Gigamining / Teramining

[jamesg]

The only thing I'm unsure about is how to notorize an email response.

I can send that question to your lawyer if I must.

Just curious, do you have to pay the legal fees if I ask questions to them?

Please direct your question to the email listed in the request.

I have paid and will continue to pay all legal fees in this matter.

[conspirosphere.tk]

Request for claims

http://gigamining.com/claims.html

Are you joking? Can your lawyer quote any actually existing law that would oblige you to ask all that? Maybe he understood that you want to run a bank, or he just enjoys tequila.
Why don't you just move to another exchange?

edit: WTF is that:

An affidavit attesting to the beneficial assignment of the agreement, which has been notarized (US residents/corporations) or local equivalent bearing the apostille of the competent jurisdiction. Copies of an acceptable affidavit can be obtained upon request from the law offices.

Just say that you want to keep all the coins

[lonelyminer (Peter Šurda)]

This is an unpleasant surprise. Not that I want to hide my identity or something, I am publicly known, but there are costs associated with notarisation and apostilles (and ridiculously I have to pay for a translator too, because although my English is probably better than the translator's, I am not a government certified translator and I don't live in an English speaking country at the moment). Are you going to pay for them too, James?

In James' defence though, the lawyers probably decided to play it safe. They are not required to obtain any of this information, but if James gets into trouble with law regarding gigamining, they can document that he made sure everything is ok.

As a side note, this bullshit certification racket should be replaced with cryptography too.

[MPOE-PR]

I'm not sure how to react on this without being rude, so I will postpone my reaction until I calm down.

The important thing to bear in mind here is that gigavps is actually going into his own pocket to pay what on first glance looks like massive legal fees to try and get this entire mess glbse made out of BTC finance on some sort of a semblance of a healthy footing.

Directing your frustration at him would be pretty much the equivalent of the stray dog that after years of living in the streets is now biting the vet.

[Audriux9]

I'm not sure how to react on this without being rude, so I will postpone my reaction until I calm down.

Same here. I don't understand where all of this is going to. I believe a part of the shareholders will not even make a claim, given the cost of fulfilling all the legal stuff like apostilles and benefit of having those couple of shares. In addition, taking into account that not a full list of shareholders are given to Gigavps (due to various reasons) that will be a decent cut left for unclaimed obligations for Gigavps, probably to cover costs of his lawyer.

Few questions to James:

 What is the future of Gigamining? Starting claim process should indicate that you already have plans for the future.
1. Are going to pay the same dividends every week? Or are you going to buy back the shares? If so what would be the buyback price?
2. If You continue mining operation, are you considering to use any third party trading platform to establish market of Gigamining shares?
3. What about Teramining? (You can't just simply skip this part of so called "assignable agreement")

[jamesg]

1. Are going to pay the same dividends every week? Or are you going to buy back the shares? If so what would be the buyback price?

You can see all past and future dividends at http://gigamining.com. There have not been any decisions made about buybacks nor does the current contract enable this since the price to quote is from GLBSE.

2. If You continue mining operation, are you considering to use any third party trading platform to establish market of Gigamining shares?

Gigamining / Teramining will no longer be relying on any third party semi-anonymous systems for trading.

3. What about Teramining? (You can't just simply skip this part of so called "assignable agreement")

Teramining is not off the table.

[Audriux9]

1. Are going to pay the same dividends every week? Or are you going to buy back the shares? If so what would be the buyback price?

You can see all past and future dividends at http://gigamining.com. There have not been any decisions made about buybacks nor does the current contract enable this since the price to quote is from GLBSE.

2. If You continue mining operation, are you considering to use any third party trading platform to establish market of Gigamining shares?

Gigamining / Teramining will no longer be relying on any third party semi-anonymous systems for trading.

3. What about Teramining? (You can't just simply skip this part of so called "assignable agreement")

Teramining is not off the table.

Just two more questions, are there any deadlines or time references to fulfill the claims? And when are you going to continue gigamining payments? I mean is it after all of the shareholders proceed with the claims, or separately with individual shareholders, who were already verified by your lawyer?

[001sonkit]

HELLO

So, I have to send all the required data available to your lawyer? I am not old enough to pay tax thus I don't have those "tax bills" (I am in Hong Kong). What should I do if I want to claim? Anyone could tell me? Or was my 2 shares gone forever?

[lonelyminer (Peter Šurda)]

The important thing to bear in mind here is that gigavps is actually going into his own pocket to pay what on first glance looks like massive legal fees to try and get this entire mess glbse made out of BTC finance on some sort of a semblance of a healthy footing.

