|
|
|
|
|
|
by coldtea
1187 days ago
|
|
|
>It's like the cartel asking "clear guidance" from the DEA about what exactly is and is not an illegal drug that can be pushed on the street, and then complaining that they won't sit at the table and discuss the legality of fentanyl. Fentanyl is clearly illegal to sell in the street, and this information is available and codified into law. So this is a bad example to use to argue that Coinbase don't have a point. DEA and the law in general should (and indeed does) provide clear guidance as to what substances are illegal and which are not, and even whether a particular novel substance is legal or not. |
|
|
Fentanyl was invented sometimes around the 1960s, and cocaine at some point was prescribed liberally by doctors. Lot of new inventions are immediately not "clearly legal or illegal" from the get go. And from where I stand (and very likely, SEC stands), it is also quite clear that unregistered token sales should be illegal. If Coinbase wants to build a business on top of it, they better have lawyers ready to argue why it should be legal. Or, they can wait until there is clear laws and regulations, which necessarily evolves slower than start-ups.
Coinbase can't profit from regulatory arbitrage and then turn around and complain that there are no clear regulations. If there were, Coinbase would have much thinner margins because there would be many more exchanges doing exactly what they do but better. What is happening right now is Coinbase mistaking themselves for an "innovative tech" company when they were primarily an "innovative legal interpretation" company, and crying about the government when they got caught with their pants down.