 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
That is correct. However, there is no jurisdiction backing up his claim.
If a company doing an IPO on NXT isn't legally incorporated in a state or country, I'd stay the hell away from that investment. Yep. In many common law jurisdictions (perhaps civil law jurisdictions as well) "investors" in a common enterprise not carried on through a separate legal entity may be found to be partners in a general partnership and as such would be fully liable for the debts and liabilities of the partnership. This, plus the fact that selling unregistered securities to the public is often prohibited, makes all these experiments very dangerous legally. That seems to imply that any and all holders of NXT are "partners in a general partnership and as such would be fully liable for the debts and liabilities of the partnership," since we are all "'investors' in a common enterprise"...etc. Is this a correct interpretation, cryptolawyer? There is no legislation regarding cryptos directly, so there are no precedence to look to to provide a clear picture of what will happen in such cases. It really depends on how the court decides to few cryptos. But in the case that they view them in such a way, then applicable laws would apply. The safest way to approach is to assume that if you can be criminally charged, you will be; If you can possibly be held liable, you will be sued. If you have a good attorney, your good intensions MAY be taken into account in court...Maybe. The bottom line is that both sides of the fence cannot be played. I people want cryptos to be taken seriously, then we can't forget this. If we want cryptos to be seen as legal tender or legit currency, then we have to expect to have to play by the rules. There is no half way. It has to be all in our all out. The fact is that some of the developments that have occurred, or are in the process of occurring with NXT leave ALOT of people exposed legally, and could be seen in court to be direct violations and criminal fraud. Truly a can of worms. I have to admit that I am unsure as to whether a cryptocurrency by itself could be deemed to be a security and therefore form a basis for holders to be deemed partners in a partnership or to deem that an unregistered offering occurred when the initial currency was issued. In fact, the SEC here in the US mused over the issue last year, although they appear not to be pursuing that line of reasoning recently. In the US the outcome may turn on the application of the "Howey" test for securities, and may fail in the requirement that holders expect profits based solely on the efforts of others. Encouragingly, there are examples of non-crypto private currencies having been used for years in some towns in the US, and to my knowledge none have ever blown up in their users' hands. "Shares" in non-entities where returns are expected from the operations of the non-entity are almost certainly securities under the Howey test, however, and in my opinion dealing in such shares is a much more likely activity to get people in trouble than just holding and using cryptos as a currency. And calling the issuance of these shares "IPOs" (a term widely understood to mean a registered offering) is akin to begging the regulators to take a closer look (and they won't like what they see). Personally, I hold and use cryptos, as I view the risk of liability in that context to be minimal (and we have other regulators, like FinCEN, affirmatively stating as much in respect of other areas of law). I would not, however, invest in non-entities (crypto or otherwise); most forms of separate legal entities provide limited liability protection for their owners (admittedly to different degrees and subject to certain exceptions), and there is simply no good reason not to avail yourself of such protection. Even if the likelihood of being held personally liable for the business' liabilities is remote, why even go there? Probably the most risky of all is publicly offering and selling unregistered securities (whether or not of a separate legal entity). In the US this is a textbook violation of SEC regulations and other laws, and my guess is that this is where we'll see the first legal action, either by the SEC itself and/or by an investor who loses money. And while I am a lawyer, I am not YOUR lawyer, and none of the above is legal advice. |
|
|
|
That is correct. However, there is no jurisdiction backing up his claim.
