Could Namecoin be a solution if Bitcoin is regulated/banned?

[d5000]

Namecoin is not designed as a currency, but as a medium to acquire a clearly defined service (domains and other name-related goods).

So the regulary situation could be different than Bitcoin's, as it's not a general-purpose currency and has a "intrinsic" system to acquire names like domains. Acquiring Namecoins could be legally similar to acquire domains, or, for example, "Game currencies" like Second Life Linden Dollars.

I am not a lawyer though, so I ask the experts if I am right? In this case, in countries with bitcoin-hostile regulations, Namecoin (or other future "service-related" coins) could be an alternative? Could it even be possible in countries like the USA to sell Namecoins commercially without a license from financial authorities (Fincen, etc.)?

(Sorry if my English is bad, I am not a native speaker)

[DeathAndTaxes]

No.  In the US (and AFAIK everywhere in the world), Bitcoin isn't regulated by name.  FinCEN's guidance on virtual currencies applies equally and fully to Namecoin, Litecoin, xyzCoin and even centralized systems like Linden dollars.

[d5000]

No.  In the US (and AFAIK everywhere in the world), Bitcoin isn't regulated by name. 

That isn't what I meant. Namecoin could be regarded as a service - not a currency - as it is the only genuine way to access ".bit" domains without involving an intermediary. Acquiring Namecoins could be viewed this way as a kind of virtual "gift card" to purchase .bit domains or other "names".

[DeathAndTaxes]

No.  In the US (and AFAIK everywhere in the world), Bitcoin isn't regulated by name.

That isn't what I meant. Namecoin could be regarded as a service - not a currency - as it is the only genuine way to access ".bit" domains without involving an intermediary. Acquiring Namecoins could be viewed this way as a kind of virtual "gift card" to purchase .bit domains or other "names".

Virtual gift cards are regulated.  Namecoins is a virtual currency.  It doesn't matter what you "call" it it matters how it is used.  If you can buys goods and services with it, you can exchange it for real currencies, it is used as a store of value then FinCEN views it as a virtual currency.  You can call it NotACurrencyCoin if you want that has absolutely no relevance.

[jdbtracker]

Dude if all the world's governments, banned Bitcoin tomorrow and enacted some Drakonian legislation to put all users in jail... Namecoin would bind with Bitcoin, no central DNS authority to block Bitcoin traffic and if a Hash scheme like Magnet links was implemented we could build fully decentralized websites impossible to take down. Just imagine going to your favourite website and knowing that every single person who has visited the site had to go to namecoin to get the authenticated hashes of a website, then connected to the namecoin torrent swarm to download the parts of the website you wanted... then add a p2p layer using Bitmessage for users to communicate data across those hashes of the sites, and you have a dynamic decentralized, no IP address communication system... people wouldn't even know where the hell you are, just that your signature has a list of hashes that you have ready to be distribute website content... individuals become servers to information... you do not find locations anymore... you find Information only.

I was thinking about this last night, just all the OpenSource programs that are availabe, we have a whole ecosystem ready to make the impossible happen.

Bitcoin: Hyper-exchangable currency to instantly transact over the internet.
Namecoin: Decentralized DNS service, censorship resistant.
Bitmessage: Decentralized, location masking, communication protocol
Alt-currencies and Microcurrencies: exchange mediums that attract specific types of people, eg. Devcoin, Tagcoin, sexcoin, they add an extra distribution layer to cryptocurrencies, they are given to people for specific actions, creating a extra vector of society to propagate through.
Open Transactions: A exchange marketplace and business library to exchange cryptocurrencies
Ripple: The centralized, decentralized barter trade system to exchange currencies and items directly to and from the people. no banks.

I can imagine this creating a very interesting webscape. Spam would have to be relevant and innovative to spread, as with commercials as well, who would spread advertisements? Content is spread out dynamically, only the original source that wishes it to propagate permanently would have it at all times. The availability of hashes would precisely measure the relevance of content to the community: all content on the internet could be gauged to it's true value. Users could change their address whenever they wanted, securely transact through the internet knowing that all content streamed from the swarm is 100% secure as it's original posters intended it to be, no tampering.

[danieldaniel]

No.  In the US (and AFAIK everywhere in the world), Bitcoin isn't regulated by name.

That isn't what I meant. Namecoin could be regarded as a service - not a currency - as it is the only genuine way to access ".bit" domains without involving an intermediary. Acquiring Namecoins could be viewed this way as a kind of virtual "gift card" to purchase .bit domains or other "names".

Virtual gift cards are regulated.  Namecoins is a virtual currency.  It doesn't matter what you "call" it it matters how it is used.  If you can buys goods and services with it, you can exchange it for real currencies, it is used as a store of value then FinCEN views it as a virtual currency.  You can call it NotACurrencyCoin if you want that has absolutely no relevance.

This is what a lot of people fail to understand.  You can't just call it "worthless" and expect to not have any liability.