Possible sale of LTC-GLOBAL site code to someone who wants to run a BTC exchange

[burnside]

I'm offering up for potential sale a perpetual license to run an exclusive bitcoin denominated stock exchange using LTC-GLOBAL site code.  (www.litecoinglobal.com)

I am very busy with my day job, my mining pool, and LTC-GLOBAL.  However with GLBSE's recent issues, Now is the time to roll out LTC-GLOBAL to the bitcoin community.  I simply do not have the time to do the business development and to take care of the day to day operations of what I know would be a very busy site.

I will point out that in terms of interface and site speed, the LTC-GLOBAL code should far surpass that of GLBSE.

I will also point out that LTC-GLOBAL's site code solves many of the primary complaints regarding using GLBSE on a daily basis.

The site should be easy to skin by changing the header, footer, and css.  Any reasonably competent graphic artist should be able to make it look very nice.  (Admittedly, I am great at making things work, but not great at making them pretty.)

Proceeds of the sale will be distributed to shareholders of LTC-GLOBAL on the LTC-GLOBAL exchange.

I'll discuss serious offers via PM.

Cheers.


-----
Just for reference: (and no, we do not value LTC-GLOBAL at this much.)
Theymos valued GLBSE in this thread here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=112402.0
17500 out of 77500 total GLBSE shares, representing 23%, asking 0.3 BTC per share.
By my math that's a rough valuation of 23250 BTC.  If their valuation was based on annual revenue, you can see the kind of potential this opportunity presents.

[1715667953]

1715667953

[k3t3r]

I hold shares of ltc-global so take an interest in this.

will this be an auction or open bids as this would potentially increase the price.

[burnside]

I am a hold shares of ltc-global so take an interest in this.

will this be an auction or open bids as this would potentially increase the price.

I would prefer to keep it out of public view, however if there are serious concerns with that I do not feel strongly about it.

Right now I'm just trying to gauge interest.  I think it would be a mistake to not launch a BTC exchange right now, I'm just hoping there are entrepreneurs out there that are interested so I don't have to do it all myself.

[Korbman]

I'd love to see someone take the reins on this one and pull it through. Having another reasonable BTC Exchange option would be wonderful 

[Stephen Gornick]

for potential sale a perpetual license to run an exclusive bitcoin denominated stock exchange using LTC-GLOBAL site code.  (www.litecoinglobal.com)

So you are selling the domain and licensing the software?

[burnside]

for potential sale a perpetual license to run an exclusive bitcoin denominated stock exchange using LTC-GLOBAL site code.  (www.litecoinglobal.com)

So you are selling the domain and licensing the software?

I'm not making any changes to Litecoin Global.

I am considering licensing the software for use as a bitcoin platform.

[burnside]

With GLBSE closing, (see: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115669.0) ... this is someone's golden opportunity...

Could be up and running in a week or two...

[SaltySpitoon]

With GLBSE closing, (see: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115669.0) ... this is someone's golden opportunity...

Could be up and running in a week or two...

I would advise that any potential buyers hold off on buying for a few days. +1 to Burnside for being a great exchange owner/manager, but I'm assuming at this point Nefario is getting strong armed by the gov, so we should probably wait and find out what they are trying to charge him with, and what legal issues could start sprouting out of crypto exchanges.

It would suck pretty badly if you purchased the exchange rights, started it up, and then got attacked immediately by the gov.

That being said, I'm interested as soon as all of this mess gets sorted.

[markm]

Presumably you would want to run as a Tor hidden service, in which case folks might prefer a system such as Open Transactions that is designed not to require trusting the server.

-MarkM-

[burnside]

With GLBSE closing, (see: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115669.0) ... this is someone's golden opportunity...

Could be up and running in a week or two...

I would advise that any potential buyers hold off on buying for a few days. +1 to Burnside for being a great exchange owner/manager, but I'm assuming at this point Nefario is getting strong armed by the gov, so we should probably wait and find out what they are trying to charge him with, and what legal issues could start sprouting out of crypto exchanges.

It would suck pretty badly if you purchased the exchange rights, started it up, and then got attacked immediately by the gov.

That being said, I'm interested as soon as all of this mess gets sorted.

+1, you absolutely HAVE to have a plan in place if you are going to succeed.

