifies regulation by setting a legal precedent for the SEC being wrong. Edit: this is how I think about it: there is a gradient from "clearly under SEC jurisdiction" and "clearly not". The SEC says "most of this gradient is under my jurisdiction", crypto projects say "no it's not". Clarity in this situation means drawing lines in the gradient, and when enforcement actions get filed then a court gets to weigh and draw lines for them.
    - junofan 4y ago
      The calls for clarity are firstly clarity about registration. Failing that, clarity about jurisdiction to work around the lack of clarity on registration. Nobody gives a shit about whether or not their dogcoins are technically securities or what the gradient is. The SEC is considered by many to be acting in bad faith by not clarifying regulation, which in effect is an abuse of a pocket veto of sorts over crypto. Other jurisdictions do not have this issue. The SEC stands alone.
    - everfree 4y ago
      > I think "all these crypto projects are securities" is a perfectly clear stance. That's not the part of their stance that's unclear. The unclear part is the part where they say "please register" when they really mean "get bent". > their calls for clarity are actually calls for "please change your mind" Coinbase's calls for clarity are actually calls for "you asked us to register, so let us submit a registration application already". > really I see all along the SEC has been clear in saying that it's all securities. Again that's not the part of their stance that's unclear to me. > Now, enforcement actions go in front of a court and the court may disagree with the SEC, which then clarifies regulation by setting a legal precedent for the SEC being wrong. The SEC's job is to write clear regulations, not to invite corporations to pay $1000/hr lawyers to conduct mind-reading sessions in court.

e63f67dd-065b 4y ago

> Coinbase tried repeatedly to register them with the SEC and was turned away, which seems to be lost on your point My entire point is that the SEC doesn't like them, to them saying "please register" is the same as saying "get bent". I specifically mentioned that those registration papers are going straight into the trash.

mistercheph 4y ago
"Please register" is disingenuous bureaucrat speak for "get bent" in the same way that calls for "clarifications on the SEC's policies" are disingenous bureaucrat speak for "get bent".
everfree 4y ago
If that was your point, then wouldn't the correct conclusion be that calls for SEC clarity are genuine, not disingenuous? Saying "please register" when you really mean "get bent" doesn't count as SEC clarity in my book. The SEC stonewalled Coinbase at every attempt to submit a registration. It's not like Coinbase registered and was declined.
- e63f67dd-065b 4y ago
  I think "all these crypto projects are securities" is a perfectly clear stance. Coinbase clearly disagrees, so their calls for clarity are actually calls for "please change your mind". People then go ahead and launch public offerings anyways, and act all surprised when SEC files enforcement actions. Some call it regulation by enforcement, but really I see all along the SEC has been clear in saying that it's all securities. Now, enforcement actions go in front of a court and the court may disagree with the SEC, which then clarifies regulation by setting a legal precedent for the SEC being wrong. Edit: this is how I think about it: there is a gradient from "clearly under SEC jurisdiction" and "clearly not". The SEC says "most of this gradient is under my jurisdiction", crypto projects say "no it's not". Clarity in this situation means drawing lines in the gradient, and when enforcement actions get filed then a court gets to weigh and draw lines for them.
  - junofan 4y ago
    The calls for clarity are firstly clarity about registration. Failing that, clarity about jurisdiction to work around the lack of clarity on registration. Nobody gives a shit about whether or not their dogcoins are technically securities or what the gradient is. The SEC is considered by many to be acting in bad faith by not clarifying regulation, which in effect is an abuse of a pocket veto of sorts over crypto. Other jurisdictions do not have this issue. The SEC stands alone.
  - everfree 4y ago
    > I think "all these crypto projects are securities" is a perfectly clear stance. That's not the part of their stance that's unclear. The unclear part is the part where they say "please register" when they really mean "get bent". > their calls for clarity are actually calls for "please change your mind" Coinbase's calls for clarity are actually calls for "you asked us to register, so let us submit a registration application already". > really I see all along the SEC has been clear in saying that it's all securities. Again that's not the part of their stance that's unclear to me. > Now, enforcement actions go in front of a court and the court may disagree with the SEC, which then clarifies regulation by setting a legal precedent for the SEC being wrong. The SEC's job is to write clear regulations, not to invite corporations to pay $1000/hr lawyers to conduct mind-reading sessions in court.