Bitcoin Forum
May 11, 2024, 10:12:47 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Is multi-signature legally an 'escrow' account which could require a license?  (Read 5847 times)
jspilman (OP)
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 19
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 29, 2013, 03:14:33 AM
 #1

Let's take the great state of California, for example...

"Persons or companies performing escrow services over the Internet in California, or performing escrow services over the Internet for consumers in California, are subject to the licensing requirements of the Escrow Law"

With regard to Internet escrow companies, “escrow” also includes any transaction in which one person, for the purpose of effecting the sale or transfer of personal property or services to another person, delivers money, or its Internet-authorized equivalent, to a third person to be held by that third person until the happening of a specified event or the performance of a prescribed condition, when it is then to be delivered by that third person to a grantee, grantor, promisee, promisor, obligee, obligor, bailee, bailor, or any agent or employee of any of the latter.

I guess the question is, if you are a 3rd party in a multi-signature transaction, has the money been "delivered" and is it being "held" by the third person? Technically no, but probably the state would not agree.

1715422367
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715422367

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715422367
Reply with quote  #2

1715422367
Report to moderator
"The nature of Bitcoin is such that once version 0.1 was released, the core design was set in stone for the rest of its lifetime." -- Satoshi
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1715422367
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715422367

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715422367
Reply with quote  #2

1715422367
Report to moderator
1715422367
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715422367

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715422367
Reply with quote  #2

1715422367
Report to moderator
1715422367
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715422367

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715422367
Reply with quote  #2

1715422367
Report to moderator
Viceroy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 501


View Profile
June 29, 2013, 12:10:57 PM
Last edit: June 29, 2013, 12:47:00 PM by Viceroy
 #2

I'd like to pose an additional question regarding the above post.  

Doesn't the quoted part explicitly mean that "all of the escrow agents" who are not licensed as escrow agents in California in these forums are in direct violation of California law?  

http://www.corp.ca.gov/Laws/Escrow_Law/FAQs.asp
americandesi
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 500


BTC < > INR & USD


View Profile
March 13, 2014, 09:09:48 PM
 #3

Let's take the great state of California, for example...

"Persons or companies performing escrow services over the Internet in California, or performing escrow services over the Internet for consumers in California, are subject to the licensing requirements of the Escrow Law"

With regard to Internet escrow companies, “escrow” also includes any transaction in which one person, for the purpose of effecting the sale or transfer of personal property or services to another person, delivers money, or its Internet-authorized equivalent, to a third person to be held by that third person until the happening of a specified event or the performance of a prescribed condition, when it is then to be delivered by that third person to a grantee, grantor, promisee, promisor, obligee, obligor, bailee, bailor, or any agent or employee of any of the latter.

I guess the question is, if you are a 3rd party in a multi-signature transaction, has the money been "delivered" and is it being "held" by the third person? Technically no, but probably the state would not agree.



Hey mate.. did you get an answer to this.?
Am also trying to find if multi-signature falls into escrow category as per state rules.

Always buying and selling btc in bulk.!
Have I helped you out?  Send a donation! : 1ADesitf6McNmFw5wAN1y86bvyHLB5gR6P
My Reputation Thread : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=252042.0
odolvlobo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4312
Merit: 3214



View Profile
March 14, 2014, 03:27:59 AM
 #4

Let's take the great state of California, for example...

"Persons or companies performing escrow services over the Internet in California, or performing escrow services over the Internet for consumers in California, are subject to the licensing requirements of the Escrow Law"

With regard to Internet escrow companies, “escrow” also includes any transaction in which one person, for the purpose of effecting the sale or transfer of personal property or services to another person, delivers money, or its Internet-authorized equivalent, to a third person to be held by that third person until the happening of a specified event or the performance of a prescribed condition, when it is then to be delivered by that third person to a grantee, grantor, promisee, promisor, obligee, obligor, bailee, bailor, or any agent or employee of any of the latter.

I guess the question is, if you are a 3rd party in a multi-signature transaction, has the money been "delivered" and is it being "held" by the third person? Technically no, but probably the state would not agree.



It seems to me that in a multi-signature transaction, the third person is an arbitrator, not an escrow, unless the third person actually holds something. IANAL.

Join an anti-signature campaign: Click ignore on the members of signature campaigns.
PGP Fingerprint: 6B6BC26599EC24EF7E29A405EAF050539D0B2925 Signing address: 13GAVJo8YaAuenj6keiEykwxWUZ7jMoSLt
Nagle
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1000


View Profile WWW
March 14, 2014, 06:58:33 AM
 #5

With regard to Internet escrow companies, “escrow” also includes any transaction in which one person, for the purpose of effecting the sale or transfer of personal property or services to another person, delivers money, or its Internet-authorized equivalent, to a third person to be held by that third person until the happening of a specified event or the performance of a prescribed condition, when it is then to be delivered by that third person to a grantee, grantor, promisee, promisor, obligee, obligor, bailee, bailor, or any agent or employee of any of the latter.
Search Google for "Internet escrow fraud" for why California did that.
SherdonIke
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 66
Merit: 0


View Profile
March 14, 2014, 07:13:06 AM
 #6

Google don't have a good answer for this question
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!