That’s a good point. Look at Telegram. They tried to use Reg D to sell the initial SAFTs, and restricted it only to millionaires, so clearly they were the type

That’s a good point. Look at Telegram. They tried to use Reg D to sell the initial SAFTs, and restricted it only to millionaires, so clearly they were the type of “accredited investor” the SEC wanted. Well, Rule 144 says after a year of holding, these millionaires could sell to anyone. Read section 4a(1) of the Securities and Exchange Act. But, somehow, the SEC got Telegram to abandon its plans and return all the money. Because the SEC argued that TON itself was a security, not a commodity, they said that it cannot be sold to the public. What if the investors were the ones selling, and not TON? If they are not AFFILIATES of TON, purchased without a view to resell, held them for a year, then why can’t they resell a few here and there? They are not considered underwriters under Section 4(a)1. Even most states allow such sales. Not to mention that the new Reg D after the JOBS Act pre-empts state laws for the primary sales, so I am not sure the states could easily win a case. I followed that case and it was never really clear what securities laws Telegram broke by making a Reg D filing and a SAFT. Maybe someone here can explain, if you actually read the case also. Now the decentralized TON community is building it instead. https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2020/04/12/making-sense-of-the-secs-case-against-telegram/ https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2020/04/12/making-sense-of-...