I beg to differ. While establishing contact with the bond holders was made more difficult by GLBSE's actions, the legal nature of the relationship is unaffected. If the lawyers now think he should get approved identities and affidavits from the bond holders, they would have told him the same thing before.

[conspirosphere.tk]

The important thing to bear in mind here is that gigavps is actually going into his own pocket to pay what on first glance looks like massive legal fees to try and get this entire mess glbse made out of BTC finance on some sort of a semblance of a healthy footing.

B/S. Since many are not going through the ordeal and expenses to recover their assets, and Giga knows it like anyone, he must even know that it is not him that is going to lose anything. And that is why he pulled this trick IMHO, since there is not really any law which forces him to do this. Otherwise why he did not think about it *before* taking all the investors' coins? Nobody asked me nothing when I bought his shares. Why? And now that is payback time he wants to know even my blood group? Puh-leeze.

Directing your frustration at him would be pretty much the equivalent of the stray dog that after years of living in the streets is now biting the vet.

Very wrong metaphor. We just got another proof that anyone who "invested" on GLBSE should be enraged with his own foolishness first of all.

edit: and now expect that all the other issuers will ask the same. They won't have even to pay for the lawyer.

[Otoh]

I was expecting something like this but not so bad, you know darn well that I am the holder of 1,530 GM units, you have my associated bitcoin address, email address & forum ID but rather than just pay what you owe me you are going to make it as difficult, costly & inconvenient as possible for me & everyone else who has helped you build your mining operation plus also rule out any chance of the higher rates you promised could be paid when I tripled the coins I put in this, I'd ask you to think again because this is just outright unnecessary BS.

[Akka]

1.   The bitcoin payment address associated with your glbse.com claim

Sure, no problem.

2.   Name of the person or entity claiming beneficial assignment of the agreement,

Also OK with that.

3.   The physical address of the person or entity (no Post Office boxes or mail suites),

If it has to, OK

4.   The tax identification number of the person or entity claiming beneficial assignment,
5.   For real persons: a photocopy or scanned PDF of government issued photo identification, or, for corporations the document number and issuing jurisdiction of the incorporating charter and proof of current good standing.

Only with a signed non disclosure agreement from this lawyer.
And I also want a photocopy or scanned PDF of government issued photo identification, from him or you.

6.   An affidavit attesting to the beneficial assignment of the agreement, which has been notarized (US residents/corporations) or local equivalent bearing the apostille of the competent jurisdiction.  Copies of an acceptable affidavit can be obtained upon request from the law offices.

This has to be a joke!


Also, I have no Idea how many Gigamining shares I have. Maybe just 1, that would be mean it's truly not worth the effort. So please provide at last Information about how many shares we are talking here.

[001sonkit]

Actually the simpliest method I've thought of:

Get on cryptostocks.com (A branch of Vircurex)
Issue the bond
turn the bond into a bunch of offline shares
Send the key and the instruction to import the shares
Pay the dividend to us

As Bitcoin is not a kind of currency, is it really that the Federal is sending letters to you and chasing upon you that you are doing those "blank money" thingy. (Logic is same as transferring your armor in game to your friends while you friends paid you, that isn't black money either! Huh?). Why do you need to go through those d___ lawyers


I'll see whats the situation and what everyone else is doing to decide whether do I claim my 2 share and it's dividend.

Sigh~

[MPOE-PR]

Moved here.

[SysRun]

Unlike most people belly aching on here I have no problem with this. Its CYA time, so this was all expected, right?

[Bitcoin Oz]

wow.

[Bastone]

Request for claims

http://gigamining.com/claims.html

To the bitcoin/gigamining community:

Virtual Processing Solutions, LLC (hereinafter VPS) has entered into a number of assignable agreements (sometimes known as “gigamining”), whereby, among its other provisions, in exchange for financial consideration, VPS agreed to conduct electronic data processing services and provide some portion of the outcome of this processing in the form of “bitcoins” to the current beneficial assignees of these agreements.  

These agreements were offered and subsequently traded on www.glbse.com.  As you may be aware, www.glbse.com has suspended normal operations.  It is the intention of VPS to comply with its obligations pursuant to these agreements to the extent consistent with U.S., international, and local law.  While VPS is not aware of any current regulatory action involving www.glbse.com or itself, it is clear that trade in “bitcoins” is attracting increased regulatory and taxation scrutiny.  Accordingly, VPS has retained the Law Offices of Carlos M. Fleites, to resolve such outstanding agreements in a lawful manner.

