Legal Analysis From Nishith Desai and Associates ?

[thenoblebot]

Hi,

I believe there was a press conference held in Mumbai on the 4th of Jan and some people made a group called BAI (Bitcoin Alliance of India). I also have read that there was a "decent" amount paid to the lawyer firm for having done the legal analysis.

So far I know of 2 reports that have tried to interpret laws in the context of bitcoin.

One being CIS guys who did a wonderful job with a very detailed analysis.

Other being Vijayshanker Na who also published some articles about bitcoin (although I disagree with his some of his views and like the CIS interpretation more .. dont know if they conflict each other).

Now the question is this : What was the technical analysis done by Nitin Desai and Associates (NDA in short) ? Is there a paper available for the same ?

I believe since this was done at the behest of BAI who claim to represent the Indian community of bitcoiners (and I fundamentally disagree with such associations representing a bitcoiners), we at least should have a copy of this legal analysis.

Did I miss it somewhere ? Or can someone point me to the legal analysis done by NDA ?

Cause it would seem a shame that even after paying a certain "decent" amount they just did a press conference and even failed to produce a paper on the subject.

TLDR : A paper on the subject from NDA is required about the legal analysis they did. Or were they just paid for the conference ?

[Benson Samuel]

Hi,

I believe there was a press conference held in Mumbai on the 4th of Jan and some people made a group called BAI (Bitcoin Alliance of India). I also have read that there was a "decent" amount paid to the lawyer firm for having done the legal analysis.

So far I know of 2 reports that have tried to interpret laws in the context of bitcoin.

One being CIS guys who did a wonderful job with a very detailed analysis.

Other being Vijayshanker Na who also published some articles about bitcoin (although I disagree with his some of his views and like the CIS interpretation more .. dont know if they conflict each other).

Now the question is this : What was the technical analysis done by Nitin Desai and Associates (NDA in short) ? Is there a paper available for the same ?

I believe since this was done at the behest of BAI who claim to represent the Indian community of bitcoiners (and I fundamentally disagree with such associations representing a bitcoiners), we at least should have a copy of this legal analysis.

Did I miss it somewhere ? Or can someone point me to the legal analysis done by NDA ?

Cause it would seem a shame that even after paying a certain "decent" amount they just did a press conference and even failed to produce a paper on the subject.

TLDR : A paper on the subject from NDA is required about the legal analysis they did. Or were they just paid for the conference ?

If the amount was paid by the people who requested NDA, there would be no reason to release information to the Public domain.

It would need to be public domain only if the public had paid for it or with the intention of Open Sourcing the document.

[thenoblebot]

If the amount was paid by the people who requested NDA, there would be no reason to release information to the Public domain.

So its not in the public domain is it ? Cause it does seem odd that a firm who represent the community did not put up even an analysis .... I at least hope they did an analysis !! Or else I would feel bad for the people who paid such an amount .. seems like they got ripped off for just a "conference". Cause all I know from it was "bitcoin is not illegal per se". Nothing else about the technicalities and interpretation which they (may have) thought through. Cause every bitcoiner in the country knew that "bitcoins are not illegal per se" from the very beginning. It was almost a given.

PS: Not taking sides here but I am genuinely confused about the transparency of such a situation. If they do claim to represent us then at least should show us they way (irrespective of the fact that we disagree with such an association but at least to substantiate their claim of representing us with honest intentions .. it should have been done earlier).

[BTCIndia]

If the amount was paid by the people who requested NDA, there would be no reason to release information to the Public domain.

So its not in the public domain is it ? Cause it does seem odd that a firm who represent the community did not put up even an analysis .... I at least hope they did an analysis !! Or else I would feel bad for the people who paid such an amount .. seems like they got ripped off for just a "conference". Cause all I know from it was "bitcoin is not illegal per se". Nothing else about the technicalities and interpretation which they (may have) thought through. Cause every bitcoiner in the country knew that "bitcoins are not illegal per se" from the very beginning. It was almost a given.

PS: Not taking sides here but I am genuinely confused about the transparency of such a situation. If they do claim to represent us then at least should show us they way (irrespective of the fact that we disagree with such an association but at least to substantiate their claim of representing us with honest intentions .. it should have been done earlier).

