Bitcoin Forum
May 25, 2024, 07:24:37 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 ... 169 »
661  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 2013-08-05 Updated Dwolla User Agreement on: August 08, 2013, 05:41:55 PM
Regulation E??

http://www.federalreserve.gov/bankinforeg/regecg.htm

Regulation E: Electronic Fund Transfers
12 CFR 205

This description should not be interpreted as a comprehensive statement of the regulation. Rather, it is intended to give a broad overview of the regulation's requirements. The full regulation is available on the Government Printing Office web site.
Regulation E provides a basic framework that establishes the rights, liabilities, and responsibilities of participants in electronic fund transfer systems such as automated teller machine transfers, telephone bill-payment services, point-of-sale (POS) terminal transfers in stores, and preauthorized transfers from or to a consumer's account (such as direct deposit and social security payments). The term "electronic fund transfer" (EFT) generally refers to a transaction initiated through an electronic terminal, telephone, computer, or magnetic tape that instructs a financial institution either to credit or to debit a consumer's asset account.

A general description of the regulation, by section, follows.

Section 205.1 Authority and purpose
States that the primary objective of the regulation is to protect individual consumers who engage in electronic fund transfers.

Section 205.2 Definitions
Defines key terms used in the regulation.

Section 205.3 Coverage
Lists the types of transactions covered by the regulation--those initiated through an electronic terminal, telephone, computer, or magnetic tape to either order, instruct, or authorize a financial institution to debit or credit an account. These transfers include, but are not limited to, POS and ATM transfers, direct deposits or withdrawals, telephone transfers, and transfers initiated through a debit card transaction.

Section 205.4 General disclosure requirements; jointly offered services
States that a financial institution may combine the disclosure information required by the regulation with that required by other laws such as the Truth in Lending Act or the Truth in Savings Act as long as it is clear and understandable and is in a written form that consumers can keep.

Section 205.5 Issuance of access devices
Stipulates that a depository institution may issue an access device (such as a debit card) only if a consumer has requested it either orally or in writing.

Section 205.6 Liability of consumer for unauthorized transfers
Limits a consumer's liability for unauthorized electronic fund transfers, such as those arising from loss or theft of an access device, to $50; if the consumer fails to notify the depository institution in a timely fashion, the amount may be $500 or unlimited.

Section 205.7 Initial disclosures
Requires financial institutions to provide to consumers initial disclosures of the terms and conditions of EFT services. Institutions must disclose the consumer's liability for unauthorized EFTs, the types of EFTs the consumer may make, and any limit on the frequency or dollar amount; fees charged by the institution; and error-resolution procedures. Institutions must also provide a summary of various consumer rights under the regulation.

Section 205.8 Change-in-terms notice; error-resolution notice
States that if there are adverse changes in fees, the consumer's liability, types of transfers available, or limits on transfers, the institution must provide a change-in-terms notice at least twenty-one days before the changes take effect. The institution must periodically send a reminder of the error-resolution procedures. It may send a detailed notice annually or provide an abbreviated notice with each account statement.

Section 205.9 Receipts at electronic terminals; periodic statements
States that consumers must be provided documentation in two forms: terminal receipts and periodic statements. Consumers must receive a receipt when they initiate an electronic transfer and monthly in the form of periodic statements. Both documents must include the type of electronic transfer; the amount and date of the transaction; the location of the terminal; and other information.

Section 205.10 Preauthorized transfers
Requires financial institutions to provide the consumer with some form of notice that electronic transfers that recur at substantially regular intervals, such as the direct deposit of salaries or benefits and the preauthorized payment of bills, occurred as scheduled.

Section 205.11 Procedures for resolving errors
States that if a consumer notifies an institution that an error involving an EFT has occurred, the institution must investigate and resolve the claim within specified deadlines. Errors covered by this requirement include unauthorized EFTs, incorrect EFTs, and the omission from an account statement of an EFT that should have been included.

Section 205.12 Relation to other laws
States that with regard to the issuance of access devices, consumer liability, and the unsolicited issuance of credit cards, the financial institution must take into account the provisions set forth in Regulation Z, Truth in Lending. In addition, the Federal Reserve Board shall determine whether the request of a state, financial institution, or other interested party is preempted by state laws relating to electronic fund transfers. Only state laws that are inconsistent with the act and this regulation are preempted, and then only to the extent of the inconsistency.

Section 205.13 Administrative enforcement; record retention
Indicates which federal agency enforces the regulation for particular classes of institutions. Records are to be retained for a period of not less than two years from the date disclosures are required to be made or an action is required to be taken.

Section 205.14 Electronic fund transfer service provider not holding consumer's account
States that a person who provides an electronic fund transfer service to a consumer but does not hold the consumer's account is subject to many of the same requirements set forth in the regulation.