This is in part why I am willing to license the code even though I know it could make far more if I operate it myself.  Because I am not in an ideal position (read: country) to be running it.

[burnside]

Presumably you would want to run as a Tor hidden service, in which case folks might prefer a system such as Open Transactions that is designed not to require trusting the server.

-MarkM-

OT has it's place, central exchanges have their place.  It's apples and oranges.

[markm]

Presumably you would want to run as a Tor hidden service, in which case folks might prefer a system such as Open Transactions that is designed not to require trusting the server.

-MarkM-

OT has it's place, central exchanges have their place.  It's apples and oranges.

Well trust and no need to trust really rather than apples and oranges.

If a server is to be anonymous to be hard to shut down, then not having to trust it is quite important.

If it is out in the open who owns it where its operating capital is stored and so on then Tor is likely not a good solution, instead some kind of "no extradition treaty" location might be needed.

(And don't bounty hunters just go kidnap people instead of extradition being used in those no extradition places? Since U.S. courts do not care whether kidnapping was used to cause the accused to appear in court?)

-MarkM-

[SaltySpitoon]

Presumably you would want to run as a Tor hidden service, in which case folks might prefer a system such as Open Transactions that is designed not to require trusting the server.

-MarkM-

OT has it's place, central exchanges have their place.  It's apples and oranges.

Well trust and no need to trust really rather than apples and oranges.

If a server is to be anonymous to be hard to shut down, then not having to trust it is quite important.

If it is out in the open who owns it where its operating capital is stored and so on then Tor is likely not a good solution, instead some kind of "no extradition treaty" location might be needed.

(And don't bounty hunters just go kidnap people instead of extradition being used in those no extradition places? Since U.S. courts do not care whether kidnapping was used to cause the accused to appear in court?)

-MarkM-

But at the same time, if you are intentionally trying to hide it, and then the gov finds you, its hard to claim stupid. Oh yeah, I just thought it would be a good idea to try to hide it, I didn't know that you would come after me, and shut me down.

I think the best case senario is that its not illegal in the first place, and you can legally have it running. I guess we should just wait and see how everything turns out with Nefario. If he was doing something frowned upon, and got busted, fine. If he wasn't doing anything frowned upon besides running the exchange.... well....

[markm]

Good point. Maybe all we need is someone who has passed the tests or whatever to become a licensed stockbroker and will put all securities interested in listing through whatever licensing requirements are needed before listing them.

Another possiblity might be to so a "common carrier", "software as a service" server on which anyone can create any asset and the operator of the server just keeps the software running without looking at what exactly people are having it number-crunch for them except to de-list anything that a court order orders to be de-listed.

-MarkM-

[Shadow383]

With GLBSE closing, (see: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115669.0) ... this is someone's golden opportunity...

Could be up and running in a week or two...

Perhaps we can organise a consortium of glbse securities that can relist on sucha  thing at least for a little while.

How much would we need to raise to buy the code ?

The real issue, as far as I can see, is that for someone to be trusted to handle a customer database and a huge quantity of funds, they should be known and identifiable.
BUT being known and identifiable means that they'll face immense legal pressure almost immediately.

Do we have anyone in a suitable location where such things would be legal?

[Korbman]

The real issue, as far as I can see, is that for someone to be trusted to handle a customer database and a huge quantity of funds, they should be known and identifiable.
BUT being known and identifiable means that they'll face immense legal pressure almost immediately.

Do we have anyone in a suitable location where such things would be legal?

Could go the piratebay route and put servers in tons of different countries to avoid centralization.

Anyway, I'm happy to support this venture in any way I can. Though I can't offer any web designing or programming skills, I will happily invest in the project. Let's have a solid plan in place and try not to end up like GLBSE

[burnside]

The real issue, as far as I can see, is that for someone to be trusted to handle a customer database and a huge quantity of funds, they should be known and identifiable.
BUT being known and identifiable means that they'll face immense legal pressure almost immediately.

Do we have anyone in a suitable location where such things would be legal?

Could go the piratebay route and put servers in tons of different countries to avoid centralization.

Anyway, I'm happy to support this venture in any way I can. Though I can't offer any web designing or programming skills, I will happily invest in the project. Let's have a solid plan in place and try not to end up like GLBSE

I don't think the exchange itself is going to have issues with legality once sold "offshore".

