Bitcoin Forum

I will not ban a subject of discussion on the forum unless it's very clear that the forum cannot survive while allowing that discussion. I think discussion of securities is pretty safe. If not, it probably wouldn't be too hard to move the forum somewhere where it is safe.

I will not ban a subject of discussion on the forum unless it's very clear that the forum cannot survive while allowing that discussion. I think discussion of securities is pretty safe. If not, it probably wouldn't be too hard to move the forum somewhere where it is safe.

Discussing them is fine. Advertising them is not.

Do people know what the difference is ?

It is not illegal to discuss illegal matters.

It is not illegal to discuss illegal matters.

It is in "the land of the free"  ;)

That's what it boils down to basically.

Promoting possibly "illegal" securities puts the forum at immense risk.
Since glbse shut down it might be prudent to "hide" this section altogether untill the dust settles.

I will not ban a subject of discussion on the forum unless it's very clear that the forum cannot survive while allowing that discussion. I think discussion of securities is pretty safe. If not, it probably wouldn't be too hard to move the forum somewhere where it is safe.

It doesn't seem to have caused reddit any legal grief.

It is not illegal to discuss illegal matters.

Wrong it is called Conspiracy.

In criminal law, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime at some time in the future. Criminal law in some countries or for some conspiracies may require that at least one overt act must also have been undertaken in furtherance of that agreement, to constitute an offense. There is no limit on the number participating in the conspiracy and, in most countries, no requirement that any steps have been taken to put the plan into effect (compare attempts which require proximity to the full offence). For the purposes of concurrence, the actus reus is a continuing one and parties may join the plot later and incur joint liability and conspiracy can be charged where the co-conspirators have been acquitted or cannot be traced. Finally, repentance by one or more parties does not affect liability but may reduce their sentence.

Two people talking about opening a illegal security is Conspiracy...... at least in U.S. law. This is always a charge used in almost any crime, it a way the gov "Put's it to you"

its not?

http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/08/unregistered-securities.asp#ixzz28PML2jew

A security is not defined by how its bought or what its bought with. You could trade someone 1000 pounds of feathers for 4 shares in a company if the seller will take it. Guess what still makes it a security, the whole thing behind it being bitcoin is going to get lots of people screwed in the long run. A security is not defined by how it's purchased I hope people understand that. If someone was to sell a share of Google for 5 goats it does not matter he is still a shareholder. Buy 1 share of illegalstocks inc with 5 goats its still a illegal security. So tell me how its is in the gray area or legal. A security is a security no matter if you trade people goats, $ or Bitcoins. Its just the tender you used to buy it.

I'm not an expert, but I would think a "security" is selling what is ultimately a promise of some sort, whereas goats, feathers, chickens, and Bitcoins are all commodities at best - they are what they are.

I would think the problem isn't so much selling securities, it's in the issuing them.  If I print securities (promises) out of my butt and offer them to the public at large, knowing full well there's a dozen ways I can cut and run with the money without any accountability, there's something wrong with that.

I never bought or touched any Bitcoin "securities" because I believe that securities require a framework of law and accountability in order to have any value.  You can't have a public company insulated from the law, because it would also have to be just as insulated from its shareholders.  If shareholders have no means to protect their interests and must simply rely on the goodness of others' anonymous hearts to maintain their value, well they're asking to get screwed.

The premise of a new decentralized stock exchange that operates like Silk Road or like the Bitcoin network itself is fundamentally flawed as well, and would only be an asset to scammers in my opinion.  Sure, it's technologically possible to start one up,  but without any accountability I doubt it'll be possible for an anonymous entity to issue securities that will have any lasting value above zero.

I agree with you, the tender is not the issue here. I think gweedo fails to see this.

This forum isn't in 'merica. We really don't have much to fear. If the Euro feds get butthurt, theymos can just move the server somewhere else.