Re: Potential list of securities in the US [was: Unlawful Unregistered Securities, DID and VC]

čt 22. 6. 2023 v 15:50 odesílatel Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
napsal:

> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 3:57 AM Melvin Carvalho
> <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Thank you Chaals for the clarification
> >
> > From your statement here:  "W3C groups should obey US securities laws."
> >
> > If we have consensus on this item, then it can be applied to the W3C DID
> registry, in a two-step approach.
>
> Please cite the US securities law which the DID Specification
> Registries is violating, especially considering the changes that Kyle
> has suggested to the DID Specification Registries that state that the
> registries are NOT an endorsement of any DID Method that is in the
> registry.
>
> To put it more bluntly, there is no connection between a consensus
> position of "W3C groups should obey US securities laws" and a change
> to the DID Specification Registries that removes entries based on
> allegations of violating US securities laws.
>
> The DID Specification registries are informational in nature. They
> report on "what exists out there that we know of". They are not an
> endorsement, have never been an endorsement, and will never be an
> endorsement of ANY security. Since it is information in nature,
> removing entries that reflect reality from the registries, without the
> consent of the individual or organization that added the information
> to the registry, or without any due process exercised by a legal
> violation of some kind, would be a form of censorship.
>
> I repeat again, as one of the maintainers of that registry, I oppose
> any such baseless action.
>
> This group has entertained the arguments you have put forth, Melvin,
> but I am not seeing any sort of consensus to take the actions you are
> suggesting. Quite the opposite, I see a preponderance of support for
> NOT removing entries based on allegations of violating US securities
> laws.
>
> It feels like we've exhausted the points and counter-points in this
> particular discussion, but more importantly, it does not look like
> your suggestion to proactively remove entries based on allegations of
> violations of securities laws is going anywhere.
>
> Is there some sort of alternate compromise on an action to be take
> that you can see here, Melvin?
>
I appreciate the ongoing dialogue. My primary intent was to highlight the
recent enforcement information around unregistered, unlawful securities
provided by the U.S. government. I believe I've raised as much awareness
around the potential issues in this document as possible without redundancy.

A registry inherently suggests some degree of curation, and the curated
list presently includes multiple unlawful securities that are flagged and
under enforcement.  For example, adhering to copyright law is explicitly
mentioned, but securities laws are not.  The document potentially tarnishes
the group and the w3c's reputation. However, it is ultimately for the w3c
membership to decide on its acceptability, not me.

This debate has indeed been exhaustive, and the suggestion of proactive
removal might not be widely agreed upon, in this group. Yet, in view of the
potential implications, I felt it important to bring to the table.

The compromise is that I'll continue to work in this space at the W3C,
albeit with heightened caution regarding the instruments detailed in this
document.

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