The problem then becomes that asset issuers will have to issue assets at their own risk and on their own recognizance.  We might see a big drop in US based asset issuers once they realize regulatory requirements of issuing securities.    Or, more likely they'll all ignore it and go on their merry way.

[burnside]

Unfortunately if an American buys or sells on your site it makes you subject to the SEC. Its either go the silk road route or nothing.

If people think other stock exchanges are not going to go the way of glbse once they get "noticed" youre kidding.

I believe this is incorrect.  All exchanges in the world are not subject to the SEC.  Many exchanges have agreements with the SEC for information sharing, but many do not.  A company in Bermuda offering trading on the Bermuda exchange is not subject to the SEC in any way.

Now... the asset issuers, that's a whole different ball game.  If you are an american, and issue assets, no matter what exchange it is, you are subject to registration requirements by the SEC.  Based on the new JOBS act with it's crowdfunding exclusions, it has become much, much easier to register.

There's also always the "it's a video game" defense.  There are 100's of legal exchanges in the US.  Legal because they're 'virtual' or 'a game' or 'for training'.  Legal because when you join up you click through terms stating that you agree that nothing within the site is 'real'.  And even if some people trade your video game digital assets outside the game, does not mean it's not a game.  In game loot is traded on ebay every day.  That doesn't mean the games are not games.

[markm]

Maybe you can simply require all issuers to submit notarised affadivits asserting that their asset is fully compliant with all laws rules and regulations pertaining in their jurisdiction?

-MarkM-

[burnside]

Maybe you can simply require all issuers to submit notarised affadivits asserting that their asset is fully compliant with all laws rules and regulations pertaining in their jurisdiction?

-MarkM-

I love it, that's brilliant!

[markm]

Maybe you can simply require all issuers to submit notarised affadivits asserting that their asset is fully compliant with all laws rules and regulations pertaining in their jurisdiction?

-MarkM-

I love it, that's brilliant!

An Englishman's home is his jurisdiction, heh heh?

("Scratch an Englishman, find a pirate"? )

-MarkM-

[Korbman]

Or, more likely they'll all ignore it and go on their merry way.

That is 100% what I intend to do. 

[BlackHeartFund]

I am meeting with my lawyers this week to investigate the legality of operating a bitcoin stock exchange, or something along those lines, in Canada. I deal with a global law firm that does a lot of work in the financial sector, so they should be able to provide me with a solid footing.

After the legal issues are sorted out, my main concern is how to create one that is not centralized, and not run by a small group of people. I am already working with some top notch security and hosting people, those problems can be managed fairly simply, if not inexpensively. However I would like to work with others in the bitcoin community to set up a transparent exchange with an accountable board of directors... if you are considering a similar project, we should talk.

Could encrypted bearer-type bonds be a potential solution to the risks of a centralized exchange being disrupted by hostile governments/hackers? Or is an exchange that operates completely via P2P the way we should be heading?

[markm]

Bearer bonds are apparently illegal nowadays in some places (such as the USA apparently? Maybe Canada too?)

I am in Canada I'm interested in what you find out.

I am concerned that coding "securities" into the blockchain could demonise the blockchain, making everyone who conspires to propagate it an accessory to securities fraud or something like that...

(Before you laugh, read up on the Liberty Dollar. A form of domestic terrorism, apparently...)


-MarkM-

[BlackHeartFund]

You're right that we should not attempt to code securities into the blockchain, that's not what I was thinking.

Bearer Bonds are basically illegal to issue everywhere, in the same way that all trades they can't federally regulate are illegal.

It seems to me that the difference is that BTC is not a fiat currency, no government has authority over it, so they can't regulate the types of stocks/bonds that people issue in Bitcoins. What they can control is what companies and individuals inside their borders do... and right now I don't think there are any clear laws in this country that govern this. We will only be taking in and distributing BTC, not exchanging BTC for fiat. We will see what the lawyers say, hopefully we can work within/around the laws of this country.

I will keep you updated, hopefully they are able to come up with a feasible plan for us.

