The burden of proof lies with the exchange, not the SEC. The exchange (or asset issuer) would have to prove they take measures against selling to US customers, directly or through a proxy. What you are suggesting would make it impossible for them to prove that. That may or may not get the exchange of the hook, it sure as hell wont get you off the hook. But perhaps you have a better legal team than bitfunder and dont mind taking on the SEC ?

Moving to yet another exchange isnt going to solve a thing, they will fold and block US citizens one after the other. And after US, they will block other countries when those security commissions wake up and smell the coffee.

Why not make it legal? AFAIK, registering a security with the SEC isnt so hard.

Before doing that, I would advice you to read the SEC regulations:
http://www.sec.gov/rules/interp/33-7516.htm

What you suggest doing isnt any less illegal than what bitfunder and btcst where doing, no matter your nationality,  and if bitfunder doesnt take any reasonabl action to prevent you providing a proxy, they will be just as liable again as well.

I thought it was based in belize. But unfortunately, it doesnt change anything. What is illegal is targeting unregistered securities to US citizens. Doesnt matter if the securities are shares in a US or Belize company. The only way around that is registering the securities with the SEC (and every other national security commission where you want to sell shares, the regulations are quite similar all over the world).

Gee, Im shocked. Who'd have thought SEC regulations would apply to bitfunder too?
If you think this is messy, just wait until asset issuers open their mailboxes and find some letters with a blue/yellow eagle in the letterhead. But yeah, all the SEC talk was just bullshit, right?

well, then sue them or file your complaint with the SEC.  They broke the law but at least will stop from breaking US security laws in a month. They will only be breaking almost all other security laws.
Just dont act surprised, this was a long time in coming.  Wonder how long it will take before the asset issuers get some letters.

It makes it compliant with SEC regulations, as they would no longer be considered targeting US investors with their unregistered securities.
Of course the same regulations exist almost everywhere else, today its US citizens being blocked, tomorrow it will be UK, France, Hong Kong, whatever .. Anyone who is shocked by this, hasnt been reading. Its not like I didnt say this a million times:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=130117.msg3249207#msg3249207

Those KnCs dont seem to be making a dent yet.

I never tried it, but it says it does. The "CGRemote" at least.

Has anyone tried cgwatcher ?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=185553.0

BTW, hows the steering committee / advisory board coming along? Cant underestimate how important that is.

I love sipa's charts:
http://bitcoin.sipa.be/

but they go "off the chart" most of the time. Does someone know of a good alternative, one with similar resolution and log axis?

This SEC talk was considered rubbish before Pirate get arrested, and before GLBSE closed it doors. I will say filling out that form most likely wont change a thing, but only because Im pretty sure the SEC is already investigating. Read this carefully (not just the title):
http://m.investor.gov/news-alerts/investor-alerts/investor-alert-ponzi-schemes-using-virtual-currencies

Anyone thinking the SEC has no jurisdiction and/or no interest in these bitcoin denominated securities IMO is in for a nasty surprise.

You should be able to buy them anywhere, local electronics shop or ebay. Something like this:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/IC-Alu-Kuhlkorper-Kuhl-Rippen-SMD-Heatsink-kuhler-Aluminium-Cooling-Aluminum-/320966208212?pt=Bauteile&var=510076969589&hash=item4abb13aad4

That said, unless someone provides a spec sheet stating otherwise, 75C is probably completely safe. VRM are typically specced to run at 120C or so.

Actually, the SEC may well be the only realistic option to get at least some of your money back:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Fund

As for waiting. Sure, go ahead and wait. Im not sure how the current October 15th promise differs from all the previous missed deadlines and promises, nor do I understand what more evidence anyone could possibly want this is a scam, but be my guest. See bitcoindaytrade to see how long Armandi will keep pushing deadlines and keep pretending its not a scam. People will be posting here a year from now and nothing will have changed.

not a lot of concentration needed. Just fill out the form:
https://denebleo.sec.gov/TCRExternal/questionaire.xhtml

Now excuse me while I hold my breath for anyone to state they filled it out.

omg this shit again. The authority of the SEC relates to where the securities are being sold/targetted. Not the country of origin of the seller nor the object of the security:

http://www.sec.gov/rules/interp/33-7516.htm

So yes, this is well within SEC authority, since no reasonable measures were taken to prevent US investors from investing in this, but by all means contact your local security commission if you prefer.

News flash: it isnt allowed. There is a reason SEC regulations require you register these contracts. Otherwise anyone can issue fake stocks, see the fake Cointerra IPO on picostocks as a recent example. Are you going to sue Cointerra over that?

Correction; some anonymous forum members (including yours truly) claim that someone who appeared to be Fabrizio claimed that on IRC or through facebook/G+. You will need something better to convince a judge that he really is behind all this.


See above.


Dont ask me, I suggested duped investors do that a long time ago. Just dont hold your breath for anyone actually doing it; afaik the only bitcoin scammer that really is in legal trouble is Pirate. And guess who is to thank for that? Indeed, the SEC. Im not even sure anyone else filed a complaint.

In fact, we can actually prove they did spend some money to develop these chips (cf Howard wang and TheSeven)  and they could easily argue that development is ongoing. Missing deadlines and being or hiring incompetent people is not a crime. Selling unregistered securities however, is. As is making materially incorrect statements in your prospectus. But those are SEC issues.


How would you prove that? The IPO was done by "sam", no one knows who he is or if he even exists. How do you prove Fabrizio is even involved? Dont get me wrong, I have no doubt he is involved, as is Alberto, but IMO you will not be able to prove this without getting the SEC involved and subpoena BTCT.  Those documents that were published dont prove a damn thing, I dont even see Fabrizio's signature on there. Anyone could produce those.