Re: Unlawful Unregistered Securities, DID and VC

The problem is that the term "legally compliant" is not yet clear here. I
echo Manu, etc, who are pointing out that this will take years to shake
out. What is being discussed here instead is a problem of interpretation
and perception.

I'm not saying that to discount problems of perception. But we need more
data to provide the best solution if a change is needed.

Particularly, if there are claims that groups at W3C are "indifferent
to...laws" (assuming CCG is included in that set) , we absolutely need to
learn more about that and escalate to W3C leadership asap to help us
navigate.

It sounds separately (for different reasons) like there are calls for
cleanup or removal of the registry. We should untangle that too, but claims
that we don't care about the law are the proverbial gun to our head. It
will be hard to move onto anything else until we understand that more.

On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 1:11 PM Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> st 14. 6. 2023 v 15:27 odesílatel Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
> napsal:
>
>> > On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 14:14:14 (+02:00), Melvin Carvalho 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
>>
>> -1, that sounds dangerously close to censoring everyone publishing a
>> DID Method in the registry just because of a few bad actors and
>> assertions that have yet to work their way through the legal system.
>>
>> We shouldn't turn our back on those that are trying to re-decentralize
>> the Web. Yes, we should consider these events and discuss how we might
>> respond to them, but no, we shouldn't overreact and shut the whole
>> thing down (as much as there are those that would like to see that
>> happen).
>>
>> Chaals said many of the things that I wanted to say, only more
>> eloquently put than I could have done.
>>
>> I'm saying the above as one of the maintainers of the DID Spec
>> Registries, who is not fond of the amount of work that that particular
>> registry produces.
>>
>> I'm also saying this as one of the DID WG members who fought hard to
>> ensure that we'd have a mechanism that allowed many flowers to bloom.
>>
>> There are problems with the DID Spec Registries that need to be
>> addressed, but shutting the whole thing down sounds premature and
>> feels like an overreaction to events that are going to take years to
>> unfold.
>>
>
> Manu, would it be feasible to consider a two-step process for the registry?
>
>    1. Establish a consensus for inclusion of only legally compliant
>    methods in the registry.
>    2. Align the current registry to reflect this new consensus.
>
> This approach may alleviate concerns that some groups in the W3C are
> indifferent to legal, specifically securities, laws. As a respected entity,
> it's essential that the W3C adheres to all laws, showcasing its commitment
> to uphold legal standards.
>
>
>>
>> -- manu
>>
>> --
>> Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
>> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
>> https://www.digitalbazaar.com/
>>
>>