[markm]

Maybe try out the game idea too. Each city on a Freeciv planet in the Galactic Milieu that builds a stock exchange city-improvment should be able to run an Open Transactions server to represent that stock exchange and allow players to play at trading stocks and shares and bonds and so on on that city's exchange...

In fact it might even be the case that having a city that far developed will cost enough in hosting fees as it is that not bothering to have a server set up so people can actually trade on your city's stock exchange would be like all those folk who pay for more hosting than they ever use thus subsidise those who make full use of their quotas. That is, we might not even have to charge extra to set up such a server since the cost of developing a city to such a high stage of civilisation might already cover such costs. (Plus the "usage tokens" for anyone actually using it might pay for it of course so plenty of chance it will seem no extra cost to the city ruler.)


-MarkM-

[burnside]

You're right that we should not attempt to code securities into the blockchain, that's not what I was thinking.

Bearer Bonds are basically illegal to issue everywhere, in the same way that all trades they can't federally regulate are illegal.

It seems to me that the difference is that BTC is not a fiat currency, no government has authority over it, so they can't regulate the types of stocks/bonds that people issue in Bitcoins. What they can control is what companies and individuals inside their borders do... and right now I don't think there are any clear laws in this country that govern this. We will only be taking in and distributing BTC, not exchanging BTC for fiat. We will see what the lawyers say, hopefully we can work within/around the laws of this country.

I will keep you updated, hopefully they are able to come up with a feasible plan for us.

Doesn't matter what you use to buy the security in the US, nor what you use for dividends, etc.  US definition of a security:

Code:

(1) The term "security" means any note, stock, treasury
stock, security future, security-based swap, bond, 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, voting-trust certificate, certificate of deposit
for a security, fractional undivided interest in oil, gas, or
other mineral rights, any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege
on any security, certificate of deposit, or group or index of securities
(including any interest therein or based on the value
thereof), or any put, call, straddle, option, or privilege entered
into on a national securities exchange relating to foreign currency,
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.

If you're doing anything you see there, you have to be registering it with the SEC.  Doesn't seem to care much what currency you're using.  Could be swapping cats.

[BlackHeartFund]

Only securities issued in the United States have to be registered with the SEC. Canada doesn't have federal security laws, as far as I can tell they are provincial.

[burnside]

Only securities issued in the United States have to be registered with the SEC. Canada doesn't have federal security laws, as far as I can tell they are provincial.

If you dont want to deal with the SEC you need to ban US citizens from using it.

Or operate offshore and ignore their requests.

A company in Canada is not beholden to the SEC.  Though the SEC could relay requests through local enforcement.

As an exchange, complying with the SEC regs is definitely going to fall on the asset issuers, and MarkM had a revelation yesterday that I think is going to work for the exchange, which is, as a listing requirement you have to sign a document stating that you have followed all of your regional laws in the creation of the security.

[markm]

Not just "a document". A notarised affadavit. Because a real notary might balk at notarising something they know is a lie, and because an affadavit is, as far as I know but I am not a lawyer, a sworn statement for court, thus, I am hoping, subject to being nailed for perjury if its not true.

Another thought is, how does lawyer/client privilege hold up in KYC cases if for example a lawyer operates an account on behalf of an undisclosed client?

-MarkM-

[Korbman]

So...the ideas that everyone has provided thus far are great for legitimacy in the eyes of the government. But isn't that what GLBSE was all about as well? Look what happened to him.

@Burnside - You're currently running the litecoin security exchange "underground" I'm assuming? Why can't we continue the same exchange plan under BTC instead of LTC? The only difference between LTC and BTC is popularity...

Guys, is there any security exchange that is currently meeting regulation standards for their government?
There's a reason we invest with bitcoins, litecoins, and the like...it's because we don't have to follow the same governmental rules and regulations that tie us down in the first place. We're free to do and create whatever we want, yet everyone is going back to the consensus that we need government regulation.

I understand that regulations help to hamper scams...I understand that regulations helps established businesses...but that's not why I wanted to work with Bitcoin security exchanges. I came here because I don't have to fight over a mountain of governmental paperwork to create a business. I don't have to work with my bank to figure out funding. I can get creative and build my own business and get funding on the exchanges for a tenth the amount of work and hassle required by the government. Establishing a bitcoin mining business is 100% possible with what we've got going on here...the moment any one of you is able to go into your local bank, say you want a $30,000 loan to purchase ASIC mining equipment, and receive that loan, tell me so I can make a visit to your bank.