If I was BAI then I'd prefer not to get provoked by stimulating conversation directed to extract information for free. There are only handful of people for whom this information is very important and that includes me. And, with help of 'public' label.. everyone will try get hold on analysis. Just random thoughts!

[dashingriddler]

The amount being paid was not for the conference but for the analysis, presentation to rbi and lobbying process.
Press conference just came in between because of rbi circular and raids.

BAI will probably have the final paper or presentation in the last week of feb and that is when presentation to rbi might take place. I believe BAI will be very happy to provide it to public - just need to check with NDA if they have anything to say about this.

[BTCIndia]

The amount being paid was not for the conference but for the analysis, presentation to rbi and lobbying process.
Press conference just came in between because of rbi circular and raids.

BAI will probably have the final paper or presentation in the last week of feb and that is when presentation to rbi might take place. I believe BAI will be very happy to provide it to public - just need to check with NDA if they have anything to say about this.

Feb end? I'd suggest 30th Feb. Shagun bhi achha hai.

[dashingriddler]

Haha.

Initial idea was to do it in last week of jan but could not be done and got postponed. Reason of press conference is not something i can totally agree on though. May be there was more analysis to make than planned.

[Benson Samuel]

If the amount was paid by the people who requested NDA, there would be no reason to release information to the Public domain.

So its not in the public domain is it ? Cause it does seem odd that a firm who represent the community did not put up even an analysis .... I at least hope they did an analysis !! Or else I would feel bad for the people who paid such an amount .. seems like they got ripped off for just a "conference". Cause all I know from it was "bitcoin is not illegal per se". Nothing else about the technicalities and interpretation which they (may have) thought through. Cause every bitcoiner in the country knew that "bitcoins are not illegal per se" from the very beginning. It was almost a given.

PS: Not taking sides here but I am genuinely confused about the transparency of such a situation. If they do claim to represent us then at least should show us they way (irrespective of the fact that we disagree with such an association but at least to substantiate their claim of representing us with honest intentions .. it should have been done earlier).

They did not represent the community. They worked on a paid movement.

Even the letter sent by Chaitanya Associates is a paid venture by Venugopal.
Difference being that Venugopal has been absolutely open to share the RBI notice with press and others.

This cannot be questioned as it is money from a person or organization. The person or organization has a right to get an advantage by paying money to tax lawyers, etc.

Transparency will take a beating though, if money was used from shares or public contributions from parties who did not request the announcement 'per se'.

[BTCIndia]

Haha.

Initial idea was to do it in last week of jan but could not be done and got postponed. Reason of press conference is not something i can totally agree on though. May be there was more analysis to make than planned.

Work like a dog to make sure presentation is on time. Community is counting on bai. Please make sure, this time it doesn't gets postponed.

[BTCIndia]

If the amount was paid by the people who requested NDA, there would be no reason to release information to the Public domain.

So its not in the public domain is it ? Cause it does seem odd that a firm who represent the community did not put up even an analysis .... I at least hope they did an analysis !! Or else I would feel bad for the people who paid such an amount .. seems like they got ripped off for just a "conference". Cause all I know from it was "bitcoin is not illegal per se". Nothing else about the technicalities and interpretation which they (may have) thought through. Cause every bitcoiner in the country knew that "bitcoins are not illegal per se" from the very beginning. It was almost a given.

PS: Not taking sides here but I am genuinely confused about the transparency of such a situation. If they do claim to represent us then at least should show us they way (irrespective of the fact that we disagree with such an association but at least to substantiate their claim of representing us with honest intentions .. it should have been done earlier).

They did not represent the community. They worked on a paid movement.

Even the letter sent by Chaitanya Associates is a paid venture by Venugopal.
Difference being that Venugopal has been absolutely open to share the RBI notice with press and others.

This cannot be questioned as it is money from a person or organization. The person or organization has a right to get an advantage by paying money to tax lawyers, etc.

Transparency will take a beating though, if money was used from shares or public contributions from parties who did not request the announcement 'per se'.

