[ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency

[GhostPlayer]

@MyFarm

OK, let me try this with a different example like Bitcoin so we don't get confused.

 Sorry. Dead end at the first full stop.  

 There has been nothing more hilarious to me than someone buy all liquidity in the market and make claims they own a coin... It would be like saying that if you own all dollars, you own the dollar.

 Nope, the FED owns the dollar, you just became the biggest ower. In crypto land, different story, same result.

 MyFarm, just wow man... That is just the most idiotic thing on earth.

 If I buy all banans in the world, I dont own all the banana-trees in the world.
 You just became the biggest crypto-monkey I know of. Wasn't SPR bad enough for 'ya?

[1715403630]

1715403630

[BlockaFett]

can't stand amateur lawyers who try to add up everything logically in their own head. LAW DOESN'T WORK LIKE THAT 

[oblox]

LOL!! Completely absurd.   

The Foundation has already consulted with trademark lawyers over this issue and made an educated decision to proceed, but in spite of all that Darkcoin should pay a dead coin's bagholders $1,000,000... just cause a random guy on the internet said so.

This is nothing more than FUD to get the price to drop back below where you dumped.  Absurdity at its finest.

Agreed... to go from a marketcap of like 7k to 1M is fucking crazy. MyFarm, stop smoking the ganja.

[MyFarm]

So what you're saying is Evan rage quits and sells the password to the Darkcoin repo for $10.00 to some guy in Canada, that's it?  That new dev can do whatever he wants with the Darkcoin name and brand?  There is no legal recourse for the Darkcoin owners?  Heh.  I think not...

There is an official dev team and official foundation and official board. If they all agree to sell then I guess then, "that's it".

Are you saying that the Darkcoin foundation's board has legal control over the Darkcoin digital currency and can do what they want with a simple majority vote and darkcoin holders have no legal recourse in such an event?

@MyFarm

OK, let me try this with a different example like Bitcoin so we don't get confused. As you very well observed coins are not shares in a business but property.  When you buy 20 BTC you are not buying 20 shares of Bitcoin and have no saying in the direction the project is taking your coins are just property that you acquired and you now own, just like if you would buy 20 Macbooks per my previous example.

Trademark rights can only be owned by an entity either a natural entity (a person) or corporate entity like a Foundation or a corporation. In the case of coins the tradermark right initially resides with the developer of the coin as they came up with the original idea, but many developers neglect this step to formally register their trademark.  So the first business that can prove use of the name in a commercial environment and files a trademark application may get it.  The best example is, Do you know who owns the Bitcoin trademark not everyone that owns Bitcoin  as you are trying to imply, it is owned by MtGox: The company overseeing bankruptcy proceedings for Mt. Gox hopes to raise millions by selling the 'Bitcoin' trademark.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/10859773/Bitcoin-trademark-up-for-sale-at-580000.html

In this particular case the only person that could contest that trademark was probably Satoshi Nakamoto, but you only have a window of time to do that and I am sure that has expired.

I hope this makes it clear that when a developer launches a coin and assigns it a name, he owns the trademark if he is smart enough to register it. The miners that start mining the blockchain are awarded coins for their services and those coins are not shares, thus they get no special voting rights from them.  Only when the developer formally registers the trademark does he really own it, as you can see in Bitcoin that is very much not the case, as Satoshi Nakamoto went missing and did not contest in on time.

But I am absolutely positive that if you bought 51% of all Bitcoins in existence you would have 0 IP rights and MtGox would still own the Bitcoin trademark.

About the DASH process in particular, the process is absolutely being handled by Intellectual Property Lawyers in the United States.  I hope this is helpful.

I understand your argument and it is a decent one.  However, the Dashcoin developer did not file a trademark.  He then released a decentralized asset into the marketplace.  I would argue that Darkcoin buying the Dashcoin repo is NOT buying Dashcoin because it is a decentralized asset and, "Owned by the community" and that buying the repo does not provide trademark registration rights as that would suddenly allow you to provide a cease and desist to the decentralized asset which makes no sense.  The SEC stated, "Whether a virtual currency is a security under the federal securities laws, and therefore subject to our regulation, is dependent on the particular facts and circumstances at issue. Regardless of whether an underlying virtual currency is itself a security, interests issued by entities owning virtual currencies or providing returns based on assets such as virtual currencies likely would be securities and therefore subject to our regulation."

My argument is this is a very unique situation with no legal precedent and that Darkcoin is potentially opening itself up to legal liability.

As for the process being handled IP lawyers, please provide the firm's name so they can be contacted.

