/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.11439511]

>That leaves us with the developers of the smart contract code that underlies these event contracts, as well as the individual users who then use that code to create and wager on their own event contracts. The developers of the code could claim that they merely created the protocol and therefore have no control over whether and how users choose to use it once it is part of the public domain. They would place the liability on the individual users, who are the actual creators and counterparties of the event contracts.

>In my view, this analysis misses the mark. Instead, I think the appropriate question is whether these code developers could reasonably foresee, at the time they created the code, that it would likely be used by U.S. persons in a manner violative of CFTC regulations. In this particular hypothetical, the code was specifically designed to enable the precise type of activity regulated by the CFTC, and no effort was made to preclude its availability to U.S. persons. Under these facts, I think a strong case could be made that the code developers aided and abetted violations of CFTC regulations.[9] As such, the CFTC could prosecute those individuals for wrongdoing.

From:
https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/SpeechesTestimony/opaquintenz16

How the fuck is enforcement even going to work. The rate of development of smart contracts is going to far outstrip the ability of the CFTC to go after individual developers, and in the case of open source software someone else can literally just copy the program and use it. He goes on to say that going after individual contracting parties will be relatively futile (which is true) but even going after developers, especially with the ridiculously wide net he is using, is going to be equally futile.
I just can't foresee how the law is going to keep up with this at all. It's almost out of their hands.

[Anonymous No.11439561]

>>11439511
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.

[Anonymous No.11439634]

>>11439511
All crypto, including tokens, will be forced to become securities

[Anonymous No.11439643]

>>11439511
Thanks, just started 100 years in jail

[Anonymous No.11439658]

>>11439511
>I think the appropriate question is whether these code developers could reasonably foresee, at the time they created the code, that it would likely be used by U.S. persons in a manner violative of CFTC regulations. In this particular hypothetical, the code was specifically designed to enable the precise type of activity regulated by the CFTC, and no effort was made to preclude its availability to U.S. persons
I dont really get this part, it's like he's saying the code was created in line with CFTC regulations, but because US citizens weren't prohibited from buying in that this somehow violated CFTC regulations? It doesn't make sense but maybe I'm a brainlet.

[Anonymous No.11439729]

>>11439658
No he's saying if a smart contract is created that does something that the CFTC doesn't allow, and if the developers don't take measures to prevent US people from using it, then the developers could be liable.
The issues this opens up are: What measures do the developers have to take? Is just a "Do not use if from US" disclaimer enough? Do they have to somehow write the code to prevent US people from using it? Is that even possible? etc. etc.
He notes later in the speech that it's particularly difficult in cases where the illegal action isn't illegal in other countries. Events contracts, which is the example he gave, aren't regulated in the UK.
So how the fuck do you even begin to come down on developers for building a UK smart contract that allows people in the US to do something they're not supposed to be allowed to, and 10x this when an open source smart contract, once created, is pretty much "out there" in the internet-verse forever.
It is an absolutely regulatory nightmare and the only conclusion I can come to is that the traditional regulatory mechanisms simply won't be able to cope. This will be the early internet x1000.

[Anonymous No.11439738]

>>11439561
Fuck off satanist.