Who am I Re: Unlawful Unregistered Securities, DID and VC

It's not clear what conflict there is here. This request feels uncomfortably like an ad hominem attempt to discredit my arguments because I work on blockchain something something..


Nevertheless my interests seem pretty straightforward, and to give a summary for anyone who doesn't know and wants to:


I am employed by Consensys (a software company making stuff to support the Ethereum ecosystem) whom I represent at W3C as AC rep, and I spend most of my time on secondment as the Technical Program Director at the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance (a US 501c6 non-profit consortium focused on ensuring that the Ethereum technical stack meets industry needs.) 


Most of the time I focus on the parts of Ethereum that aren't related to crypto currencies or tokens as investment vehicles, and how to use all the other technical capabilities of that stack (e.g. how to improve interoperability in various parts of the protocol, and between different blockchain stacks).


The one thing I do (generally 10-20% of my time) that is related to the investment value of crypto is work with the EEA's "DRAMA" Working Group (DeFi Risk Assessment, Management and Accounting), chaired by Ernst&Young and Hacken (a Ukranian security company led by an ex-Deloitte CPA). That group develops best practices for the accounting profession to sensibly account for the value of investments in "DeFi", respecting legal requirements and the generally accepted priniciples of accounting best practice such as GAAP and IFRS. (In that work, obviously, the role of the SEC and securities law in general, across the world, is critical - the whole point is to work out how to make sure we are meeting their principles). The group is working on providing more public documentation, but you can read about them at https://entethalliance.org/groups/DRAMA/


Within W3C I have been a participant representing RMIT University (1997-8), W3C staff member in the Web Accessibility Initiative (1998-2003) and the then Semantic Web activity (2002-2005), represented Opera (2005-2012) and then Yandex (2012-2018) as AC rep, I was on the W3C Advisory Board 2009-2020 and am again, chaired the Web Apps group for about a decade, and have participated in many W3C groups in the last 25 years.


Assuming that people's backgrounds and interests matter, would you please give us enough information to understand your motivations. If, as I personally feel, it doesn't matter, then perhaps it makes more sense to focus on the actual questions under discussion.


cheers

On Thursday, June 15, 2023 15:49:28 (+02:00), Melvin Carvalho wrote:






čt 15. 6. 2023 v 13:46 odesílatel Chaals Nevile <charles.nevile@consensys.net> napsal:

I have a lot of sympathy for the requirements that the registry insist on more "well-formed" entries, and I think it should be possible to challenge entries and request their removal if their main purpose is to break widely-recognised laws. But we're not the police, and work in an international context providing important records. 


On Wednesday, June 14, 2023 22:09:55 (+02:00), Melvin Carvalho wrote:






Manu, would it be feasible to consider a two-step process for the registry?

It's easy to consider. I have spent several hours on it (and wrote a few pages of notes as I thought).


Establish a consensus for inclusion of only legally compliant methods in the registry.
This is a bad idea, because we will waste massive amounts of effort on underinformed and expensive arguments about what it means to be legally compliant and on any specific case that isn't trivially obvious anyway.


I am explicitly opposed to this framing as a useful or even workable way to ensure we support a moral and legal set of values through our work. 


I do believe we should support such values, but I also believe that in practice this approach will undermine our work, without achieving the proposal's stated goals.
Align the current registry to reflect this new consensus.
No, since I don't think we will have consensus.

This approach may alleviate concerns that some groups in the W3C are indifferent to legal, specifically securities, laws.

I doubt it. But it will raise significant concerns that some groups in W3C are prepared to indulge in pseudo-legal argument, or to allow the use of pseudo-legal claims to restrict rational conversation.


As a respected entity, it's essential that the W3C adheres to all laws, showcasing its commitment to uphold legal standards.

No. 


There are a lot of laws. W3C should strive not to engage in illegal activity, and individuals likewise, especially with respect to the jurisdictions they are domiciled in etc etc. Because that's the law, because it is generally the morally right thing to do, but also in order to ensure our work is globally relevant.


Despite being close in wording and perhaps closer in sentiment the two statements can lead to different ways of working, and the details (as always in law) are really important.


Chaals, thank you for your comments, please could you disclose conflicts of interest in this matter.

 


cheers


 

-- manu

--
Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
https://www.digitalbazaar.com/



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