[MyFarm]

LOL!! Completely absurd.   

The Foundation has already consulted with trademark lawyers over this issue and made an educated decision to proceed, but in spite of all that Darkcoin should pay a dead coin's bagholders $1,000,000... just cause a random guy on the internet said so.

This is nothing more than FUD to get the price to drop back below where you dumped.  Absurdity at its finest.

Agreed... to go from a marketcap of like 7k to 1M is fucking crazy. MyFarm, stop smoking the ganja.

That's the initial offer.  If it has to go to court, I suspect the Dashcoin community will want much more.

[BlockaFett]

So what you're saying is Evan rage quits and sells the password to the Darkcoin repo for $10.00 to some guy in Canada, that's it?  That new dev can do whatever he wants with the Darkcoin name and brand?  There is no legal recourse for the Darkcoin owners?  Heh.  I think not...

There is an official dev team and official foundation and official board. If they all agree to sell then I guess then, "that's it".

Are you saying that the Darkcoin foundation's board has legal control over the Darkcoin digital currency and can do what they want with a simple majority vote and darkcoin holders have no legal recourse in such an event?

@MyFarm

OK, let me try this with a different example like Bitcoin so we don't get confused. As you very well observed coins are not shares in a business but property.  When you buy 20 BTC you are not buying 20 shares of Bitcoin and have no saying in the direction the project is taking your coins are just property that you acquired and you now own, just like if you would buy 20 Macbooks per my previous example.

Trademark rights can only be owned by an entity either a natural entity (a person) or corporate entity like a Foundation or a corporation. In the case of coins the tradermark right initially resides with the developer of the coin as they came up with the original idea, but many developers neglect this step to formally register their trademark.  So the first business that can prove use of the name in a commercial environment and files a trademark application may get it.  The best example is, Do you know who owns the Bitcoin trademark not everyone that owns Bitcoin  as you are trying to imply, it is owned by MtGox: The company overseeing bankruptcy proceedings for Mt. Gox hopes to raise millions by selling the 'Bitcoin' trademark.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/10859773/Bitcoin-trademark-up-for-sale-at-580000.html

In this particular case the only person that could contest that trademark was probably Satoshi Nakamoto, but you only have a window of time to do that and I am sure that has expired.

I hope this makes it clear that when a developer launches a coin and assigns it a name, he owns the trademark if he is smart enough to register it. The miners that start mining the blockchain are awarded coins for their services and those coins are not shares, thus they get no special voting rights from them.  Only when the developer formally registers the trademark does he really own it, as you can see in Bitcoin that is very much not the case, as Satoshi Nakamoto went missing and did not contest in on time.

But I am absolutely positive that if you bought 51% of all Bitcoins in existence you would have 0 IP rights and MtGox would still own the Bitcoin trademark.

About the DASH process in particular, the process is absolutely being handled by Intellectual Property Lawyers in the United States.  I hope this is helpful.

I understand your argument and it is a decent one.  However, the Dashcoin developer did not file a trademark.  He then released a decentralized asset into the marketplace.  I would argue that Darkcoin buying the Dashcoin repo is NOT buying Dashcoin because it is a decentralized asset and, "Owned by the community" and that buying the repo does not provide trademark registration rights as that would suddenly allow you to provide a cease and desist to the decentralized asset which makes no sense.  The SEC stated, "Whether a virtual currency is a security under the federal securities laws, and therefore subject to our regulation, is dependent on the particular facts and circumstances at issue. Regardless of whether an underlying virtual currency is itself a security, interests issued by entities owning virtual currencies or providing returns based on assets such as virtual currencies likely would be securities and therefore subject to our regulation."

My argument is this is a very unique situation with no legal precedent and that Darkcoin is potentially opening itself up to legal liability.

As for the process being handled IP lawyers, please provide the firm's name so they can be contacted.

MyFarm - go speak to a lawyer, you are all over the map mate.

[MyFarm]

Here is the post I was referring too.

It's sad to see the coin being renamed to a brand that already has patents filed on it... moreover that is also an existing coin that's been here a while.

Those are some of the reasons why I decided to empty my DRK stash and move on. It's kind of a slap in the face for the early DRK people.

Anybody would happen to know the filing number of the challenge application? Would be interesting to see.

We moved forward under the advice of trademark attorneys.  Until the legal process is complete it's unlikely much information will be released.  Our decisions are aligned with the community as we are simply taking the necessary steps towards making this the most widely accepted anonymous and instant cryptocurrency. 

Also here he talking about how he and another lawyer set up the Foundation.