If I'm not mistaken then, you informed us, letter given to RBI has grace period till 7th Feb which means its was sent much earlier and now when grace period is near then only they decided to go public with information. And what public? They only send, DNA or any other media with information not us. Such kind of act from Venugopal is acceptable, but we thought you belong to our community. And here you'r just being a mediator filtering information.

[dashingriddler]

Haha.

Initial idea was to do it in last week of jan but could not be done and got postponed. Reason of press conference is not something i can totally agree on though. May be there was more analysis to make than planned.

Work like a dog to make sure presentation is on time. Community is counting on bai. Please make sure, this time it doesn't gets postponed.

Practically I am not really working for the presentation myself. I am only answering some technical questions from NDA when they ask. ND had to visit US for 10 days - so the plan was to complete it before he leaves on 25th jan but did not happen. After he is back in first week of feb - he will be putting everything back in place and get the analysis completed. Most probably it wont get postponed this time.

[Benson Samuel]

If the amount was paid by the people who requested NDA, there would be no reason to release information to the Public domain.

So its not in the public domain is it ? Cause it does seem odd that a firm who represent the community did not put up even an analysis .... I at least hope they did an analysis !! Or else I would feel bad for the people who paid such an amount .. seems like they got ripped off for just a "conference". Cause all I know from it was "bitcoin is not illegal per se". Nothing else about the technicalities and interpretation which they (may have) thought through. Cause every bitcoiner in the country knew that "bitcoins are not illegal per se" from the very beginning. It was almost a given.

PS: Not taking sides here but I am genuinely confused about the transparency of such a situation. If they do claim to represent us then at least should show us they way (irrespective of the fact that we disagree with such an association but at least to substantiate their claim of representing us with honest intentions .. it should have been done earlier).

They did not represent the community. They worked on a paid movement.

Even the letter sent by Chaitanya Associates is a paid venture by Venugopal.
Difference being that Venugopal has been absolutely open to share the RBI notice with press and others.

This cannot be questioned as it is money from a person or organization. The person or organization has a right to get an advantage by paying money to tax lawyers, etc.

Transparency will take a beating though, if money was used from shares or public contributions from parties who did not request the announcement 'per se'.

If I'm not mistaken then, you informed us, letter given to RBI has grace period till 7th Feb which means its was sent much earlier and now when grace period is near then only they decided to go public with information. And what public? They only send, DNA or any other media with information not us. Such kind of act from Venugopal is acceptable, but we thought you belong to our community. And here you'r just being a mediator filtering information.

A lot of members who requested the notice have got a copy of it, along with other news media outlets.
Besides, as explained earlier, Venugopal has paid to get this in action and has all rights to the information that he holds. He has released it and there are several members here who hold a copy of it.

As long as the DNA news reached you, it is public information. There is also a bitterco.in post and some others will jump in and write about it over the next few days.

[dashingriddler]

If the amount was paid by the people who requested NDA, there would be no reason to release information to the Public domain.

So its not in the public domain is it ? Cause it does seem odd that a firm who represent the community did not put up even an analysis .... I at least hope they did an analysis !! Or else I would feel bad for the people who paid such an amount .. seems like they got ripped off for just a "conference". Cause all I know from it was "bitcoin is not illegal per se". Nothing else about the technicalities and interpretation which they (may have) thought through. Cause every bitcoiner in the country knew that "bitcoins are not illegal per se" from the very beginning. It was almost a given.

PS: Not taking sides here but I am genuinely confused about the transparency of such a situation. If they do claim to represent us then at least should show us they way (irrespective of the fact that we disagree with such an association but at least to substantiate their claim of representing us with honest intentions .. it should have been done earlier).

They did not represent the community. They worked on a paid movement.

Even the letter sent by Chaitanya Associates is a paid venture by Venugopal.
Difference being that Venugopal has been absolutely open to share the RBI notice with press and others.

This cannot be questioned as it is money from a person or organization. The person or organization has a right to get an advantage by paying money to tax lawyers, etc.

Transparency will take a beating though, if money was used from shares or public contributions from parties who did not request the announcement 'per se'.