Section 205.15 Electronic fund transfer of government benefits
States that a government agency is subject to the requirements of the regulation if directly or indirectly it issues an access device to a consumer for use in initiating an electronic fund transfer of government benefits from an account, other than needs-tested benefits in a program established under state or local law or administered by a state or local agency.

Appendix A Model disclosure clauses and forms

Appendix B Federal enforcement agencies

Appendix C Issuance of staff interpretations

Supplement I Official staff interpretations (Commentary)

< Back to Regulation E
662  Bitcoin / Press / Re: 2013-07-30 Digital Asset Transfer Authority Announced on: August 08, 2013, 05:30:46 PM
LostDutchman,

Thank you for updating your post.

No one is trying create "an Authority OVER cryptocurrency".  If you understood the technology of the decentralized ledger of bitcoin you would realize that is not possible.  Bitcoin is disintermediation on steroids.

DATA is merely a group of bitcoin businesses who are saying that its members are planning to operate their businesses accourding to the laws of their countries as they understand them  and to ask for clarity when those laws and regulation are not clear.  

Pretty simple.

Also if you could do some research you can see that regulation is doing little to slow the bitcoin economy:

According to Jeff Garzik's http://bitcoinwatch.com/

In the last 24 hours there have been:
55,879 Transactions (2328.29 per hour!)
749,510.38 BTC SENT (31,229.60 BTC per hour)

That is $76,225,205.65 USD at current Mt Gox USD price.

The bitcoin money supply is also currently larger then the GDP of 25 of the worlds countries.


Seychelles   1,031   2012 est.
Solomon Islands   1,011   2012 est.
Gambia, The   918   2012 est.
Guinea-Bissau   870   2012 est.
Sint Maarten   794.7   2008
Grenada   790   2012 est.
Vanuatu   783   2012 est.
Saint Kitts and Nevis   734   2012 est.
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines   712   2012 est.
Northern Mariana Islands   733   2010
Samoa   683   2012 est.
Comoros   600   2012 est.
Dominica   497   2012 est.
Tonga   476   2012 est.
American Samoa   462.2   2005
São Tomé and Príncipe   264   2012 est.
Micronesia, Federated States of   238.1   2008
Cook Islands   183.2   2005 est.
Anguilla   175.4   2009 est.
Kiribati   173   2012 est.
Falkland Islands   164.5   2007 est.
Palau   164   2008
Marshall Islands   161.7   2008 est.
Tuvalu   37   2012 est.
Niue   10.01   2003




Not bad for a 4 year old economy.





663  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: 2013-08-05 Updated Dwolla User Agreement on: August 08, 2013, 05:14:06 PM
there are previous Dwolla agreements posted elsewhere.  If someone can do a diff you can find the exact text that was changed.  I just don't have the time to search for it right now.
664  Bitcoin / Press / Re: 2013-07-30 Digital Asset Transfer Authority Announced on: August 08, 2013, 04:42:55 PM
Troll... it happens around here...
665  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Going after Trendon Shavers, Pirateat40, BTCST on: August 08, 2013, 04:35:55 PM
FYI,

This is being discussed here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=269612.msg2884152#msg2884152
666  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Technical Support / Re: 40 BTC Gone - Please Help Me Understand What Happened on: August 08, 2013, 04:26:15 PM
Sorry to hear about your loss.

Have you posted to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=40264.msg2814699#msg2814699

This sounds like a blockchain.info specific issue. 

I have read numerous threads recently where similar attacks are happening with blockchain.info wallets.

I regularly receive emails regarding unauthorized attempts to access my wallet, so it is clear that blockchain.info (any any other type of bitcoin wallet) are targets.

Unfortunately there are many attack vectors but by posting to the blockchain.info thread specifically maybe they can help you and other victims narrow down the options and prevent this from continuing to happen.

Unfortunately is it not likely you will be able to identify the attacker (with out the help of the NSA) so you funds are probably unrecoverable.

To be safe do a clean install of your OS or even better use a dedicated computer with no Java, adobe or flash to access bitcoin accounts.



667  Bitcoin / Legal / Re: In the US, who needs to be registered as a MTB? on: August 08, 2013, 04:02:45 PM
This regulation as it pertains to bitcoin in the us is VERY unclear and over broad.

Define "using/accepting bitcoin" as your use case will determine what regulation apply to you.

Money Transmission is regulated by the US Federal government as defined in the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and enforced by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN).
There is no cost to register as a money service business.  You can do so on the Fincen.gov website.
This requires you to:
Keep records
File Reports to prevent
 - money laundering
 - tax evasion
 - criminal activities.
The BSA was amended by the USA PATRIOT act and that requires you to
 - Identify your customers

48 of the 50 States in the US require you to also get licensed as a "Money Transmitter."  This is to protect the consumers in each state. 
There are no money transmitter laws in:
Montana and South Carolina
New Mexico is also questionable (and there may be other)

I believe New York, Connecticut, Texas and California explicitly require anyone who serves clients in those states whether their company is foreign or domestic to be registered in those states.