If you believe you are the beneficial assignee of such an agreement, you are requested to contact the Law Offices of Carlos M. Fleites in writing at the below listed e-mail or physical address to provide the following information:

• The bitcoin payment address associated with your glbse.com claim
• Name of the person or entity claiming beneficial assignment of the agreement,
• The physical address of the person or entity (no Post Office boxes or mail suites),
• The tax identification number of the person or entity claiming beneficial assignment,

• For real persons: a photocopy or scanned PDF of government issued photo identification, or, for corporations the document number and issuing jurisdiction of the incorporating charter and proof of current good standing.
• An affidavit attesting to the beneficial assignment of the agreement, which has been notarized (US residents/corporations) or local equivalent bearing the apostille of the competent jurisdiction.  Copies of an acceptable affidavit can be obtained upon request from the law offices.

All information provided will be held in confidence and used only for the purposes of lawfully fulfilling the obligations of the agreements and not shared with outside parties except as required by law.  If you have any questions or concerns, please address these to the law offices at the following e-mail or mailing address.

qpage@mylawyr.com

or

Law Offices of Carlos M. Fleites, ATTN: Quentin A. Page
407 Lincoln Road, Suite 12-E
Miami Beach, FL 33139
USA

Finally, since no unique identification exists for outstanding agreements, ALL CURRENT BENEFICIAL ASSIGNEES ARE STRONGLY ADVISED NOT TO ENGAGE IN ANY TRANSFER, SALE, OR ASSIGNMENT OF THESE AGREEMENTS OUTSIDE OF GLBSE, AS IT MAY RENDER IT IMPOSSIBLE TO VERIFY AND SERVICE SUCH AGREEMENTS.

Thank you for your prompt attention in this matter.

WOW, talk about f'd in the A..

[MPOE-PR]

B/S. Since many are not going through the ordeal and expenses to recover their assets, and Giga knows it like anyone, he must even know that it is not him that is going to lose anything.

Think of it in practical terms. Say he accepts 20k BTC worth of claims on the Internet, no questions asked. Five years from now it is proven Nefario lied, and there's new users for about 12k of those BTC. In five years that's a solid million and-then-some dollars.

How is the business he's running supposed to budget for this?

Is he supposed to buy insurance? He can't buy insurance, nobody is selling (except Gumpys a la CPA).
Is he supposed to amortize it? Something a la Shtylman?
Or moreover, do you think he's supposed to just ignore it, because that's been up to date the "Stragetgy" of Gumpy Q. ForumFinancier: "ignore everything I don't understand!"?

The latter avenue, of hiding, ignoring and so forth is the very cause of the mess. It has been the cause of each and every other mess to date (and not just in BTC). It will forever remain the cause and producer of mess for as long as people still think that's an acceptable way to go.

I think it is commendable that someone for once stops with this "let's ignore all contingencies we don't like" and tries to act rationally. Yes, it will hurt a lot of people. Specifically, it will hurt all the people who actually realized a loss at the time GLBSE closed and failed to book it because they don't know what finance is, how business works or pretty much anything else.

As a subsidiary but very important point: the consumer attitude of people involved in Bitcoin has to cease. You are not consumers. Nobody cares if you are inconvenienced, you have no right to convenience. Nobody is taking unbounded liabilities for your comfort.

Bitcoin is not like going to the supermarket.

Very wrong metaphor. We just got another proof that anyone who "invested" on GLBSE should be enraged with his own foolishness first of all.

Indeed. Let's immortalize some textures & moments:

Also by the end of next week GLBSE will have options available (and the ability to make options) on all assets listed on GLBSE.

Nefario, Mircea Popescu spreads so much FUD about you and GLBSE, here and on IRC, you shouldn't go so lightly on him.

This is ridiculous! Why not GLBSE???!

What I don't understand is why S.DICE is going to IPO on this penny-ante exchange instead of GLBSE. I think that Mr. E.V.'s ideological fetishes might be putting the business sensibilities in the back seat. Which is dangerous for investors.

Business sense is not "Ideological fetishes". Time to finally learn that lesson?

[conspirosphere.tk]

Think of it in practical terms. Say he accepts 20k BTC worth of claims on the Internet, no questions asked. Five years from now it is proven Nefario lied, and there's new users for about 12k of those BTC. In five years that's a solid million and-then-some dollars.

