Re: Unlawful Unregistered Securities, DID and VC

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.
>>>>
>>>>