/biz/ - Business & Finance

>web 3 claims to sec
>We are not a security
Lol

>>52242321
Where's the part where SEC announces it?

>>52242348

Yeah, actually not sure. The full blog post from the web 3 foundation is here:

https://medium.com/web3foundation/less-trust-more-truth-polkadots-native-token-dot-has-morphed-and-is-not-a-security-b2a8847a70cc

But don't think they would make a statement like this unless they got some kind of major thumbs up from SEC. Probably something will come out from the SEC soon.

>In our view, current day offers and sales of DOT are not securities transactions, and DOT is not a security. It is merely software.

>>52242348
>>52242380
They didn't, DOT is trying to Frontrun the SEC in the event of a lawsuit so they can claim there was no fair notice. Every crypto should be doing this to fuck Gary over.

So the BENT the knee. KEKed. Fuck GAYsler. He should be executed cartel style for treason.

>>52242321
>In our view, current day offers and sales of DOT are not securities transactions, and DOT is not a security. It is merely software.

But not in the SEC's view.

>>52242780
Who cares what the SEC views? Court will decide. And if not then the people will take it into their own hands.

>>52242851
>We funded and keep funding our dev ops with an unregistered security
>But it's also software

>>52242867
Yes its not a security. So its not an "unregistered security" you fucking idiot. Are your shits a registered with the SEC? Ops off to prison with you to get ass fucked I guess because everything is a security according to you GAYsler dick suckers obsessed with government controlling everything. If you actually want to make an argument explain what the investment contract is when you buy DOT, there is none, so its impossible that its a security.

>>52242906
Crypto tokens minted out of thin air by the same dev team that sells them to investors are undeniably securities.

>>52242918
NO. Do you even know what a security is? It is an contract or arrangement between two parties that satisfy certain conditions. When you buy a token there is zero relationship between you and the dev, the dev has zero obligations to you. No contract exists so it impossible for something that doesn't exist to be a security.

The anti-freedom, financial fascist Gaysler wants you to think literally everything is a security. They say literally EVERYTHING is a security and controlled and regulated by the all powerful government and you have zero financial freedom and must cuck to the government and fiat. It is not true, you are falling for propaganda.

>>52242969
The contract is dot devs scamming fools that bought their bags in expectations of a profit for funding their dev ops.

>>52242969
Okay now how much will you be pound me in the ass tier if you ignore SEC? Can you stop being retarded for one second?

>>52242918

The important factor is that DOT was never offered to US persons, thus never broke securities law in the US.

The statement that DOT is now "software" points to the view from SEC that Polkadot is decentralized, similar to their view on Ethereum.

If DOT is now not considered a security, it can more easily be offered the US market, whereas it was not in the past.

this is a big hurdle
...a rare win for DOT after so many setbacks/missteps

We saw what happened with XRP, which is the banksters crypto
So imagine when (not if) this happens to ADA, SOL, AVAX, MATIC
Will they fare as well as DOT?
And I expect the hammer to come down on 'stable coins' and utility tokens (BNB, BUSD, UNI, CAKE, etc.)

Things are about to get interesting for DOT
Now if they'd fucking rebrand already so that biz tier faggits quit calling it gay. I'd settle for dropping the polka and just calling it DOT.

>>52243036
No it doesn't and it isn't mentioned like this in the blog post, which is a desperate attempt to ironically calm their investors by claiming they worked close with some public relations department of the sec

>>52242992
Doesn't make it a security. Buying something in expectation of a profit doesn't make what you're buying a security. Is gold a security? No. Everyone buys gold expecting profit. But there are gold sellers and gold shills and gold miners, but gold is not a security because those gold sellers only deliver an asset not an investment contract which could be a security.

Buying a token is paying for a token, nothing else. There is zero obligation the token seller has to the buyer in the future. There is no investment contract. There is no security. Now if a dev directly sells tokens while promising further development and promises profit that is a security - these promises might be securities - not the token.

>>52243021
Not an argument.

>>52243116
Xrp and lybri are going to lose their case and every dev scammer in the industry is seeing and panicking writing such blog posts like dot to keep people from front running for the exit

>>52243136
SEC will lose. We will see. Either way, you will still be a pathetic bootlicker defending government strangling your own financial freedom.

>>52243045
God, paid shills like you are embarrassing. Do a better job faggot.

>>52243161
I am not defending them scammer, just stating the obvious, crypto token the way every cs failure has used them to fund his grift was illegal and only a matter of time to come and bite the industry in its scam ass

Who the fuck is Web3 Foundation

>>52243184
Fraud is illegal. Not crypto tokens. Make an actual argument. Why is a token a security, its not. There could be fraud on the side, has nothing to do with the SEC or securities. You just repeats scam scam scam, are tramatized? Which token hurt you, anon? Did you invest more than you could afford to lose? Just stick to fiat in a safe bank account where you can lose 8%/year to inflation.

>>52243116
You’re making headcanon, not arguments. The only thing that matters is how it plays out in reality, not your butchered idealization of what is “right” or wrong, you oaf.

>>52243218
You sound desperate scam shill. Did you thought a bunch of cs failures could play liberty dollar and get away with it scotts free. Thanks for the real money and investment in marketing to catch retail.

>>52243224
I am going by the LAW. Read the securities act of 1933 and court precedent like the howey test. You must have a CONTRACT for it to even be considered to be a security. A simple transaction of goods is not a contract it. You have to identify obligations two parties have to each other. If you buy DOT, no one has any obligation to do anything for you. You have no contract. There is no security.
>>52243237
No, you are obviously the salty loser who got scammed by some street shitter and now has to book lick GAYsler and hope the government fucks up enough innocent people out of your own spite and jealously of my and other's success for having to foresight to get into REAL crypto early, not some scam shit you fell for.

>>52243301
Never lost real money in crypto and perfectly aware its a scam build entirely on hype and ponzinomics. The gravy train ends with xrp, from there on the industries and cryptographies reputation is down the drain with the perfect excuse to suffocate the industry. And all because cs failures thought they could print their own funding

>>52243174

>>52243323
uh suure. You will be buying back in at $200k BTC. Just buy and hold real crypto this time, don't try to outsmart the market with dogeshitdickmars, even if the devs promise the liquidity is locked and will not redeem.

>>52243380
Why not one million dollar
>Buy back
Lol
Shitcoins only exist as inverted leveraged dollar options.

>>52243400

i got cancer reading your posts

>>52243795
>thisguy.png
nice display of image board culture shill

Sorry even better
>Thisguy.jpg
Ahahaha
Amazing you didn't wrote checked

>>52243795
Good one dude

>>52242321
what a pajeet you are...flags when?

>>52242321
Sakura a cute

>>52244000
Predict my flag Mr. 000, Sir.

>>52242906
DOT is well known to be a security.