Re: Unlawful Unregistered Securities, DID and VC

I got one, thanks to a lovely person on the list. DM me if you need it too

On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 11:28 AM Kim Hamilton <kimdhamilton@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Non-paywall link please?
>
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 5:15 AM Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> st 7. 6. 2023 v 15:20 odesílatel Michael Prorock <
>> michael.prorock@mesur.io> napsal:
>>
>>> Personal hat firmly on, I would be a fan of removing the did registry.
>>> Especially in favor of standardizing of few methods, such as did:web
>>>
>>
>> That makes sense to me, Mike, as a possible way forward
>>
>> The Wall Street Journal recently published an article titled "The List of
>> Crypto Coins the SEC Says Are Illegal Is Growing". The word "illegal", when
>> used by such an eminent publication, commands significant attention and
>> should not be taken lightly.
>>
>>
>> https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-dow-jones-06-06-2023/card/the-list-of-crypto-coins-the-sec-says-are-illegal-is-growing-VDghHoLBchVk5hzYxox6
>>
>> Working groups and community groups, particularly those associated with
>> reputable bodies like the W3C, should be vigilant about the materials they
>> produce. It's imperative that such entities abstain from promoting or
>> associating with these unregistered securities which have been deemed
>> illegal. Given the gravity of securities laws and the extensive
>> ramifications of their violations, we cannot afford to be complacent.
>>
>> Such a situation demands proactive action, and it's crucial to remember
>> that the gravity of securities laws supersedes even the consensus within
>> the W3C.
>>
>>
>>> Mike Prorock
>>> CTO - mesur.io
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2023, 08:34 Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> W3C operates on consensus, and the registry is a note.
>>>>
>>>> You are welcome to raise a PR removing an entry and provide your
>>>> justification, if the working group can't resolve the issue, it can be
>>>> escalated all the way up the chain.
>>>>
>>>> (Pun intended).
>>>>
>>>> The working group might also consider removing the method registry
>>>> entirely, since it is not necessary for URNs to remain namespaces, and has
>>>> been cited as a point of market confusion.
>>>>
>>>> Be the change you want to see in the world.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2023, 5:25 AM Steve Capell <steve.capell@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Well I’ve said before that it looks to me like all but a dozen or so
>>>>> did methods are really just marketing for “me too cryptocurrency ponzu
>>>>> schemes”
>>>>>
>>>>> Feel a like a government blacklist is more than enough rationale for
>>>>> w3c to remove those methods from the register
>>>>>
>>>>> Probably a lot more ought to get shot too but it’s not obvious what is
>>>>> the fair criteria for shooting
>>>>>
>>>>> Steven Capell
>>>>> Mob: 0410 437854
>>>>>
>>>>> On 7 Jun 2023, at 8:02 pm, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 
>>>>> This issue has been raised previously, but the severity of the
>>>>> situation has escalated recently. The US government has started taking
>>>>> legal action against companies that allegedly promote unregistered
>>>>> securities, as outlined in this document:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.docdroid.net/I02zzqT/sec-v-binance-4-pdf.
>>>>>
>>>>> Specifically, twelve blockchains have been named: BNB (BNB), Binance
>>>>> USD stablecoin (BUSD), Solana (SOL), Cardano (ADA), Polygon (MATIC),
>>>>> Filecoin (FIL), Cosmos Hub (ATOM), The Sandbox (SAND), Decentraland (MANA),
>>>>> Algorand (ALGO), Axie Infinity (AXS,) and Coti (COTI). There may be more
>>>>> beyond this list.
>>>>>
>>>>> What is particularly disconcerting is the visibility of many of these
>>>>> potentially problematic instruments under the auspices of the W3C logo,
>>>>> particularly in the DID method registry:
>>>>> https://w3c.github.io/did-spec-registries/. It's worth noting that
>>>>> many of these also finance standards work.
>>>>>
>>>>> In securities law, the attitude of "If you think something is illegal,
>>>>> don't use it" is insufficient. The potential risk here is that W3C's
>>>>> reputable image could be tainted by these developments. Urgent action is
>>>>> required to rectify this situation.
>>>>>
>>>>>