[adastra22]

Why would that be relevant? It happened, that’s all that matters.

Edit: the context of this is the question of whether Ethereum is a security. The SEC has already ruled that it is, and the ruling came down to the fact that it had a presale (via the Howey test).

[codehalo]

It's not clear yet that the SEC has any jurisdiction over cryptocurrencies. At this point, their rulings are empty, and perhaps it will be decided in court.

[adastra22]

They have jurisdiction over securities. Things like the Howey test are used to determine if something is a security. Ethereum meets that bar. Whether bitcoin is a security isn’t so clear. Not by the Howey test at least.

[codehalo]

> Ethereum meets that bar.

Some argue otherwise. That will need to be determined in the courts or congress, not by a regulatory bully.

[davorak]

> That will need to be determined in the courts or congress, not by a regulatory bully.

The SEC was set up by congress, the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and several others [1]. The Howey test was made by the courts and at least finalized by the supreme court [2].

[1] https://www.sec.gov/about/about-securities-laws

[2] https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/328/293.html

[codehalo]

I dont see how posting trivia about the SEC's origin take away from it now being moat protecting, outdated entity. It needs to get back to what it was designed for - 20th century regulation, they are clearly showing their uselessness in the 21st.

[davorak]

> I dont see how posting trivia about the SEC's origin take away from it now being moat protecting, outdated entity.

You argued that "courts or congress" should determine whether Ethereum meets the bar for being a security. My links point out that the the courts and congress has already put a process in place, as you seem to be requesting in your your comment:

> That will need to be determined in the courts or congress...

It sounds like you have additional complaints/issues about the SEC outside of those you put in your comment. My reply was not to address SEC as a whole, only that the "courts or congress" are the wellspring for the procedures and processes currently in place like you seemed to request.

[idiotsecant]

Maybe they don't have jurisdiction over crypto, but they definitely have jurisdiction over business entities with American presence. If they decide that you're accepting cash dollars for something security-like, it doesn't particularly matter what the underlying assets are, I don't think.

[headsoup]

I suppose so long as cryptocurrencies aren't interacting with the dollar markets at all that makes sense...

[adastra22]

No interaction with the dollar market is required to be a security.