Look at what was started by the various community members under GLBSE or MPEx. Do you think half of their ideas could have flourished if they had to spend the amount of time, effort, and money to work through regulations?

I agree that scams are a problem, and some are vastly more obvious than others. I must be a better way to locally regulate the securities without the intervention of SEC, FSA, etc.

[burnside]

With Litecoin Global it's a lot easier to establish it as a game/learning experience.  LTC is a totally different ballgame when it has 1/240th the value, is all speculative, and you can't really buy (much of) anything else with it.

As an educational site, I don't think it'd be wise to do away with the stocks/bonds/funds names.  That's a large part of the education side. 

[Korbman]

With Litecoin Global it's a lot easier to establish it as a game/learning experience.  LTC is a totally different ballgame when it has 1/240th the value, is all speculative, and you can't really buy (much of) anything else with it.

As an educational site, I don't think it'd be wise to do away with the stocks/bonds/funds names.  That's a large part of the education side. 

Though I agree with that, Litecoins can still be exchanged for worldly currencies. From a legal perspective, it doesn't matter if litecoins are a billionth the value of a bitcoin. As long as you convert USD to LTC, park those LTC somewhere and make a return (or loss), it's considered investing.

On the other side of that, if we replace LTC with BTC in your sentence and modify it a bit we can make the same argument
"BTC is a totally different ballgame when it has 12x the value of a Dollar, is all speculative, and you can't really buy (much of) anything with it [compared to government backed currencies]."

[Bitcoin Oz]

With Litecoin Global it's a lot easier to establish it as a game/learning experience.  LTC is a totally different ballgame when it has 1/240th the value, is all speculative, and you can't really buy (much of) anything else with it.

As an educational site, I don't think it'd be wise to do away with the stocks/bonds/funds names.  That's a large part of the education side. 

That may be, but you still can't use anything you can then withdraw again to sell for money - it's a one way street.

If you sell "litecoupons" for litecoins and people exchange them off-exchange it's not on you if you specify those coupons have no redeemable value, its an educational game and not real financial instruments.

If people deposit litecoin the only thing they can do is exchange them for litecoupons they arent allowed to go back to litecoins.

If someone sets up an outside site to trade litecoupons for litecoins again its not your fault.

tl;dr youd better make damn sure that litecoupon exchange site isnt tied to litecoinglobal in any way and they need to comply with AML , tax and all the other nasties - just as ogrr.com does for wow gold

[Bitcoin Oz]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=117317.msg1257909#msg1257909

I think the answer lies in the unit of account not being setup a real money in the first place so we need a "gamecoin"

Bitcoin was called a currency by its creator and you cant now say it isnt. Gamecoin is not a currency from  the get go

[markm]

Yeah there always seem to be places where players can sell in-game stuff for fiat, claiming in game's TOS that that is not allowed is maybe not good game design, a game designer I respect (R.I.P.) once told me never include a rule you cannot enforce.

Since you cannot prevent the entire internetz, Tor, i2p etc etc from having some place somewhere where players can sell game items you might as well toss that rule entirely and use blockchain based game-valuables so people can take their game-stuff home with them and even try to pass them off as "currencies" if they so desire.

Its amazing how the Hacker nation's currency "bitcoins" has taken off, big game-currencies fad in early 21st century on the planet known as Earth apparently.

-MarkM-

[DeathAndTaxes]

So...the ideas that everyone has provided thus far are great for legitimacy in the eyes of the government. But isn't that what GLBSE was all about as well? Look what happened to him.

@Burnside - You're currently running the litecoin security exchange "underground" I'm assuming? Why can't we continue the same exchange plan under BTC instead of LTC? The only difference between LTC and BTC is popularity...

Guys, is there any security exchange that is currently meeting regulation standards for their government?
There's a reason we invest with bitcoins, litecoins, and the like...it's because we don't have to follow the same governmental rules and regulations that tie us down in the first place. We're free to do and create whatever we want, yet everyone is going back to the consensus that we need government regulation.

