Question about ducks.

[Cyrusis]

Ducks are cool.

[1714056212]

1714056212

[1714056212]

1714056212

[1714056212]

1714056212

[1714056212]

1714056212

[1714056212]

1714056212

[1714056212]

1714056212

[beetcoin]

bitcoin is nascent.. there are no laws for this. even a big industry like gold/silver/ can't really protect holders from pumping and dumping, so that won't change for bitcoin either. the fact that CNBC still exists and george soros is getting rich by the day.. are proof of this.

[Walsoraj]

Pump n dump = fraud. SEC has authority over this. In fact, they are probably well past the investigation stage and are preparing to bring actions soon.

/end thread.

[evershawn]

There are no laws against it at the moment because governments are still trying to classify what it is.

[Walsoraj]

There are no laws against it at the moment because governments are still trying to classify what it is.

Absolutely false and idiotic statement.

[msc]

Bitcoin doesn't protect you against fraud charges.  Robbing someone of BTC through deception is robbing them of an asset, which is just like robbing them of cash.  Refer to the BTC Ponzi scheme that was busted.

[VforVictory]

It would be qutie illegal...if this were an actual sanctioned market.

[nwbitcoin]

Pump and dump of voucher values is legal as it isn't a financial product.  Bitcoin isn't legal tender, or a currency or anything that the whole world can agree on, and so its value is going to be subject to these pumps and dumps for the foreseeable.

Calling it fraud is very naive and would only be valid if you were only willing to buy and sell at a value you felt it was worth - like maybe the $10 a coin it was 12 months ago.  Selling at current market price would seem to suggest that fraud is only an issue when the price drops!  ;-)

[Walsoraj]

Pump and dump of voucher values is legal as it isn't a financial product.  Bitcoin isn't legal tender, or a currency or anything that the whole world can agree on, and so its value is going to be subject to these pumps and dumps for the foreseeable.

Calling it fraud is very naive and would only be valid if you were only willing to buy and sell at a value you felt it was worth - like maybe the $10 a coin it was 12 months ago.  Selling at current market price would seem to suggest that fraud is only an issue when the price drops!  ;-)

At least one federal court has already called it an "investment". That puts it within aim of the SEC.

*edit*

To be more precise, an "investment contract security". http://www.theracetothebottom.org/home/securities-exchange-commission-v-shavers-court-finds-bitcoin.html

[nwbitcoin]

At least one federal court has already called it an "investment". That puts it within aim of the SEC.

Many people would consider an old Ferrari as an investment, does that make classic cars a financial product too? ;-)

[Walsoraj]

At least one federal court has already called it an "investment". That puts it within aim of the SEC.

Many people would consider an old Ferrari as an investment, does that make classic cars a financial product too? ;-)

Not all investments qualify as a "security" under federal law. Bitcoin does.

http://www.theracetothebottom.org/home/securities-exchange-commission-v-shavers-court-finds-bitcoin.html

[Walsoraj]

It looks like there is no definitive answer to this, then?

I personally don't think it is fraud. Nobody is being forced in to participating. And I believe if a disclaimer is put down, warning people of the risks involved, then it definitely can't be listed as fraud at this point. Right?

Let's say the announced it was fraud, would the organizer(s) committing this fraud just receive a cease immediately notice or worse?

Did you read any of the above posts? Yes, there is a definitive answer.

[nwbitcoin]

The other point conveniently forgotten is that bitcoin pumps and dumps can be done anywhere in the world.  While the US Empire thinks it has jurisdiction world wide, the reality is it doesn't -  pumping and dumping will happen with no penalty!

Welcome to the free market! ;-)

[beetcoin]

It looks like there is no definitive answer to this, then?

I personally don't think it is fraud. Nobody is being forced in to participating. And I believe if a disclaimer is put down, warning people of the risks involved, then it definitely can't be listed as fraud at this point. Right?

Let's say the announced it was fraud, would the organizer(s) committing this fraud just receive a cease immediately notice or worse?

maybe fraud is not the correct term, but it's definitely unethical as it is artificially manipulating the game in order to benefit a group over the rest of the population. that is just cheating.

[jbreher]

Not all investments qualify as a "security" under federal law. Bitcoin does.

http://www.theracetothebottom.org/home/securities-exchange-commission-v-shavers-court-finds-bitcoin.html

I think you're misreading this. The ruling was not that _bitcoin_ was a security; it was that investments in BTCST were securities.

[Phrenico]

The US government can and will do whatever it wants.

Now, why "pumping and dumping" should be criminalized is beyond me. Can anybody explain without vague platitudes like "market manipulation", or "fraudulent buying"?

If you buy alts, buy them for good reasons; not because of momentum. If you want to speculate and get burned in the process, you'll learn for next time.

As I see it, if the SEC regulators are so good at distinguishing "pumpers" from "investors", then they can just short the coin themselves and profit. That ought to be the only "regulation" going on--not jailing thoughtcriminals.

[beetcoin]

The US government can and will do whatever it wants.

Now, why "pumping and dumping" should be criminalized is beyond me. Can anybody explain without vague platitudes like "market manipulation", or "fraudulent buying"?

If you buy alts, buy them for good reasons; not because of momentum. If you want to speculate and get burned in the process, you'll learn for next time.

As I see it, if the SEC regulators are so good at distinguishing "pumpers" from "investors", then they can just short the coin themselves and profit. That ought to be the only "regulation" going on--not jailing thoughtcriminals.

because it tips the scale of balance to the wealthy elite. the more swing you have, the more influence you have on manipulating prices. allowing this to happen will create an unfair game where the regular joe ends up losing.

[Phrenico]

The US government can and will do whatever it wants.

Now, why "pumping and dumping" should be criminalized is beyond me. Can anybody explain without vague platitudes like "market manipulation", or "fraudulent buying"?

If you buy alts, buy them for good reasons; not because of momentum. If you want to speculate and get burned in the process, you'll learn for next time.

As I see it, if the SEC regulators are so good at distinguishing "pumpers" from "investors", then they can just short the coin themselves and profit. That ought to be the only "regulation" going on--not jailing thoughtcriminals.

because it tips the scale of balance to the wealthy elite. the more swing you have, the more influence you have on manipulating prices. allowing this to happen will create an unfair game where the regular joe ends up losing.

I don't understand. They can't force you to sell; all volatility does is give you opportunity. If you don't want to play, then when you feel turbulence just buckle up.

[kaito]

Now, why "pumping and dumping" should be criminalized is beyond me. Can anybody explain without vague platitudes like "market manipulation", or "fraudulent buying"?

It's a form of fraud.
Of course the intention of the investor is difficult to prove. However I gather that that fontas guy ran a semi public scheme and announced his intents.