Re: Unlawful Unregistered Securities, DID and VC

You could read about it at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/jun/13/techscape-us-sec-crypto-lawsuits-uk-rishi-sunak without trying to breach copyright law. 

On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 20:28:59 (+02:00), Kim Hamilton 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.

-- 
Charles 'Chaals' Nevile
Lead Standards Architect, ConsenSys Inc