I understand that regulations help to hamper scams...I understand that regulations helps established businesses...but that's not why I wanted to work with Bitcoin security exchanges. I came here because I don't have to fight over a mountain of governmental paperwork to create a business. I don't have to work with my bank to figure out funding. I can get creative and build my own business and get funding on the exchanges for a tenth the amount of work and hassle required by the government. Establishing a bitcoin mining business is 100% possible with what we've got going on here...the moment any one of you is able to go into your local bank, say you want a $30,000 loan to purchase ASIC mining equipment, and receive that loan, tell me so I can make a visit to your bank.

Look at what was started by the various community members under GLBSE or MPEx. Do you think half of their ideas could have flourished if they had to spend the amount of time, effort, and money to work through regulations?

I agree that scams are a problem, and some are vastly more obvious than others. I must be a better way to locally regulate the securities without the intervention of SEC, FSA, etc.

Way to miss the enitre point.  The discussion has NOTHING to do with scams and everything to do with the SEC (or your local equivelent) getting a court order, seizing everything you own and putting you in prison for the next 5 to 10 years for securities fraud.

[Korbman]

Way to miss the enitre point.  The discussion has NOTHING to do with scams and everything to do with the SEC (or your local equivelent) getting a court order, seizing everything you own and putting you in prison for the next 5 to 10 years for securities fraud.

Ah, well gosh jee whiz then this is a super easy problem to fix isn't it? Create a tor hidden service like the silk road and you won't have anything to worry about. And I see you've "missed the entire point" on the definition of securities fraud.

The goal is to find a balance between legality and a safe haven for investors. Going the full hidden route and negating the majority of your problems will ultimately create a problem unto itself, whereas going the full legal route will hinder any community member looking to kickstart their own bitcoin business.

[Bitcoin Oz]

So...the ideas that everyone has provided thus far are great for legitimacy in the eyes of the government. But isn't that what GLBSE was all about as well? Look what happened to him.

@Burnside - You're currently running the litecoin security exchange "underground" I'm assuming? Why can't we continue the same exchange plan under BTC instead of LTC? The only difference between LTC and BTC is popularity...

Guys, is there any security exchange that is currently meeting regulation standards for their government?
There's a reason we invest with bitcoins, litecoins, and the like...it's because we don't have to follow the same governmental rules and regulations that tie us down in the first place. We're free to do and create whatever we want, yet everyone is going back to the consensus that we need government regulation.

I understand that regulations help to hamper scams...I understand that regulations helps established businesses...but that's not why I wanted to work with Bitcoin security exchanges. I came here because I don't have to fight over a mountain of governmental paperwork to create a business. I don't have to work with my bank to figure out funding. I can get creative and build my own business and get funding on the exchanges for a tenth the amount of work and hassle required by the government. Establishing a bitcoin mining business is 100% possible with what we've got going on here...the moment any one of you is able to go into your local bank, say you want a $30,000 loan to purchase ASIC mining equipment, and receive that loan, tell me so I can make a visit to your bank.

Look at what was started by the various community members under GLBSE or MPEx. Do you think half of their ideas could have flourished if they had to spend the amount of time, effort, and money to work through regulations?

I agree that scams are a problem, and some are vastly more obvious than others. I must be a better way to locally regulate the securities without the intervention of SEC, FSA, etc.

Way to miss the enitre point.  The discussion has NOTHING to do with scams and everything to do with the SEC (or your local equivelent) getting a court order, seizing everything you own and putting you in prison for the next 5 to 10 years for securities fraud.

Prison isnt so bad here. More like a holiday camp 

[EskimoBob]

Maybe its time for bitcoin community to stop ego-tripping and stop using big words like securities, currency, corporation, IPO, bond, dividends, exchange etc.
Seriously.
None (most?) of the Corporations here are actually incorporated anywhere on this planet. Copy/pasting some bull shit legalese to a web page is not making your imaginary adventure a Co. Not in this planet.
None (most?) of the CEO's and what not have probably never ever met a RL CEO or owned a small business in the real world (RL).
Most of people here have 0 experience in investing in the real world and zero experience underwriting a IPO. Damn, mots IPO issuers do not even know what those 3 letters really mean and what are the consequences.

