You have over 100,000$ on GLBSE?

we're talking about like ~8900 BTC, like $105,000, this is a crime taking place.

If bitcoin securities are illegal because bitcoin is now officially money,

then Nefario has stolen >$100k,

and that is a crime,

and he will go to jail,

I made an appointment with my lawyer today, we'll see what he says.

Have you contacted law enforcement yet to tell them your side of the story?

I sent a message to the seller, linking him to the announcement, pointing out the image, and mentioning the skepticism surrounding BFL.  I asked if the machine was being shipped to somewhere in the Kansas City area. 

Everything still checks out as the auction was won Sept. 28 and it is reasonable for it to still be in transit.

You dont lease a PS3 with the aim of making money.
And I fear just relabeling it wont really help. I came across this, granted, for Arizona, but I suspect it will similar all over:

I. Defining a Security.
 The first step in deciding whether the securities statutes apply is to determine whether the transaction at issue actually involves a “security”. Arizona broadly defines a security as any:

[N]ote, stock, treasury stock, bond, commodity investment contract, commodity option, debenture, evidence of indebtedness, certificate of interest or participation in any profit-sharing agreement, collateral-trust certificate, preorganization certificate or subscription, transferable share, investment contract, viatical or life settlement investment contract, voting-trust certificate, certificate of deposit for a security, fractional undivided interest in oil, gas or other mineral rights, real property investment contract or, in general, any interest or instrument commonly known as a “security”, or any certificate of interest or participation in, temporary or interim certificate for, receipt for, guarantee of, or warrant or right to subscribe to or purchase, any of the foregoing.[7]

The definition for each of these securities is either listed in the Act under A.R.S. Section 44-1801 or provided by judicial interpretations and tests.[8] In determining whether a certain instrument is a security, a court will consider the substance rather than the form of the instrument.[9] “Essentially, if the purchaser will be a passive owner―relying on someone else’s efforts or conduct in order to make money on the investment―the instrument is probably a security.”[10]

http://www.mitchell-attorneys.com/legal-articles/securities-registration-and-exemption/

on a side note, i just wanted to quote Nefario:

I do not agree to your proposal.

this forum is full of crooks and it appears to be run by a crook also.

GLBSE itself was a criminal organization.  This is like arguing that a mafia don has an obligation to talk it over with his consigliare and his Lieutenants before going to the police to turn them in.   Nobody cares that you all signed a blood oath together, those private rules are entirely irrelevant.