Bitcoin Forum

Has anybody seen the new terms of service from CEX that starts on the 4th of Feb


One of the things that caught my attention was this
"DUE DILIGENCE

Before the publication of the first demand you should send to us:

1) a valid government issued ID, acceptable high quality images of documents are: - international passport (double page) - national ID card (both sides) - driver's license (both sides)

2) a proof of residency, acceptable scanned images of paper documents are: - bank statement - utility bill for utilities consumed at your home address - tax return, council tax - certificate of residency issued by a government or a local government authority You can also submit other documents to serve as proof of residency such as; government-issued documents, judicial authority-issued documents, documents issued by a public agency / authority, utility service company, or similar regulated service providing companies."


Does this mean we have to give them all our details to have GHS with them ? or is it only if there is suspicious activity on your account ?

would be nice to get some feedback from some of you guys on how you would understand the new TOS https://cex.io/tos

Well if you are USA based they are complying with our money laundering rules.  Everyone that wants to belong on the site and own any ghs would have to comply.

If you mine and point miners at the site and sell all your ghs before the date I am not sure. As you could mine and transfer to a different site. Without ever trading on the site.  To own any ghs from them would be an act of trading. Also not sure about referral hash.

I noticed that too.

Before the publication of the first demand you should send to us

Is the word publication just a poor translation or does it have some kind of significant meaning in this context? I would take the word demand as the legal definition and therefore to make any withdrawal you should have this information sent to them first. I wouldn't call clicking a withdrawal button a publication though. The word "should" is also different than must, so does this mean that they will allow withdrawals until an account gets flagged in some way as suspicious? I really don't know what they are trying to do. Probably just cover themselves if a government comes after them, but otherwise it will be business as usual.

It would be nice if one of our lurking lawyers gave us some unofficial advice on this.

That is a strange use of wording. Are they referring to actively trading on their site and submitting buy/sell orders? Withdrawals are not published publicly on the site so that doesn't make sense.