If a company doing an IPO on NXT isn't legally incorporated in a state or country, I'd stay the hell away from that investment. Yep. In many common law jurisdictions (perhaps civil law jurisdictions as well) "investors" in a common enterprise not carried on through a separate legal entity may be found to be partners in a general partnership and as such would be fully liable for the debts and liabilities of the partnership. This, plus the fact that selling unregistered securities to the public is often prohibited, makes all these experiments very dangerous legally. |
|
|
|
@ Native English people
Guys, I'm working on Digital Goods Store and need few words/phrases/terms for the following:
- To place goods for sale
- Opposite to above (when u cancel selling this goods)
- A comment that is left by a customer when they r (not) satisfied with the quality of purchased goods
- A tag that is used to describe goods to make it easier to find them (like "game", "online", "mmorpg" for online game codes)
- A process of send goods to buyers (actually it's publishing encrypted text on the blockchain)
Just some off-the-cuff suggestions from a non-tech guy: - To place goods for sale: List - Opposite to above (when u cancel selling this goods): Withdraw - A comment that is left by a customer when they r (not) satisfied with the quality of purchased goods: Rating - A tag that is used to describe goods to make it easier to find them (like "game", "online", "mmorpg" for online game codes): Tag [?] - A process of send goods to buyers (actually it's publishing encrypted text on the blockchain): Delivery I was kind of struggling, but you said it man. Those are really good explanations. Although im a little worried about "publishing encrypted text on the blockchain" for delivery means. Talk about blockchain bloat. How about keys to encrypted off-blockchain data as a blockchain-based DRM system? |
|
|
|
Someone needs to make this for Nxt, it's not hard (it's already included in my client.. you can send money to an alias) https://www.onename.io/?a=1Agreed. I was at the Bitcoin Center in NYC last night and a lot of people there were talking about this. |
|
|
|
CfB
Could you add a "comment" field to requestType=transferAsset
This would really help track things for the gateway
[i am assuming that after a block confirms that I can trust the values in all the fields]
James
AGREE! A comment field would be of great help, and probably not difficult to implement! A bit more difficult but immensely valuable is to be able to optionally set the denomination in terms of units of another asset. I know the NXTcore cant handle fractions very well now, but maybe while we are changing API, we can put it in there with the understanding that it wont work until NXTcore supports fractions. I hope it can support fractions for assets too! James It's hard to overstate how powerful this functionality would be, both for James' use case and for many others. |
|
|
|
I dont know why I thought it wasnt possible to do cold storage for the multisig deposit acct.
On a typical day, less than 10% of overall deposits would be withdrawn, maybe much less. There is no need for a super complicated shifting of funds to and from many multisig accts. We just need to have a multisig cold wallet using 2 of 3 signers where the signers would be Anon136, rickyjames and klee. When the gateway multisig acct gets excess deposits, each server would authorize transfer to the cold multisig wallet. When a big withdrawal comes in, then 2 of the 3 cold wallet signers would need to approve.
All of the deposits and withdrawals and multisig acct info would be public, so all these funds transfers will be visible to all.
The incentive for two of the three gateway operators to collude is reduced dramatically. The trust required for gateways drops 90% and shifts to the cold wallet trio.
What do you think?
James
Sounds smart. Plus it would seem the more accounts the funds are dispersed in the more secure they would be. But that also raises a concern: Has anyone verified the legal / accounting requirements for establishing this holding account? Not trying to be a stick in the mud, but if there are going to be people signing anything you may want check in to this if you already haven't. In light of the inevitable legal fallout from Mt Gox, this is a very wise suggestion. |
|
|
|
AE issued assets can derive a value of their own though, without being linked to anything. It is not over complicating, it is based in the fact that they are unique and available in controlled limited quantity. The same principles that make Federal Reserve notes have value can be applied to AE generated assets. If some one can implement a way to create a demand for the asset they create then it will have value. A little while ago some people were discussing Iceland using a crypto as its adopted currency. To use this topic as an example of what I mean, If the government of Iceland issued itself an AE asset, then passed legislation requiring taxes to be paid with that asset and no other form of currency, and then put a portion of the asset on the open market, the asset would derive a value. I think the AE is even more capable than people realize. It is not overly complicated. It is awesome.
As far as your gate way though, Anon136 made a reply that I think helped me understand what you mean.