If I'm not mistaken then, you informed us, letter given to RBI has grace period till 7th Feb which means its was sent much earlier and now when grace period is near then only they decided to go public with information. And what public? They only send, DNA or any other media with information not us. Such kind of act from Venugopal is acceptable, but we thought you belong to our community. And here you'r just being a mediator filtering information.

Yeah letter has a date of 7th of Jan.
I think it is the wish of Venugopal to send a copy to Benson and still ask him not to talk about it nor to share it till he instructs. So nothing wrong from both of them from my point of view even though i as well felt it would have been better to know about it sooner.

[BTCIndia]

A lot of members who requested the notice have got a copy of it..

Can you name few among 'lot of member' here? I'll ask them for copy personally until one provides me. Or information about 'lot of member' is also classified? I can't wait to read so called 'slap' which barely makes difference to movement where everything depends on legal procedure. We all know how pathetic legal proceeding are in India. Don't we?

[dashingriddler]

I have got a copy of it from Benson. In that email, i can see some more people emails to whom it has reached as well.

[Benson Samuel]

If the amount was paid by the people who requested NDA, there would be no reason to release information to the Public domain.

So its not in the public domain is it ? Cause it does seem odd that a firm who represent the community did not put up even an analysis .... I at least hope they did an analysis !! Or else I would feel bad for the people who paid such an amount .. seems like they got ripped off for just a "conference". Cause all I know from it was "bitcoin is not illegal per se". Nothing else about the technicalities and interpretation which they (may have) thought through. Cause every bitcoiner in the country knew that "bitcoins are not illegal per se" from the very beginning. It was almost a given.

PS: Not taking sides here but I am genuinely confused about the transparency of such a situation. If they do claim to represent us then at least should show us they way (irrespective of the fact that we disagree with such an association but at least to substantiate their claim of representing us with honest intentions .. it should have been done earlier).

They did not represent the community. They worked on a paid movement.

Even the letter sent by Chaitanya Associates is a paid venture by Venugopal.
Difference being that Venugopal has been absolutely open to share the RBI notice with press and others.

This cannot be questioned as it is money from a person or organization. The person or organization has a right to get an advantage by paying money to tax lawyers, etc.

Transparency will take a beating though, if money was used from shares or public contributions from parties who did not request the announcement 'per se'.

If I'm not mistaken then, you informed us, letter given to RBI has grace period till 7th Feb which means its was sent much earlier and now when grace period is near then only they decided to go public with information. And what public? They only send, DNA or any other media with information not us. Such kind of act from Venugopal is acceptable, but we thought you belong to our community. And here you'r just being a mediator filtering information.

Yeah letter has a date of 7th of Jan.
I think it is the wish of Venugopal to send a copy to Benson and still ask him not to talk about it nor to share it till he instructs. So nothing wrong from both of them from my point of view even though i as well felt it would have been better to know about it sooner.

I was not in the loop of this development until late last week.
Venugopal coordinated with Naavi to get this moving.

The document was shared with the press and myself at the same time. The advice was to wait for mainstream media to pick it up before sharing with individuals and as I was not the one to make the decision, I stood by the person taking the initiative.

[dashingriddler]

Say it was not released to people.
Do we as Indians have the ability to enforce RTI or something else and get a copy of the notice from govt because it is being filed against RBI which is a government body?

[Benson Samuel]

A lot of members who requested the notice have got a copy of it..

Can you name few among 'lot of member' here? I'll ask them for copy personally until one provides me. Or information about 'lot of member' is also classified? I can't wait to read so called 'slap' which barely makes difference to movement where everything depends on legal procedure. We all know how pathetic legal proceeding are in India. Don't we?

No, I will not name anyone.
That is inconsequential to you.

[BTCIndia]

I have got a copy of it from Benson. In that email, i can see some more people emails to whom it has reached as well.

Your email is name@famousmail.com? Answer would do rest of things.

[Benson Samuel]

I have got a copy of it from Benson. In that email, i can see some more people emails to whom it has reached as well.

Your email is name@famousmail.com? Answer would do rest of things.

He asked for a copy.