Does that mean Edward the pro poker player is the no.1 richest wallet He liked to play with numbers, didn't he?

Ex-poker pro.  I rarely play poker these days (maybe once in the last 4 months) mostly because I've been heavily involved in cryptocurrencies for a couple years now.  Prior to crypto I'd help start a social gaming company, so it's actually been quite a number of years since I considered myself a poker pro.

I don't have the richest Darkcoin wallet, however I did introduce my business partner to Darkcoin (I haven't checked recently but he may have the richest Darkcoin wallet).

I do however remain in contact with a lot of top pros in the poker community as many of the them have recently begun to take an interest in cryptocurrencies.  There are a lot of crypto gambling sites on the horizon that I know of, and when I have the opportunity I always mention Darkcoin to them.      

Fwiw, I was pretty instrumental in bringing Darkcoin to Bitfinex and can say without my involvement that would not have happened when it did, if at all.  Eventually I realized there was a need to organize things and help build the darkcoin ecosystem and I approached Evan with the idea of starting up a foundation.  We've seen a lot of mistakes made in other foundations (i.e. Bitcoin Foundation) and it was obvious if we were to move foward with this it should be done right.  As such, I brought Harold Boo (an incredibly capable attorney I've known and worked with for years) to the table to help set up the foundation as he has been involved in crypto for about a year and had previous experience structuring non-profits.  Evan's first request was that we have a strong community member involved and Chris Rimoldi was proposed.  Things kind of went from there.

Anyway, I haven't chimed in for a bit and thought I'd give a few details about how things got started with the foundation.  There is still a lot of work ahead of us with it.

-ed

I think the legal side of this is covered.

Plus, Evan didn't buy the project he only bought the github and is using it in trademark case against an different company.  So basically you saying that all dashcoin holders have a legal claim to a github account which was registered to an individual person... BS.

There is no legal precedent for decentralized assets.  All I have to do is bribe developers, take over the github, and then I can file a trademark and send a cease and desist to coin holders, exchanges, etc in essence destroying the decentralized asset?  I don't think so.  If that is upheld in court, Darkcoin could start bribing developers for say 50k and destroy multi-million dollar assets.  There's no way any sane court would uphold that.

[BlockaFett]

Here is the post I was referring too.

It's sad to see the coin being renamed to a brand that already has patents filed on it... moreover that is also an existing coin that's been here a while.

Those are some of the reasons why I decided to empty my DRK stash and move on. It's kind of a slap in the face for the early DRK people.

Anybody would happen to know the filing number of the challenge application? Would be interesting to see.

We moved forward under the advice of trademark attorneys.  Until the legal process is complete it's unlikely much information will be released.  Our decisions are aligned with the community as we are simply taking the necessary steps towards making this the most widely accepted anonymous and instant cryptocurrency.  

Also here he talking about how he and another lawyer set up the Foundation.

Does that mean Edward the pro poker player is the no.1 richest wallet He liked to play with numbers, didn't he?

Ex-poker pro.  I rarely play poker these days (maybe once in the last 4 months) mostly because I've been heavily involved in cryptocurrencies for a couple years now.  Prior to crypto I'd help start a social gaming company, so it's actually been quite a number of years since I considered myself a poker pro.

I don't have the richest Darkcoin wallet, however I did introduce my business partner to Darkcoin (I haven't checked recently but he may have the richest Darkcoin wallet).

I do however remain in contact with a lot of top pros in the poker community as many of the them have recently begun to take an interest in cryptocurrencies.  There are a lot of crypto gambling sites on the horizon that I know of, and when I have the opportunity I always mention Darkcoin to them.      

Fwiw, I was pretty instrumental in bringing Darkcoin to Bitfinex and can say without my involvement that would not have happened when it did, if at all.  Eventually I realized there was a need to organize things and help build the darkcoin ecosystem and I approached Evan with the idea of starting up a foundation.  We've seen a lot of mistakes made in other foundations (i.e. Bitcoin Foundation) and it was obvious if we were to move foward with this it should be done right.  As such, I brought Harold Boo (an incredibly capable attorney I've known and worked with for years) to the table to help set up the foundation as he has been involved in crypto for about a year and had previous experience structuring non-profits.  Evan's first request was that we have a strong community member involved and Chris Rimoldi was proposed.  Things kind of went from there.

Anyway, I haven't chimed in for a bit and thought I'd give a few details about how things got started with the foundation.  There is still a lot of work ahead of us with it.

-ed

I think the legal side of this is covered.

Plus, Evan didn't buy the project he only bought the github and is using it in trademark case against an different company.  So basically you saying that all dashcoin holders have a legal claim to a github account which was registered to an individual person... BS.