Why add the unnecessary complexity of creating a tax liability derivative? A sovereign could, and I argue should, issue an asset exchangeable one-for-one for its own fiat. But I do agree with your implicitly stated principle: If you're going to admit a trusted third party back into the system, might as well allocate that trust to the most trustworthy party around. A "dollar coin" issued and backed by the US government would enable ordinary block chain payments and more sophisticated smart contract business processes to be denominated in USD, thereby removing the severe exchange rate and liquidity risks inherent in corresponding crypto-denominated transactions. Such a move could drive a huge amount of real-world economic activity onto the block chain in short order. And particularly relevant to this thread, if this (admittedly bold) move were to happen, it's doubtful Bitcoin could handle it in its current form. NXT's at least theoretical ability to scale TPS and implement a Turing-complete AT would suddenly find interest among a much larger and more diverse set of potential users. |
|
|
|
What do you guys think about building some kind of decentralized insurance directly into the coin to provide peace of mind that something like Gox can't happen to Nxt? Details and more info here: https://nextcoin.org/index.php/topic,4186.0.htmlThe decentralized exchange helps too but being able to used an insured bank to store your Nxt would provide a certain peace of mind. It's the reason my dad has been convinced that cryptos will fail.. because they aren't insured, therefore he'd never feel safe storing them anywhere and I'm sure he's not the only one. It's a necessity when it comes to non-techy people in my mind. And as Rahm Emanuel says (dislike him but he's got a point on this topic): Never let a good crisis go to waste! The fundamental difference between a sovereign standing behind bank deposits denominated in its own fiat and any correlarry in the crypto world is that a sovereign can print more money, and can theoretically insure against loss of ALL deposits. The consequences of actually doing so would be dire, of course, but you could never backstop crypto deposits with the same level of assurance. Capital adequacy rules could help with some of the risk, and I could imagine a decentralized approach to enforcing such rules as between assets and liabilities denominated solely in crypto (James' cross chain work could have very powerful application here). With fiat on the balance sheet, we have a TTP issue, but with adequate auditing that risk should be manageable, and in any event it would be way better than what we have now. Will it be enough to convince our collective moms and dads to keep crypto on such a platform? That's the hard (and more important) question. |
|
|
|
bitcoin price in MT gox is falling to zero.
Is this normal?
On top of their prior bombshells regarding the transaction malleability issue, they have imposed additional restrictions on the ability to withdraw funds (i.e., heightened ID verification requirements). It's looking increasingly likely that Mt Gox is insolvent and trying to buy time. Ironically, one of the early proponents of the merits of Bitcoin as a decentralized platform finds itself at the epicenter of a monumental failure of centralized trust. |
|
|
|
ANNOUNCEMENT! Asset Exchange is a great tool, but will not succeed without service providers. The most important question is… How to get legal FIAT out of the IPO?Let me explain the IPO process using Nxt´s Asset Exchange through our example:We have a limited liability company (ltd) in Austria with financial reports for the last two years which is accessible online. The owners are known; we will try to provide a reasonable business plan and are ready to attend Q&A sessions so we can wave away all doubts. We are planning to pay dividends regularly to our investors depending of income. We are not a startup, but for this project, we will need another office, new developers, and a lot of things related to the daily job which we can´t (yet) pay with Bitcoin or Nxt, so we will definitively need FIAT to make those purchases. We need legal FIAT that the company can spend. I am pretty sure that after the story with Visacoin (and all the other scammers) most of us will only invest in companies/projects of well-known community members, where the transparency is given, so you know whom you are lending your money. And they will also need a gateway to get legal FIAT out of the IPO. I decided to consult a tax advisor, a business consultant and a professional offshore consultant to get an overview about the possibilities. And I am more than thrilled about the news I got.  