This is my first post on these forums, so apologies if it's in the wrong place.
Anyhow, since this the legal section...
Some websites, trading platforms and "experts" prance around pretending and claiming to be something they're not. Those amongst you who know a thing or two about legalese will spot the inherent flaws in the claims made on sites such as Bitcoin Exchange Ltd (
https://bitexltd.com/index.php#). Whilst you might not realise it, these sorts of sites will only act to cripple genuine attempts to get Bitcoins into the mainstream psyche. Look at Mt. Gox...trusted with hundreds of millions of fiat currency and the trusty Bitcoins as well. Poof! All gone in a matter of days and the World looked on and laughed.
Bitcoin Exchange Ltd makes three legal claims that are utter nonsense (I'm a financial and legal professional, so qualified enough to state this), but that the normal reader won't notice. Due to these "claims" being central to their status as "the most reliable, fast and secured Bitcoin exchanger in the UK" that "Bitcoin Exchange Ltd is government registered" and "licensed under Company House, England" it won't be long until they're found out and put to the sword. This will undoubtedly cause pain to some traders and frustration to others wanting Bitcoins to thrive. Another nail in the coffin to real progress.
Even though a major foundation of cryptocurrencies is the lack of centralised regulation, perhaps some form of community regulation might prove a worthwhile thing to consider? The UK government has it in its power to shutdown Bitcoin Exchange Ltd for its false representations (irrespective of the crypto link), which incidentally are illegal under the laws of England and Wales, and will only serve to empower them to push for regulation by "lawmakers" (*cough, cough*).
It would be a wise thing for the community itself to put into place (self-)regulation that would protect cryptocurrencies (and their users) from politicians, unethical trading entities and ensure that the very principles of their creation are defended and kept unchanged. Otherwise, sooner rather than later, it will happen, so surely it's better to be proactive instead of reactive?
Thoughts?