There is no legal precedent for decentralized assets.  All I have to do is bribe developers, take over the github, and then I can file a trademark and send a cease and desist to coin holders, exchanges, etc in essence destroying the decentralized asset?  I don't think so.  If that is upheld in court, Darkcoin could start bribing developers for say 50k and destroy multi-million dollar assets.  There's no way any sane court would uphold that.

MyFarm you don't know even basics of what you talking about and this is giving me a headache. For are start there is implied trademark and registered trademark, go do some basic reading before shooting off here :/

EDIT: amateur lawyers think all the law can be worked out logically - it can't, even the terms you are using are generic and have many interpretations / laws covering them. that's why there are lawyers and why they charge a lot of $.

[MyFarm]

@MyFarm

OK, let me try this with a different example like Bitcoin so we don't get confused.

 Sorry. Dead end at the first full stop.  

 There has been nothing more hilarious to me than someone buy all liquidity in the market and make claims they own a coin... It would be like saying that if you own all dollars, you own the dollar.

 Nope, the FED owns the dollar, you just became the biggest ower. In crypto land, different story, same result.

 MyFarm, just wow man... That is just the most idiotic thing on earth.

 If I buy all banans in the world, I dont own all the banana-trees in the world.
 You just became the biggest crypto-monkey I know of. Wasn't SPR bad enough for 'ya?

Almost as idiotic as buying the repo and claiming you own one of the most important assets of a decentralized asset: its name.  BRB I'm going to go bribe the Monero dev for $100,000 then send cease and desists to every Monero holder and exchange and destroy the coin.  You have to defend your trademark, ya know?

[toknormal]

w.t.f. legal stuff...

MyFarm -

First of all, the only way in which anyone can categorically "own" a name is by trademarking it. Have a look at how many companies are called "A1 Plumbing"..https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl#q=a1+plumbing

Trademark infringement is fairly academic to contest - you've either got a registered trademark in the same category as that in which a competitor is actively trading or you haven't. (And that means actually having it registered with the trademarking authorities which is a lengthy process).

I dare say there are edge cases, for example if another airline called "Delta" started up in the US and the original 'Delta' had never trademarked their name then there would be all kinds of regular practical complications that would simply make it too difficult for the newcomer to trade. For example, they'd have to Incorporate their name with the authorities and that would be impossible because the name was already taken.

I can tell you right now though that as far as companies house in the UK is concerned (who register 'Limited Liability Companies') they would have no problem at all with one company called "Dash" and another called "Dashcoin". They would categorically be seen as distinctly registrable entities.

For example, here's a list of all the registered companies in the UK with one thing or another to do with a certain "rise from the ashes" bird.....(hey - and that's only A to D, I won't bore you with the next 8 pages   )





I think darkcoin team have been pretty polite even offering to buy the other dev out. They had no need in my opinion. They're just being tidy about it.

The other thing is the extent to which cryptocurrencies are 'legal entities' in the first place. The fact is they are not - it's a bit like me and everyone else in the country calling my local highway "toknormal way". No one can stop me from doing that or sue me. The problem comes if I want to institutionalise that name in some kind of official register. Then I need to check there are no 'toknormal ways" that are already on the books.

This speaks to the whole essence of cryptocurrencies and why they're such a threat to the fiat banking system - nobody owns them because they are decentralised. When I say "own" I mean in a legal sense. Just because you happen to have access to a private key doesn't mean you "own" the coins at that address because there is no manifestation in law of cryptocurrency ownership (due to the fact there are no counterparties involved) - you'd need to buy from an ETF if you want that kind of "ownership" and even then you would'nt have any executive rights over the currency other than to spend it because currencies are not "companies".

The bottom line here I'd say is "are there any other cryptos called 'Dash' " and using the DASH ticker.

No ? Right lets get on with it then  

[Minotaur26]

So what you're saying is Evan rage quits and sells the password to the Darkcoin repo for $10.00 to some guy in Canada, that's it?  That new dev can do whatever he wants with the Darkcoin name and brand?  There is no legal recourse for the Darkcoin owners?  Heh.  I think not...

There is an official dev team and official foundation and official board. If they all agree to sell then I guess then, "that's it".

Are you saying that the Darkcoin foundation's board has legal control over the Darkcoin digital currency and can do what they want with a simple majority vote and darkcoin holders have no legal recourse in such an event?

