Quote from: werneo on October 29, 2014, 05:04:15 PM
WSJ quotes bytemaster:

Quote...BitShares, which uses the eponymous name "bitshares" to describe tokens issued by autonomous, software-driven companies over its independent blockchain-based software, says these are not securities either, despite their name. The implied reference to corporate shares is "an analogy," says Daniel Larimer, CEO of Invictus Innovations, which developed the BitShares project. "I could use other analogies that view the dollar as stock in the United States. An analogy does not create a security." The key, he said, is that there is no contract between two parties contained in the digital tokens.

http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/10/28/bitbeat-bitcoin-2-0-companies-respond-to-sec-rumor-were-clean/

+5%

Love that quote in WSJ! 

Quote from: werneo on October 29, 2014, 05:04:15 PM
WSJ quotes bytemaster:

Quote...BitShares, which uses the eponymous name "bitshares" to describe tokens issued by autonomous, software-driven companies over its independent blockchain-based software, says these are not securities either, despite their name. The implied reference to corporate shares is "an analogy," says Daniel Larimer, CEO of Invictus Innovations, which developed the BitShares project. "I could use other analogies that view the dollar as stock in the United States. An analogy does not create a security." The key, he said, is that there is no contract between two parties contained in the digital tokens.

http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/10/28/bitbeat-bitcoin-2-0-companies-respond-to-sec-rumor-were-clean/

It is a good read.  Ethereum's Joseph is sharing the same view -  "tokens... had no contractual rights attached to them".   SEC has declined to comment.

With WSJ's publication, this may turn out to be free publicity for bitshares.

Good!

WSJ quotes bytemaster:

Quote...BitShares, which uses the eponymous name "bitshares" to describe tokens issued by autonomous, software-driven companies over its independent blockchain-based software, says these are not securities either, despite their name. The implied reference to corporate shares is "an analogy," says Daniel Larimer, CEO of Invictus Innovations, which developed the BitShares project. "I could use other analogies that view the dollar as stock in the United States. An analogy does not create a security." The key, he said, is that there is no contract between two parties contained in the digital tokens.

http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/10/28/bitbeat-bitcoin-2-0-companies-respond-to-sec-rumor-were-clean/

Quote from: tonyk on October 29, 2014, 05:27:51 AM

Quote from: URSAY on October 29, 2014, 03:27:50 AM

Quote from: gamey on October 28, 2014, 07:51:30 PM
Coinfire, never heard of them before this.

I'm wondering if this is even real or bullshit.  Are there better more reputable sources ?

CoinFire spends a lot of time on letstalkbitcoin.com in the forums.  Nice guy.  I'm read a couple other interesting articles on his site, long before this.

Got it!

Picture painting post!

Explains A TON!

So funny because it is so true.

Quote from: URSAY on October 29, 2014, 03:27:50 AM

Quote from: gamey on October 28, 2014, 07:51:30 PM
Coinfire, never heard of them before this.

I'm wondering if this is even real or bullshit.  Are there better more reputable sources ?

CoinFire spends a lot of time on letstalkbitcoin.com in the forums.  Nice guy.  I'm read a couple other interesting articles on his site, long before this.

Got it!

Picture painting post!

Explains A TON!

Quote from: cass on October 28, 2014, 08:31:51 AM

Quote from: toast on October 28, 2014, 01:23:57 AM

Quote from: bytemaster on October 28, 2014, 01:02:56 AM
Since we have not received anything I can post that we have not received anything.

LOL.. make a thread w/ daily update

ROFL

LOL YES!  Please do this hahaha

well,  maybe it was all just an FUD attempt.. I see xcp price took a dive from the rumor.

Quote from: donkeypong on October 29, 2014, 04:09:16 AM
Coindesk says the whole thing might be bullshit:

http://www.coindesk.com/crypto-2-0-companies-rebuff-sec-crackdown-rumors/

My first take when I read it was that it was probably fake or way overblown simply for the fact that having to handle hundreds of anything like this is a serious amount of work. I doubt any government department wants to or is equipped to take on that much all at once.

Coindesk says the whole thing might be bullshit:

http://www.coindesk.com/crypto-2-0-companies-rebuff-sec-crackdown-rumors/

Quote from: Riverhead on October 29, 2014, 03:34:42 AM
The gag order is not new for these types of things. They don't want the word to get out and have companies destroying documents before they get their letter.

ahhhh that makes sense.  I was wondering what the rational would be.  So bizarre the government can do that in such matters.  Sigh.  I was hoping it was legitimate FUD but of course government aholes have to protect people by their crony capitalism.

The gag order is not new for these types of things. They don't want the word to get out and have companies destroying documents before they get their letter.

Quote from: gamey on October 28, 2014, 07:51:30 PM
Coinfire, never heard of them before this.

I'm wondering if this is even real or bullshit.  Are there better more reputable sources ?

CoinFire spends a lot of time on letstalkbitcoin.com in the forums.  Nice guy.  I'm read a couple other interesting articles on his site, long before this. 

I am not a lawyer, but I find it suspect that the SEC could send out these letters and force companies to not publicly respond.

That is the realm of national security matters.  I was shocked SEC/FINCEN could do such a thing, but no one else objected so I didn't mention anything.

Now the original site is no longer up or at least is being DDOS'd.  Coinfire, never heard of them before this.

I'm wondering if this is even real or bullshit.  Are there better more reputable sources ?

I doubt SEC could hush anyone anyway without a judges order.  Are there SEC judges rubberstamping these letters ?   Are there SEC judges?