My offer:There are several ways for a company to get FIAT out of crypto, paying only a reasonable amount of tax. But all the ways are going through a special company (with special license) that is made for this purpose. There are professionals who know how to set things up in a LEGAL way, without risks. Sure, we need to pay (a reasonable amount of) taxes, but for that, we can have a good night´s sleep without the risk of getting busted for money laundering, tax evasion or something similar. We can have our own company, earn money by charging handling and transaction fees, AND help the community to grow and evolve. I am looking for a well-known community member to team up with to found this special company. I am a member of the community since the end of November and am ready to meet in person, wherever we can arrange it. This is a big opportunity, I think, but I can´t do it alone. I need someone to brainstorm with, to share the ideas, the work, the responsibility, the win and of course the risk of this investment. Setting up a company (anonymously, so our name will not be linked to it) will cost 15 000 Euro (around 33 BTC or 350 000 Nxt) INCLUDING all costs for setting up the company in the Seychelles, all the consultants fees, and all other connected costs for the first year. From the second year on, the maintenance costs will be around 6000 Euro + an annual turnover tax of 1.5%. Setting up the same company not anonymously would cost 10 000 Euro. We will be able to help to convert crypto to FIAT, and also to pay the dividends (in a legal way in FIAT) to the investors through our company if the startup doesn´t want to bother with this. Something similar to what Havelock Investment is doing, except, that we will not look for projects and attract investors, as this will be done using Nxt´s Asset Exchange. We step in once the funding was successful and the desired amount of investment was raised by the community. I´ve already spent around 500 Euros on consulting with the above mentioned guys, so I am very serious about this, but will not start the project alone, just to make this clear. I will be in Moscow this Friday till Monday and will be in New York in the end of March if someone would like to discuss this in person. I am an attorney licensed and practicing in New York, and would be happy to chat with you about this when you make it over here. PM me for off-forum contact details. Cheers |
|
|
|
For those not following the AT topic that might still be interested: http://ciyam.org/nxt/It is still a work in progress but at least you can see that progress is being made (I know that in Nxt land progress is generally measured in days rather than weeks or months). We have already come up with some interesting ideas beyond the two current use cases such as a "Term Deposit" AT that would earn you NXT by leasing your forging power for x blocks then return the initial balance + forging interest to you and I think James will probably blow everyone's mind with some of his ideas. The more I look at the flexibility of the Nxt design the more I think it really is the "next" thing. I just hope that TF can be proven to have no attack vector (beyond a 90% stake ownership one). Fantastic! I'll reiterate my lawyer's-view request to think about other attributes of ownership that can be separated from an asset and dealt with independently in addition to forging rights. For example: the ability to separate and transfer voting rights in the event a voting system is implemented, the ability to give a third party a blocking right over your disposition of an asset, such that you can't transfer it without the third party's consent, or the ability to permit and control copies of digital assets (i.e. copyright principles). Much of IP and real property law is taught and practiced by reference to the concept of a "bundle of rights," whereby ownership of an asset is actually an amalgamation of distinct rights in and to the asset, each of which can be separated and used independently in more sophisticated economic and contractual relationships. And the vast majority of pure contractual relationships in modern finance involve contracting parties agreeing to treat non-IP and real property assets similarly (securitizations and other structured finance transactions rely on a bewildering variety of fine-grained divisions of rights and obligations vis-a-vis financial assets). Enabling even a small subset of these concepts at the protocol level (or in clever AT and/or multi-signature approaches) would likely open a floodgate of innovative reallocation of trust to the blockchain among real-world economic actors. |
|
|
|
Nxt is the most important crypto to add.
The recent development activity and marketcap speak for themselves; adding NXT is a must! |
|
|
|
Maybe someone should create BullDoge on top of NXT The stronger Doge. As a parody and as a show of force of NXT. Actually, please do - to garner some attention from the Doge crowd. Ha! +1 |
|
|
|
I've seen a couple of forging pools throughout this thread and noticed a possibitly of forging only by giving "forging rights" without giving the NXTs.
Has anyone one of you tried this and which pool did you use?