@MyFarm

OK, let me try this with a different example like Bitcoin so we don't get confused. As you very well observed coins are not shares in a business but property.  When you buy 20 BTC you are not buying 20 shares of Bitcoin and have no saying in the direction the project is taking your coins are just property that you acquired and you now own, just like if you would buy 20 Macbooks per my previous example.

Trademark rights can only be owned by an entity either a natural entity (a person) or corporate entity like a Foundation or a corporation. In the case of coins the tradermark right initially resides with the developer of the coin as they came up with the original idea, but many developers neglect this step to formally register their trademark.  So the first business that can prove use of the name in a commercial environment and files a trademark application may get it.  The best example is, Do you know who owns the Bitcoin trademark not everyone that owns Bitcoin  as you are trying to imply, it is owned by MtGox: The company overseeing bankruptcy proceedings for Mt. Gox hopes to raise millions by selling the 'Bitcoin' trademark.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/10859773/Bitcoin-trademark-up-for-sale-at-580000.html

In this particular case the only person that could contest that trademark was probably Satoshi Nakamoto, but you only have a window of time to do that and I am sure that has expired.

I hope this makes it clear that when a developer launches a coin and assigns it a name, he owns the trademark if he is smart enough to register it. The miners that start mining the blockchain are awarded coins for their services and those coins are not shares, thus they get no special voting rights from them.  Only when the developer formally registers the trademark does he really own it, as you can see in Bitcoin that is very much not the case, as Satoshi Nakamoto went missing and did not contest in on time.

But I am absolutely positive that if you bought 51% of all Bitcoins in existence you would have 0 IP rights and MtGox would still own the Bitcoin trademark.

About the DASH process in particular, the process is absolutely being handled by Intellectual Property Lawyers in the United States.  I hope this is helpful.

I understand your argument and it is a decent one.  However, the Dashcoin developer did not file a trademark.  He then released a decentralized asset into the marketplace.  I would argue that Darkcoin buying the Dashcoin repo is NOT buying Dashcoin because it is a decentralized asset and, "Owned by the community" and that buying the repo does not provide trademark registration rights as that would suddenly allow you to provide a cease and desist to the decentralized asset which makes no sense.  The SEC stated, "Whether a virtual currency is a security under the federal securities laws, and therefore subject to our regulation, is dependent on the particular facts and circumstances at issue. Regardless of whether an underlying virtual currency is itself a security, interests issued by entities owning virtual currencies or providing returns based on assets such as virtual currencies likely would be securities and therefore subject to our regulation."

My argument is this is a very unique situation with no legal precedent and that Darkcoin is potentially opening itself up to legal liability.

As for the process being handled IP lawyers, please provide the firm's name so they can be contacted.

I tried my best to explain this to you, as you can see there is a precedent with Bitcoin, where Bitcoiners dont own any trademarks and not even the foundation does. Ironically it is owned by one of the companies that hurt it the most, but so is the law.  I wont address this subject anymore as I dont see there is anything else to add.

[MyFarm]

Here is the post I was referring too.

It's sad to see the coin being renamed to a brand that already has patents filed on it... moreover that is also an existing coin that's been here a while.

Those are some of the reasons why I decided to empty my DRK stash and move on. It's kind of a slap in the face for the early DRK people.

Anybody would happen to know the filing number of the challenge application? Would be interesting to see.

We moved forward under the advice of trademark attorneys.  Until the legal process is complete it's unlikely much information will be released.  Our decisions are aligned with the community as we are simply taking the necessary steps towards making this the most widely accepted anonymous and instant cryptocurrency.  

Also here he talking about how he and another lawyer set up the Foundation.

Does that mean Edward the pro poker player is the no.1 richest wallet He liked to play with numbers, didn't he?

Ex-poker pro.  I rarely play poker these days (maybe once in the last 4 months) mostly because I've been heavily involved in cryptocurrencies for a couple years now.  Prior to crypto I'd help start a social gaming company, so it's actually been quite a number of years since I considered myself a poker pro.

I don't have the richest Darkcoin wallet, however I did introduce my business partner to Darkcoin (I haven't checked recently but he may have the richest Darkcoin wallet).

I do however remain in contact with a lot of top pros in the poker community as many of the them have recently begun to take an interest in cryptocurrencies.  There are a lot of crypto gambling sites on the horizon that I know of, and when I have the opportunity I always mention Darkcoin to them.      

