5 ms·
Just reading this and I don't understand how anyone would say this passes the Howey Test. This is clearly a security. The only possible debate is whether there
by peripitea 4y ago
Just reading this and I don't understand how anyone would say this passes the Howey Test. This is clearly a security. The only possible debate is whether there is an expectation of profit, but I can't see anyone seriously entertaining that debate -- there was an ICO! What do you think the median person buying into that ICO was expecting? "I'm going to spend a few thousands dollars on this token that might have utility in this project in a few years"?? Come on.
- ETH_start 4y agoIf this is a security, then so is pokemon. This is a token sale. It never called itself an "ICO". The whitepaper never once claimed the token is expected to profit its owners, and repeatedly warns of the risk of loss. It explicitly says the paper is not an investment prospectus as well. >>What do you think the median person buying into that ICO was expecting? "I'm going to spend a few thousands dollars on this token that might have utility in this project in a few years"?? Come on. If it turned out that the median person buying Pokemon cards were doing it for the purpose of deriving a profit, that wouldn't turn Pokemon cards into securities.
- peripitea 4y agoThe difference between pokemon and this is the common enterprise component. This is very obviously a common enterprise; pokemon is very obviously not.