I know, most of you say that lets invent something new and do business the new way. Sad truth is that so far we have only seen scammers and thieves blowing the smoke up bitcoin community's collective ass.
If you do not know how business or markets works, you "new ways of doing stuff" are usually childish mistakes that the real world has all ready done, learned from those, fixed the problem and moved on.

How many of you have passed the S 7 exam? How did your S 63 go and for what state?
Do we have any CPA's around here? EU or USA background?

Wipe your tears, boys and girls. Truth is harsh.

[markm]

Well gosh yes, most of this companies and such stuff is childish and silly.

The "Great Game" is in being a Sovereign Nation!

Playing some puny "company" trading on the stock exchange of one city or even on many stock exchanges in many cities is small fry compared to running the (e.g. Freeciv) Nation or one of the Nations that builds those cities and builds Markets, Banks and Stock Markets in them!

March armies around! Make Alliance, Peace, Ceasefire, Armistice, or War treaties with other Nations!

Play with "real money" in the sense meant by expressions such as "a few billions here, a few billions there, pretty soon it adds up to real money"!

Win wars and influence history!

-MarkM-

[EskimoBob]

I was talking to someone who know about the laws around here (not US) and guess what: Setting up a bazaar (market) to trade some virtual  tokens (BTC is not a currency) is completely OK until legal currency is kept out of the equation.

You say BTC has value in fiat? So do all the stupid game cards that kids collect and trade in some countries. They do not call their collections Co's and themselves CEO and are not selling you a "share of ownership or debt (big bad words) in a INC, LLE, LTD etc". 

American based SEC has NOTHING to do with BTC. BTC is not a security. Only reason they can get upset is if  you keep calling your imaginary "what ever" a real company an keep telling to people,  how you are running a business blaa blaa blaa, dividends, IPO etc.  Then it can be considered as a scam and they (SEC, IRS, FSA, police etc) will get curious.

If you sell tokens for a imaginary team that operates under guidelines X and rewards it's members in those same game tokens (btc) no one cares wtf you do. Start using big words and you are in deep shit. As simple as that.

So. Nefario. Use some SQL magic, rename those moronic contracts to what they really are and open up your token bazaar.
You are running a online shop for trading game tokens to "teams" of imaginary teams of miners and cosmonauts.
 

[Kumala]

Well, the German authorities seem to be of different opinion: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=117008.0
A first interpetation seems to classify BTC as a finance instrument, though not a currency, nevertheless all finance instruments require regulations. Ofcourse this is just a first statement made by the authorities and an actual legal case still has to proof this statement.

[Korbman]

Maybe its time for bitcoin community to stop ego-tripping and stop using big words like securities, currency, corporation, IPO, bond, dividends, exchange etc.
Seriously.

I consider big words to be things like floccinaucinihilipilification (the estimation of something that's valueless), or hippopotomonstrosesquipedalian (of or pertaining to long words)
Seriously though, there's nothing wrong with using the words as longs as you understand them. You pointed out in your other post:

I was talking to someone who know about the laws around here (not US) and guess what: Setting up a bazaar (market) to trade some virtual  tokens (BTC is not a currency) is completely OK until legal currency is kept out of the equation.
You say BTC has value in fiat? So do all the stupid game cards that kids collect and trade in some countries. They do not call their collections Co's and themselves CEO and are not selling you a "share of ownership or debt (big bad words) in a INC, LLE, LTD etc".  

American based SEC has NOTHING to do with BTC. BTC is not a security. Only reason they can get upset is if  you keep calling your imaginary "what ever" a real company an keep telling to people,  how you are running a business blaa blaa blaa, dividends, IPO etc.  Then it can be considered as a scam and they (SEC, IRS, FSA, police etc) will get curious.

And you'd be exactly right. Keep things as a "game" and you can't be harmed. As long as you deal solely in BTC, LTC, etc there are NO REGULATIONS for you to abide by because no government (that I know of) recognizes Bitcoins as a currency. So creating a "business" and "trading" all under BTC is 100% legal. When you start bringing fiat into the equations is when you bring governments along with it. That's the challenging part.
That said, you can still create your own company, INC, LTD, LLC, etc. It's all part of the "game" here, and as long as your company doesn't stem into the 'real world' you're all set.