Fwiw, I was pretty instrumental in bringing Darkcoin to Bitfinex and can say without my involvement that would not have happened when it did, if at all.  Eventually I realized there was a need to organize things and help build the darkcoin ecosystem and I approached Evan with the idea of starting up a foundation.  We've seen a lot of mistakes made in other foundations (i.e. Bitcoin Foundation) and it was obvious if we were to move foward with this it should be done right.  As such, I brought Harold Boo (an incredibly capable attorney I've known and worked with for years) to the table to help set up the foundation as he has been involved in crypto for about a year and had previous experience structuring non-profits.  Evan's first request was that we have a strong community member involved and Chris Rimoldi was proposed.  Things kind of went from there.

Anyway, I haven't chimed in for a bit and thought I'd give a few details about how things got started with the foundation.  There is still a lot of work ahead of us with it.

-ed

I think the legal side of this is covered.

Plus, Evan didn't buy the project he only bought the github and is using it in trademark case against an different company.  So basically you saying that all dashcoin holders have a legal claim to a github account which was registered to an individual person... BS.

There is no legal precedent for decentralized assets.  All I have to do is bribe developers, take over the github, and then I can file a trademark and send a cease and desist to coin holders, exchanges, etc in essence destroying the decentralized asset?  I don't think so.  If that is upheld in court, Darkcoin could start bribing developers for say 50k and destroy multi-million dollar assets.  There's no way any sane court would uphold that.

MyFarm you don't know even basics of what you talking about and this is giving me a headache. For are start there is implied trademark and registered trademark, go do some basic reading before shooting off here :/

EDIT: amateur lawyers think all the law can be worked out logically - it can't, even the terms you are using are generic and have many interpretations / laws covering them. that's why there are lawyers and why they charge a lot of $.

By all means, educate me.  Please cite case law with decentralized assets to backup your case.

[megges]

Here is the post I was referring too.

It's sad to see the coin being renamed to a brand that already has patents filed on it... moreover that is also an existing coin that's been here a while.

Those are some of the reasons why I decided to empty my DRK stash and move on. It's kind of a slap in the face for the early DRK people.

Anybody would happen to know the filing number of the challenge application? Would be interesting to see.

We moved forward under the advice of trademark attorneys.  Until the legal process is complete it's unlikely much information will be released.  Our decisions are aligned with the community as we are simply taking the necessary steps towards making this the most widely accepted anonymous and instant cryptocurrency. 

Also here he talking about how he and another lawyer set up the Foundation.

Does that mean Edward the pro poker player is the no.1 richest wallet He liked to play with numbers, didn't he?

Ex-poker pro.  I rarely play poker these days (maybe once in the last 4 months) mostly because I've been heavily involved in cryptocurrencies for a couple years now.  Prior to crypto I'd help start a social gaming company, so it's actually been quite a number of years since I considered myself a poker pro.

I don't have the richest Darkcoin wallet, however I did introduce my business partner to Darkcoin (I haven't checked recently but he may have the richest Darkcoin wallet).

I do however remain in contact with a lot of top pros in the poker community as many of the them have recently begun to take an interest in cryptocurrencies.  There are a lot of crypto gambling sites on the horizon that I know of, and when I have the opportunity I always mention Darkcoin to them.      

Fwiw, I was pretty instrumental in bringing Darkcoin to Bitfinex and can say without my involvement that would not have happened when it did, if at all.  Eventually I realized there was a need to organize things and help build the darkcoin ecosystem and I approached Evan with the idea of starting up a foundation.  We've seen a lot of mistakes made in other foundations (i.e. Bitcoin Foundation) and it was obvious if we were to move foward with this it should be done right.  As such, I brought Harold Boo (an incredibly capable attorney I've known and worked with for years) to the table to help set up the foundation as he has been involved in crypto for about a year and had previous experience structuring non-profits.  Evan's first request was that we have a strong community member involved and Chris Rimoldi was proposed.  Things kind of went from there.

Anyway, I haven't chimed in for a bit and thought I'd give a few details about how things got started with the foundation.  There is still a lot of work ahead of us with it.

-ed

I think the legal side of this is covered.

Plus, Evan didn't buy the project he only bought the github and is using it in trademark case against an different company.  So basically you saying that all dashcoin holders have a legal claim to a github account which was registered to an individual person... BS.

There is no legal precedent for decentralized assets.  All I have to do is bribe developers, take over the github, and then I can file a trademark and send a cease and desist to coin holders, exchanges, etc in essence destroying the decentralized asset?  I don't think so.  If that is upheld in court, Darkcoin could start bribing developers for say 50k and destroy multi-million dollar assets.  There's no way any sane court would uphold that.

I wonder if you want to sue all the altcoin exchanges, too, because they destroy coins after they delist them, investers invested because they were listed, and then they are unlisted, SUE THEM.