Nefario could have pulled this and any other sort of scams since day one. But everybody trusted him all along. Just up to now. Now that is payback time is different: now you need an affidavit.
It makes sense.

[Deprived]

B/S. Since many are not going through the ordeal and expenses to recover their assets, and Giga knows it like anyone, he must even know that it is not him that is going to lose anything.

Think of it in practical terms. Say he accepts 20k BTC worth of claims on the Internet, no questions asked. Five years from now it is proven Nefario lied, and there's new users for about 12k of those BTC. In five years that's a solid million and-then-some dollars.

How is the business he's running supposed to budget for this?

Is he supposed to buy insurance? He can't buy insurance, nobody is selling (except Gumpys a la CPA).
Is he supposed to amortize it? Something a la Shtylman?
Or moreover, do you think he's supposed to just ignore it, because that's been up to date the "Stragetgy" of Gumpy Q. ForumFinancier: "ignore everything I don't understand!"?

The latter avenue, of hiding, ignoring and so forth is the very cause of the mess. It has been the cause of each and every other mess to date (and not just in BTC). It will forever remain the cause and producer of mess for as long as people still think that's an acceptable way to go.

I think it is commendable that someone for once stops with this "let's ignore all contingencies we don't like" and tries to act rationally. Yes, it will hurt a lot of people. Specifically, it will hurt all the people who actually realized a loss at the time GLBSE closed and failed to book it because they don't know what finance is, how business works or pretty much anything else.

As a subsidiary but very important point: the consumer attitude of people involved in Bitcoin has to cease. You are not consumers. Nobody cares if you are inconvenienced, you have no right to convenience. Nobody is taking unbounded liabilities for your comfort.

Bitcoin is not like going to the supermarket.

Very wrong metaphor. We just got another proof that anyone who "invested" on GLBSE should be enraged with his own foolishness first of all.

I agree with a lot of what you say here, but fundamentally disagree on one major issue.

If gigavps needs that information in order to deliver on his obligations then there's no alternative other than to providing it.  However all costs associated with providing that information should be covered by him.

He wrote the contract.  He chose the site on which the trades were transacted.  At no stage was it made clear that this information would be needed - and it was never previously requested in order to disburse dividends or trade shares.

He's attempting to insert into the contract a requirement (which has costs to satify) on the other party unilaterally.  As such, all costs associating with fulfilling HIS new requirement should be met by him.

On the point about claims arising later - that's essentially no different to what was previously happening.  Previously (when GLBSE ran) giga was sending dividend payments to GLBSE (nefario) who then distributed them out between who he claimed (via his database) had ownership of the shares/bonds.  All that's happening now is that the list for distribution is being given to giga so he can disburse them directly.  Giga had no way previously of ensuring that dividends went to the correct counter-parties - and no means of rectifying any issues that arose over claims disputing ownership of rights.  He had to trust nefario then - same as he does now.  Plus it's pretty unlikely that in 5 years time someone would be able to "prove" they owned shares now - without having even made any comment about it anyway.

Don't think giga's actions have much to do with insurance or risj of fraud - more to do with attempting to (after the fact) make his operation appear to be a private rather than a public offering: which involves knowing the identity of the other parties and no trading of the "securities".

I don't have any Gigamining units.  If I did then my very first email to his lawyer would be asking whether giga was going to cover all reasonable costs associated with providing the required information and, if not, on what basis he was claiming those costs were my responsibility.

You need to find out what his position is before you can decide how to proceed.  I don't think there's ANY way to refuse to provide that information (though see next paragraph) but who has to pay for the costs associated (included YOUR time) is far more open to debate.

To the person saying what to do if you're under 18, don't have the ID etc.  Email his lawayer.  Explain that you're under 18, have no ID etc.  Explain that he never requested such information, stipulated that he wouldn't deal with under 18s or made any effort to establish that parties he dealt with were of legal age to enter such agreements with him.  Ask his lawyer who the local body is to whom you should make a complaint that he entered into a financial arrangement with a minor, with no attempt to ascertain whether or not they were a minor, and is now attempting to get out of his obligations by making requirements that a minor can't fulfil.  You may not get a clear answer - but at least you'll then know that issue is being proper consideration.

For those with small holdings your options may well end up being either walk away or try to cause grief by reporting what happened to as many regulatory bodies as you can.  Your call on which of those options you take.  But first some of you need to contact his lawyer and find out precisely what the situation is - always treat any formal demand as the starting point for negotiation, not as some absolute end point which has to be accepted or rejected.