Conversation

Scary argument to take ad absurdum re: EtherDelta. Does it make sense to hold the author of a generally useful protocol responsible for specific misuses? Even the DMCA managed to carve out a safe harbor for facilitators of copyright infringement with actual victims.

Quote Tweet

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

@SECGov

· Nov 16, 2018

Statement on digital asset securities issuance and trading from our Divisions of Corporation Finance, Investment Management and Trading and Markets ow.ly/XWgN30mEfwG

9:26 PM · Nov 16, 2018Twitter Web Client

Replying to

Spot on

! It’d be beneficial to establish some sort of safe-harbor principles for digital assets, trading platforms, some ICOs, etc...

cc:

... this is what you have foreseen over a year ago re the safe harbor idea.

This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more

Mikko Ohtamaa

@moo9000

Nov 16, 2018

It was different era in 2016. The original EtherDelta run on a Github page. Zack got rid of the project as soon as regulation interest around this sector begun. EtherDelta was zero-gen proof-of-concept. To be a PoC it worked little bit too well. tokenmarket.net/news/security-

Replying to

Curious how

would respond...

"Does it make sense to hold the author of a generally useful protocol responsible for specific misuses?" No, I don't think it always or even often does. But facts and circs of EtherDelta case don't seem to be that.

Show replies

Replying to

There Is No 'Bitcoin': What the SEC Doesn't Get About Cryptocurrency

The SEC would like to establish jurisdiction over crypto assets but this is only appropriate where there are legally enforceable contracts between legal entities, argues Edan Yago.