Back to topic, i have no clue whats going on in your head, where you get all that information you think you have about anything in the darkcoin / dashcoin deal.
I haven't read any official about Darkcoin is overtaking Dashcoin, Darkcoin is not even taking the name, its DASH not dashcoin.
Where did you get that insane idee anyone will take your dashcoins? Why do you think you cant be traded at exchanges after, where do you get the idea darkcoin has to destroy dashcoin?

The only think i see so far is a owner change of a github. Thats all. So tell me whats the difference for your Dashcoin, does anything changes for you?

[MyFarm]

I think darkcoin team have been pretty polite even offering to buy the other dev out. They had no need in my opinion. They're just being tidy about it.

That's just it.  They weren't, "polite".  They are doing it all wrong.  You don't buy out the dev.  You buy out the community and coin.  To do it any other way it very bad business.

[oblox]

LOL!! Completely absurd.  

The Foundation has already consulted with trademark lawyers over this issue and made an educated decision to proceed, but in spite of all that Darkcoin should pay a dead coin's bagholders $1,000,000... just cause a random guy on the internet said so.

This is nothing more than FUD to get the price to drop back below where you dumped.  Absurdity at its finest.

Agreed... to go from a marketcap of like 7k to 1M is fucking crazy. MyFarm, stop smoking the ganja.

That's the initial offer.  If it has to go to court, I suspect the Dashcoin community will want much more.

You're toxic to the crypto community. No court would even see that as viable. The marketcap was never more than like 50k in the entire existence of the coin:

http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/dashcoin/

Even if it was accessed at a GENEROUS 30% mark up to the all-time high market cap, it still isn't justifiable to a $1M valuation. Get real.

That's on top of the fact that we aren't using "Dashcoin" but rather Dash, have consulted with IP lawyers, etc, etc. Dashcoin could easily continue development if it so desired, even with the same name for all they care.

[GhostPlayer]

Almost as idiotic as buying the repo and claiming you own one of the most important assets of a decentralized asset: its name.  BRB I'm going to go bribe the Monero dev for $100,000 then send cease and desists to every Monero holder and exchange and destroy the coin.  You have to defend your trademark, ya know?

 Precisely you ding-dong!! (been using this expression as of late, and I just love it).
 
 I'll try to keep it simple.

 Trademark requirements - a name - no one uses it? Fine -> there you go!

 Trademarks requirements - a name - some are using it - LOOK, the dude in crypto didn't trademark Dashcoin? pfff... peanuts compared to buying the trademark. We get to prove we had legit use of the name, we can file for Trademark.

 You can buy all Dashcoin you want, you have absolutely zero control over the coin. The gibhub on the other hand... well, that's the real honey pot.

 Genius move.

[megges]

I think darkcoin team have been pretty polite even offering to buy the other dev out. They had no need in my opinion. They're just being tidy about it.

That's just it.  They weren't, "polite".  They are doing it all wrong.  You don't buy out the dev.  You buy out the community and coin.  To do it any other way it very bad business.

What was bought out? A Github account, nothing changed to dashcoin, we are not rebranding darkcoin to dashcoin, we are rebranding to DASH.
What does it has to do with your coins, you still have all, you can still do what you want with them, noone says other, besides you.

[MyFarm]

Here is the post I was referring too.

It's sad to see the coin being renamed to a brand that already has patents filed on it... moreover that is also an existing coin that's been here a while.

Those are some of the reasons why I decided to empty my DRK stash and move on. It's kind of a slap in the face for the early DRK people.

Anybody would happen to know the filing number of the challenge application? Would be interesting to see.

We moved forward under the advice of trademark attorneys.  Until the legal process is complete it's unlikely much information will be released.  Our decisions are aligned with the community as we are simply taking the necessary steps towards making this the most widely accepted anonymous and instant cryptocurrency.  

Also here he talking about how he and another lawyer set up the Foundation.

Does that mean Edward the pro poker player is the no.1 richest wallet He liked to play with numbers, didn't he?

Ex-poker pro.  I rarely play poker these days (maybe once in the last 4 months) mostly because I've been heavily involved in cryptocurrencies for a couple years now.  Prior to crypto I'd help start a social gaming company, so it's actually been quite a number of years since I considered myself a poker pro.

I don't have the richest Darkcoin wallet, however I did introduce my business partner to Darkcoin (I haven't checked recently but he may have the richest Darkcoin wallet).

I do however remain in contact with a lot of top pros in the poker community as many of the them have recently begun to take an interest in cryptocurrencies.  There are a lot of crypto gambling sites on the horizon that I know of, and when I have the opportunity I always mention Darkcoin to them.      