I am pretty sure that possibility was only discussed, it is not possible yet I know a lot of feature requests are discussed at length on this thread, but several weeks ago I chimed in on a similar conversation, and I'll reiterate one observation here. From this lawyer's perspective, the ability for NXT (or looking ahead, any asset on a ledger) to be held in one place but certain indicia of ownership or other rights to be separated and transferred elsewhere would be enormously useful. |
|
|
|
rofl. i completely missed that thread where i was mentioned like a dozen times
U should monetize ur reputation. If u were a fiat gateway operator for Asset Exchange, u would help the community a lot. I would accept dollars issued by u without any doubt. Think of such a business plz... I was planning on being the silver bullion gateway but I could also do fiat. Does anyone have any thoughts on US based fiat exchange? Seems you have all the FINCEN registration to go through. What does localbitcoins do? Fly under the radar? I bought my first Btc in person from localbitcoins, from a daytrader literally on wall street. I will gladly make myself available as a New York based fiat exchange, but trying to sort the legality. Stop by the NY Bitcoin Center at 40 Broad on Monday night and throw some NXT into the mix. I was there last week and Doge was being traded alongside BTC. If you do, I'll know who you are, and come over and introduce myself. Hey CL What's the usual method of trading over there? fees? I would imagine offering NXT is a little harder, what with phone apps and wallets. Def need a laptop with you I assume? I didn't actually trade myself when I went to check out the space; but there was a live auction going on with buyers and sellers trading face to face. Plenty of space to sit down with a laptop and work the transfer if you find a counterparty. In light of the localbitcoins arrest in FL, it will be interesting to see who shows up at Monday's event here in NY... |
|
|
|
rofl. i completely missed that thread where i was mentioned like a dozen times
U should monetize ur reputation. If u were a fiat gateway operator for Asset Exchange, u would help the community a lot. I would accept dollars issued by u without any doubt. Think of such a business plz... I was planning on being the silver bullion gateway but I could also do fiat. Does anyone have any thoughts on US based fiat exchange? Seems you have all the FINCEN registration to go through. What does localbitcoins do? Fly under the radar? I bought my first Btc in person from localbitcoins, from a daytrader literally on wall street. I will gladly make myself available as a New York based fiat exchange, but trying to sort the legality. Stop by the NY Bitcoin Center at 40 Broad on Monday night and throw some NXT into the mix. I was there last week and Doge was being traded alongside BTC. If you do, I'll know who you are, and come over and introduce myself. Hey CL What's the usual method of trading over there? fees? I would imagine offering NXT is a little harder, what with phone apps and wallets. Def need a laptop with you I assume? I didn't actually trade myself when I went to check out the space; but there was a live auction going on with buyers and sellers trading face to face. Plenty of space to sit down with a laptop and work the transfer if you find a counterparty. |
|
|
|
rofl. i completely missed that thread where i was mentioned like a dozen times
U should monetize ur reputation. If u were a fiat gateway operator for Asset Exchange, u would help the community a lot. I would accept dollars issued by u without any doubt. Think of such a business plz... I was planning on being the silver bullion gateway but I could also do fiat. Does anyone have any thoughts on US based fiat exchange? Seems you have all the FINCEN registration to go through. What does localbitcoins do? Fly under the radar? I bought my first Btc in person from localbitcoins, from a daytrader literally on wall street. I will gladly make myself available as a New York based fiat exchange, but trying to sort the legality. Stop by the NY Bitcoin Center at 40 Broad on Monday night and throw some NXT into the mix. I was there last week and Doge was being traded alongside BTC. If you do, I'll know who you are, and come over and introduce myself. |
|
|
|
Knowing identity of carlos allows credible legal threat to stop his nonsense. He doesn't care about actually running a coin, so your protection doesn't work. People will still get scammed and then might blame NXT.
