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

This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more

Jesse Powell

@jespow

Replying to

@ChrisBlec

Could be this outcome is fact-specific and unique, though the statement doesn't convey that. Upon reviewing the .sol contract right now, it's asset agnostic. So then the problem is keeping/serving a db of arbitrary data that might represent ownership info of regulated assets?

9:45 PM · Nov 16, 2018Twitter Web Client

Likes

This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more

Jesse Powell

@jespow

Nov 16, 2018

We can imagine anything useful being used in a crime. There were plenty of non-security tokens to trade at the time of development. I doubt we'll ever find out the details here as the cost to settle was less than the cost to defend, and far less than the price of a loss.