Fwiw, I was pretty instrumental in bringing Darkcoin to Bitfinex and can say without my involvement that would not have happened when it did, if at all.  Eventually I realized there was a need to organize things and help build the darkcoin ecosystem and I approached Evan with the idea of starting up a foundation.  We've seen a lot of mistakes made in other foundations (i.e. Bitcoin Foundation) and it was obvious if we were to move foward with this it should be done right.  As such, I brought Harold Boo (an incredibly capable attorney I've known and worked with for years) to the table to help set up the foundation as he has been involved in crypto for about a year and had previous experience structuring non-profits.  Evan's first request was that we have a strong community member involved and Chris Rimoldi was proposed.  Things kind of went from there.

Anyway, I haven't chimed in for a bit and thought I'd give a few details about how things got started with the foundation.  There is still a lot of work ahead of us with it.

-ed

I think the legal side of this is covered.

Plus, Evan didn't buy the project he only bought the github and is using it in trademark case against an different company.  So basically you saying that all dashcoin holders have a legal claim to a github account which was registered to an individual person... BS.

There is no legal precedent for decentralized assets.  All I have to do is bribe developers, take over the github, and then I can file a trademark and send a cease and desist to coin holders, exchanges, etc in essence destroying the decentralized asset?  I don't think so.  If that is upheld in court, Darkcoin could start bribing developers for say 50k and destroy multi-million dollar assets.  There's no way any sane court would uphold that.

I wonder if you want to sue all the altcoin exchanges, too, because they destroy coins after they delist them, investers invested because they were listed, and then they are unlisted, SUE THEM.

Back to topic, i have no clue whats going on in your head, where you get all that information you think you have about anything in the darkcoin / dashcoin deal.
I haven't read any official about Darkcoin is overtaking Dashcoin, Darkcoin is not even taking the name, its DASH not dashcoin.
Where did you get that insane idee anyone will take your dashcoins? Why do you think you cant be traded at exchanges after, where do you get the idea darkcoin has to destroy dashcoin?

The only think i see so far is a owner change of a github. Thats all. So tell me whats the difference for your Dashcoin, does anything changes for you?

Please see this:

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/official-statement-on-rebranding-to-dash.4297/

Months ago the community organically came up with the name “Dash” as a possible rebranding idea of Darkcoin, I took notice of this and the good deal of support it had in the forums. This lead to us researching the Dash brand for a few months. In the process of doing some investigation, we found that there was another company in the financial space that was filing a trademark. This resulted in me buying another coin “Dashcoin” and challenging their trademark application.

There is some misunderstanding in the community about why there was a quick move to announce this without a previous debate on the forums, as I originally intended. It was simply the result of a mistake on github, where I posted a comment to the Darkcoin github account with the Dashcoin github account login. I felt it was best to show the community where I was with the research, rather than let rampant speculation move through the community about why we were in control of the Dashcoin project. Acquiring Dashcoin is no different than getting a previously existing domain name, the acquired project itself will not continue only the DRK project will move forward under a new name. I had to make some really quick decisions and I apologize for the confusion that resulted from my mistakes.

"Hey Evan, will you sell us the login rights to Darkcoin's github for $25,000,000?"

Sincerely,
The NSA

[BigTimeProducer]

Who cares about Dashcoin? We're "DASH". Not related at all.

[MyFarm]

LOL!! Completely absurd.  

The Foundation has already consulted with trademark lawyers over this issue and made an educated decision to proceed, but in spite of all that Darkcoin should pay a dead coin's bagholders $1,000,000... just cause a random guy on the internet said so.

This is nothing more than FUD to get the price to drop back below where you dumped.  Absurdity at its finest.

Agreed... to go from a marketcap of like 7k to 1M is fucking crazy. MyFarm, stop smoking the ganja.

That's the initial offer.  If it has to go to court, I suspect the Dashcoin community will want much more.

You're toxic to the crypto community. No court would even see that as viable. The marketcap was never more than like 50k in the entire existence of the coin:

http://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/dashcoin/

Even if it was accessed at a 30% mark up to the all-time high market cap, it still isn't justifiable to a $1M valuation. Get real.

That's on top of the fact that we aren't using "Dashcoin" but rather Dash, have consulted with IP lawyers, etc, etc. Dashcoin could easily continue development if it so desired, even with the same name for all they care.

As Evan said here: https://darkcointalk.org/threads/official-statement-on-rebranding-to-dash.4297/ it's like a domain name.  It's amazing how valuable domain names are...