None (most?) of the Corporations here are actually incorporated anywhere on this planet. Copy/pasting some bull shit legalese to a web page is not making your imaginary adventure a Co. Not in this planet.
None (most?) of the CEO's and what not have probably never ever met a RL CEO or owned a small business in the real world (RL).
Most of people here have 0 experience in investing in the real world and zero experience underwriting a IPO. Damn, mots IPO issuers do not even know what those 3 letters really mean and what are the consequences.

Probably correct here as well, but there's nothing wrong with that until the tax man comes for their "company's" real-world profits

I know, most of you say that lets invent something new and do business the new way. Sad truth is that so far we have only seen scammers and thieves blowing the smoke up bitcoin community's collective ass.
If you do not know how business or markets works, you "new ways of doing stuff" are usually childish mistakes that the real world has all ready done, learned from those, fixed the problem and moved on.

Serious question: How many legitimate businesses have actually turned out to be scams on GLBSE (or elsewhere)? I'm actually curious as to the answer for this. And by "legitimate business" I mean someone actually having a background, transparency, and products/services, but actually just ran away with your money. And I swear to god if one of you retards says "Pirate" I will hunt you down and slap you across the head for thinking his business was legit in the first place.  

How many of you have passed the S 7 exam? How did your S 63 go and for what state?

Quite coincidentally, this happens to be something I've been looking into

[EskimoBob]

I consider big words to be things like floccinaucinihilipilification (the estimation of something that's valueless), or hippopotomonstrosesquipedalian (of or pertaining to long words)
...

LOL. No, not "big" but "long".   

[markm]

That said, you can still create your own company, INC, LTD, LLC, etc. It's all part of the "game" here, and as long as your company doesn't stem into the 'real world' you're all set.

Actually you should check which such codes are 'FNORD!!!' words in your local area.

In the U,K, it might be "Ltd." that is a fnord, U.S. fnord-words might include "Inc."

Some such codes are like "TM" and the copyright symbol, or impersonating a police officer or wearing military emblems of the local military whilst not ever having been in that military or of the rank indicated by the emblem and suchlike totems/fetishes/symbols.

I took to using Corp for intergalactic organisations engaged in intergalactic commerce partly because around here (Halifax, Nova Scotia) I don't think that is one of the FNORD words, nonetheless when I introduced the term on these forums I threw in a whole "explanation" of what it meant in the context I was using it.

-MarkM-

[usagi]

I was talking to someone who know about the laws around here (not US) and guess what: Setting up a bazaar (market) to trade some virtual  tokens (BTC is not a currency) is completely OK until legal currency is kept out of the equation.

You say BTC has value in fiat? So do all the stupid game cards that kids collect and trade in some countries. They do not call their collections Co's and themselves CEO and are not selling you a "share of ownership or debt (big bad words) in a INC, LLE, LTD etc". 

American based SEC has NOTHING to do with BTC. BTC is not a security. Only reason they can get upset is if  you keep calling your imaginary "what ever" a real company an keep telling to people,  how you are running a business blaa blaa blaa, dividends, IPO etc.  Then it can be considered as a scam and they (SEC, IRS, FSA, police etc) will get curious.

If you sell tokens for a imaginary team that operates under guidelines X and rewards it's members in those same game tokens (btc) no one cares wtf you do. Start using big words and you are in deep shit. As simple as that.

So. Nefario. Use some SQL magic, rename those moronic contracts to what they really are and open up your token bazaar.
You are running a online shop for trading game tokens to "teams" of imaginary teams of miners and cosmonauts.
 

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115825.msg1258823#msg1258823
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115553.msg1258825#msg1258825
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115430.msg1258828#msg1258828

Stop spamming the forums with your bullshit propaganda, EskimoBob. Your cut-and-paste campaigns are really annoying. Yes, we can read.

[farlack]

(And don't bounty hunters just go kidnap people instead of extradition being used in those no extradition places? Since U.S. courts do not care whether kidnapping was used to cause the accused to appear in court?)

-MarkM-

Dog the bounty hunger went to jail for hopping over to Mexico to grab someone. So no.

[Korbman]

Stop spamming the forums with your bullshit propaganda, EskimoBob. Your cut-and-paste campaigns are really annoying. Yes, we can read.

That's because there's tons of people who don't read through all the threads...there's such a disconnect that he has to answer the same question in three or four different threads just to let people know what's up.