In addition to the fees to apply in each state there are personal net worth requirements for each state. 
This starts at $1000 and goes up to $1M +
There is bonding required in each of these states of approximately the same range.
Each will do a criminal back ground check (some require finger printing)
They will evaluate you personal and professional finances
They will evaluate your business history.
Some require personal interviews with you and your key staff.

You may want to seek advice from an qualified lawyer familiar with US Money Transmission Law and Anti-Money Laundering(AML) and  Know Your Customer(KYC) requirements.

There is a very reputable attorney who post here regularly.  You may gain additional insight from this post.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=206305.120

Good luck.


668  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Going after Trendon Shavers, Pirateat40, BTCST on: August 08, 2013, 03:46:02 PM
This will continue to be a precedent setting case and I believe we'll see criminal prosecution of Trendon and maybe even some of the pass throughs.
669  Bitcoin / Press / Re: 2013-07-30 Digital Asset Transfer Authority Announced on: August 08, 2013, 03:38:14 PM
In My opinion "Best Practices" ==  "safe for consumers" and operating "within the law"

I DO NOT promote bitcoin reversibility or regulating bitcoin the protocol.

Legislators can not control bitcoin the protocol. But they can and have made it very difficult for bitcoin businesses, exchanges and miners to operate legally in the United States.

Bitcoin may become "currency" and that would be great.  Right now there are not enough places to purchases good and services with bitcoin so it make exchanges and work arounds like "GYFT" necessary.  It is at these choke points that government has and will continue to impose restrictions if the existing bitcoin businesses do not engage them.

The Bitcoin foundation has already done this on behalf of all bitcoiner with its answer to the cease and desist from California and it's comments to FinCEN and D.A.T.A will also do this on behalf of its members.

"Standards" will be defined by the members of D.A.T.A and they are currently being formulated.

"Bitcoin Industry" =  Miners, Mining equipment manufactures, exchanges, payment processors, merchants, users.  Everyone in the bitcoin ecosystem could be considered part of the bitcoin industry.  However you have to remember that the bitcoin is a peer to peer decentralized network.  You need no intermediary.  You don't have to buy or sell coins on Gox.  You can trade directly with anyone any where.  You can use localbitcoins.com etc.

I do not see D.A.T.A. as a popularity contest.  Not sure where you got that.  The list of signatory members have basically said the they want to create an organization to create best practices for its members.  And at the very least I believe its member would like to operate their businesses legally in there jurisdictions and if the law is not clear (as is the case in the US) the organization wants to engage legislators and regulators to help them better understand the protocol and its many benefits and ask for better clarity of the regulation or regulation better suited to virtual currency and emerging payments.  

This effort may have no effect but right now it is clear that governments are providing guidance that in my opinion says "We don't understand this, we FEAR the implications, so we are going to outlaw it or severely restrict it."  And with out "industry" input governments may continue to unfavorably regulate our industry.

DATA is one groups effort to collectively engage in that process.


670  Bitcoin / Press / Re: 2013-08-07 Bitcoin Startup ArtaBit Working On Cheaper Alternative To WU on: August 08, 2013, 03:22:06 PM
Ayoub Nacirin is a member of our BitcoinNYC start up.  He's one of the good guys.  Everyone trying to run a legitimate bitcoin business is the US is struggling with regulations. If he can figure that part I believe he one to make it happen.

If you want to learn more about bitcoin regulation and compliance requirements in the US there is a Virtual Currencies Conference being held by the National Money Transmitters Association in New York City August 14th.  There will be some high level current and former regulators in attendance and it will be an opportunity for bitcoin businesses to interact with them in person.  I highly reccomend it.

http://nmta.us/site/1
You can save $100.00 when you pay with bitcoin.
https://bitpay.com/cart?id=69WsLI3LJ4blsJJuAVmMEIvRaN9lWsd15_MiOgeUW9g=

 
671  Bitcoin / Press / Re: 2013-07-30 Digital Asset Transfer Authority Announced on: August 08, 2013, 02:47:26 PM
I still don't understand the purpose of DATA

Is it to influence good business practices?
    -What does this mean? No organization should have any power over bitcoins, whether it's just "influence" or outright control.

From the DATA website: This open project is developing best practices and standards for management of digital asset transfers worldwide.  

Is it to talk to legislators?

Yes.

And finally, why do we need it? Why do legislators have to be talked to in the first place? Any "law" they make is a joke, since they can't actually regulate bitcoins.

That you your opinion an you are welcome to it.