If you want to legally prohibit people from redistributing and using your code in other projects, copyright law already does that. Open source doesn't mean anyone can use it if you have a copyright notice on the code. This no difference between software and images copyright. Simply add on top of every source file: /* * Developer : Developer Name ( example@example.com) * Date : xx/yy/zzzz * All code (c)2014 name -- all rights reserved * You may not use, copy, or distribute the code without written permission from the developer * */ Yeah it's as simple as that. That makes it illegal to use the code without developer's permission. This actually is the most restrictive form of license you can release your code under. According to this, every time your code is called or executed you need written permission from the developer. The mainstream open source licenses are what you want to be considering; as they have well thought-out mechanisms to permit your code to be useful yet restrictive enough to prohibit exploitative uses. "According to this, every time your code is called or executed you need written permission from the developer." Not everytime. Jus once. If the developer has offered the permission to use it with Nxt project, that one time written permission is enough. Not quite, who does he give the written permission to? Nxt, as has been pointed out, is not a separate entity, but an informal group of individuals? How all future users of Nxt who are unknown at this time. I'm not advocating that this be made unnecessarily complicated, but there's a reason that software licenses are not one liners. If we want to call the software open source, it really should be licensed under one of the accepted open source licenses, otherwise you have unclear copyright when people use or build on the platform. People are watching the crypto currency movement very with an eye towards developing commercial applications, even if the community has other motives. Releasing under a well known license would go a long way to comforting commercial developers, the attention of whom would work wonders for Nxt. The source code now is released under the MIT licence. https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt-public/src/4073c21098076d3469b3f74d49e73ffabe3a2001/MIT-license.txt?at=masterGreat, thanks for the clarification. |
|
|
|
Knowing identity of carlos allows credible legal threat to stop his nonsense. He doesn't care about actually running a coin, so your protection doesn't work. People will still get scammed and then might blame NXT.
If you want to legally prohibit people from redistributing and using your code in other projects, copyright law already does that. Open source doesn't mean anyone can use it if you have a copyright notice on the code. This no difference between software and images copyright. Simply add on top of every source file: /* * Developer : Developer Name ( example@example.com) * Date : xx/yy/zzzz * All code (c)2014 name -- all rights reserved * You may not use, copy, or distribute the code without written permission from the developer * */ Yeah it's as simple as that. That makes it illegal to use the code without developer's permission. This actually is the most restrictive form of license you can release your code under. According to this, every time your code is called or executed you need written permission from the developer. The mainstream open source licenses are what you want to be considering; as they have well thought-out mechanisms to permit your code to be useful yet restrictive enough to prohibit exploitative uses. "According to this, every time your code is called or executed you need written permission from the developer." Not everytime. Jus once. If the developer has offered the permission to use it with Nxt project, that one time written permission is enough. Not quite, who does he give the written permission to? Nxt, as has been pointed out, is not a separate entity, but an informal group of individuals. Each would need separate written permission. How about all future users of Nxt who are unknown at this time? I'm not advocating that this be made unnecessarily complicated, but there's a reason that software licenses are not one liners. If we want to call the software open source, it really should be licensed under one of the accepted open source licenses, otherwise you have unclear copyright when people use or build on the platform. People are watching the crypto currency movement very with an eye towards developing commercial applications, even if the community has other motives. Releasing under a well known license would go a long way to comforting commercial developers, the attention of whom would work wonders for Nxt. |
|
|
|
Knowing identity of carlos allows credible legal threat to stop his nonsense. He doesn't care about actually running a coin, so your protection doesn't work. People will still get scammed and then might blame NXT.
If you want to legally prohibit people from redistributing and using your code in other projects, copyright law already does that. Open source doesn't mean anyone can use it if you have a copyright notice on the code. This no difference between software and images copyright. Simply add on top of every source file: /* * Developer : Developer Name ( example@example.com) * Date : xx/yy/zzzz * All code (c)2014 name -- all rights reserved * You may not use, copy, or distribute the code without written permission from the developer * */ Yeah it's as simple as that. That makes it illegal to use the code without developer's permission. This actually is the most restrictive form of license you can release your code under. According to this, every time your code is called or executed you need written permission from the developer. The mainstream open source licenses are what you want to be considering; as they have well thought-out mechanisms to permit your code to be useful yet restrictive enough to prohibit exploitative uses. |
|
|
|
|
