Re: Unlawful Unregistered Securities, DID and VC

If asking for disclosure of conflicts of interest is really a CEPC
violation, folks should review the minutes of the meeting with Microsoft,
Google, Mozilla and Apple:

https://www.w3.org/2021/09/21-did10-minutes.html

The points being raised are not new.

The W3C overruled the objections, if members don't agree with the directors
decision, there is probably some appeals process which would likely be
expensive and painful for W3C, and send a stronger signal than rehashing it
on community mailing lists.

I don't think the W3C is the right community to be debating securities law,
or blockchain standards, and, in my opinion, the tone and process we have
seen from W3C members over the last several years precludes it becoming the
right place for such debates, or technical standards related to these
industries.

W3C will likely never attract expert participation on these topics, since
it might be viewed as an unacceptable risk for larger entities to send
representatives to working groups based on how things have gone.

This will in turn reduce membership fees from the crypto(currency)
industry, which will prevent the W3C from making any effective technical
contribution to the related industry standards.

Of course things could change, and the SEC, FINCEN, FBI and other
government agencies (including government agencies outside the US) might
send representatives to participate in the next DID WG.

I am not sure if it would be worth their time though, a JSON Data Model and
URI formats are not securities, even if they identify and describe assets
that are securities. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTPRange-14

Technical standards such as DIDs and VCs can facilitate enforcement
activities, and reconnaissance in public permissionless networks.

These activities can support the legally recognized rights of citizens
regardless of which country they reside in, (including property and freedom
of speech rights in the United States).

If one goal of the W3C was truly to assist law enforcement, identifying
threat actors and patterns of suspicious behavior (in a possibly globally
unique and cryptographically verifiable way) seems like a great start.

If you review previous cases, you can see how valuable metadata analysis
and identification have been to prosecutions in the past:

https://www.justice.gov/d9/press-releases/attachments/2022/03/24/us_v._ethan_nguyen_andre_llacuna_complaint.pdf

I don't know if the W3C has engaged effectively with law enforcement in the
past, except perhaps in matters related to DRM.

If DIDs do stay at W3C, I think it would be excellent to have more
participation from law enforcement and regulatory agencies.

Regards,

OS

On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 10:11 AM Christopher Allen <
ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 9:50 AM Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Chaals, thank you for your comments, please could you disclose conflicts
>>> of interest in this matter.
>>>
>>
> Melvin,
>
> This is a complicated topic, but this portion feels like a personal attack
> — basically calling someone out in a sideways fashion as being biased. It
> is uncalled for, unprofessional, and likely violates the W3C Code of
> Professional Conduct https://www.w3.org/Consortium/cepc/:
>
> > Treat everyone with respect. We are a large community of people who are
> passionate about our work, sometimes holding strong opinions and beliefs.
> We are committed to dealing with each other with courtesy, respect, and
> dignity at all times.
>
> — Christopher Allen
>
>>

-- 


ORIE STEELE
Chief Technology Officer
www.transmute.industries

<https://transmute.industries>