However groups like
http://www.nbpca.com/
http://www.finra.org/
and many other have helped shape the conversation and regularly engage with regulations and legislators it their respective fields

Is there a mission statement? I haven't checked the DATA site in weeks, but when I did quite frankly it was pointless...

DATA does not have a complete mission statement yes DATA is only a committee to explore the creation of a Self Regulation Committee called D.A.T.A.

However the intentions of the organization are laid out in the press release.

the Committee for the Establishment of the Digital Asset Transfer Authority will:

1. Develop best practice anti-money laundering and sanctions compliance standards for emerging payments and virtual currency firms;

2.  ... serve as a source of business and technical standards for the prudent and responsible conduct of payment transactions;

3. Engage with member firms, merchants and customers, regulators, law enforcement and legislators to identify and address emergent public policy concerns and risks affecting our industry; and

4. Work to establish the Digital Asset Transfer Authority (“DATA”), ideally as a formal self-regulatory organization, to develop, publish and ensure member compliance with standards. We envision that DATA, when fully established, will:

a. Have a decision-making board, a majority of whose members will be independent of the industry, advised but not bound by advisory committees of technical experts and members;

b. Develop and administer appropriate oversight processes and accountabilities for members who do not meet DATA’s business and technical standards; and

c. Approve new or modified member standards as the marketplace, technology, and regulatory expectations evolve.


You don't have to be a member of D.A.T.A. but its members are indicating they would uphold these initial principles once a formal organization is in place.


672  Bitcoin / Press / Re: 2013-08-07 Bitcoin Clampdown Continues As Federal Judge Says It’s A Currency on: August 08, 2013, 10:14:08 AM
Why would you call a judicial ruling a clampdown?  This just adds to bitcoin's legitimacy. Would you have preferred it was ruled pretend Internet Money that no one really cares about??
673  Bitcoin / Press / Re: 2013-07-30 Digital Asset Transfer Authority Announced on: August 08, 2013, 01:30:43 AM
This thread is an attempt to be a civil public discussion.  This is a public forum and you are certainly welcome to participate but I don't think childish personal attacks really help support your position.

Thanks.
674  Bitcoin / Legal / Re: for the porposes of security on: August 07, 2013, 06:32:08 PM
My taxing authority just told me Bitcoin is not money, and they will not accept it.

Standby for an update on that.  The IRS evidently only just learned about bitcoin in May of 2013.

http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/654620.pdf
675  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: DATA - Authority or Association? on: August 07, 2013, 05:34:23 PM
Joe,

FYI,

I've have met most of the people on that list at conferences or I've seen them giving talks on line and I've never seen any one of those people on that list wear a suit.



676  Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: DATA - Authority or Association? on: August 07, 2013, 05:27:42 PM
I think in a thread like this, it was expected to get some traditional "throw the baby out with the bath water" talk.  You know, government isn't perfect so let's get rid if all governments.  But for those of us that actually live in the real world and operate business', confronting the difficulties of regulations head on, is a good thing. 

Whether Bitcoin can be regulated is not worth arguing about.  The transmission of Bitcoin's is already under regulation.  Nobody likes it but it is what it is.  So moving forward, it would be helpful to have knowledgeable voices helping to guide regulatory policy in a sound and fair way.  Whether DATA is that group, remains to be seen but doing nothing but letting the fringe voices of "ignore the law" and "destroy the government" lead the charge, is certain disaster.

Agreed.

And it is my opinion that we currently find ourselves in the US in this onerous regulatory position for exactly this reason.  Groups like DATA and the Bitcoin Foundation are trying to do something about that.  It doesn't mean that others have to agree or join this effort.

Download your own client.

Fork the code.

The choices belong to you.
677  Bitcoin / Press / Re: 2013-08-06 " Bitcoin can be used as money" on: August 07, 2013, 03:50:38 PM
He is a little more clarity from an actual attorney!

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=269612.msg2884525#msg2884525
678  Bitcoin / Legal / Re: Bitcoin is Money, says Federal Court on: August 07, 2013, 03:49:37 PM
Very interesting.

Thanks for the clarification.



679  Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: Find Trendon Shavers in person thread... [BTCST, BTS&T, pirateat40] on: August 07, 2013, 03:47:34 PM
He will go to jail.
680  Bitcoin / Legal / Re: Bitcoin is Money, says Federal Court on: August 07, 2013, 03:13:39 PM
http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/08/06/Bitcoin.pdf

United States District Court
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SHERMAN DIVISION
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE §
COMMISSION §
§
V. § CASE NO. 4:13-CV-416
§
TRENDON T. SHAVERS and BITCOIN §
SAVINGS AND TRUST §
MEMORANDUM OPINION REGARDING THE COURT’S
SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 ... 169 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!