RE: FYI: US authorities throw the book at Ripple Labs

>From the American Banker story linked below... They are not changing anything at the protocol level.

Ripple's Protocol is staying intact:
As part of the enforcement action, Ripple Labs agreed to make "enhancements" to its protocol, which incited much speculation on Twitter as industry observers tried to assess the impact on the company's business model.

But a more in-depth explanation provided by Fincen clarifies the nature of the updates. The firm will implement AML transaction monitoring across its network and improve its analytical tools for reporting on counterparties and the flow of funds.

"The 'enhancements' are to transaction analysis and risk monitoring" of the protocol but not to the protocol itself, according to O'Gorman.

This will come as a relief to players in the digital currency space who worried that regulators were overstepping by mandating changes to the Ripple software.
________________________________________
From: Jeffrey Cliff [jeffrey.cliff@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 10:14 AM
To: Joseph Potvin
Cc: Adrian Hope-Bailie; Web Payments CG
Subject: Re: FYI: US authorities throw the book at Ripple Labs

This is quickly becoming a net neutrality issue -- what's happening
here is that the US government is trying to make our network no longer
neutral to all participants.  In particular, participants that it
chooses to no longer participate will no longer have the option to
participate at what sounds like the protocol level.  Perhaps it is too
soon to tell -- they've only so far made changes to RippleTrade and
optional changes elsewhere -- but this announcement does not bode
well.  Depending how they implement these changes, it will break
financial inclusion for the budding network: Ripple Labs may not have
a problem with that (since they have been focusing more on "including"
only banks, completely ignoring the histoiry of Ripple as a way to
live *without* banks).   As Joseph Potvin points out, though, this is
only the first state actor to want this power.  How will they react
when the government of Cuba or the the Hague or something tries to
freeze the US government's accounts for money laundering in central
america?  I think we all know -- this power will only be usable by
*some* network participants.

Anonymity is a stopgap to these kinds of problems occurring -- it
forces the network, at least, to be honest.  I think we're going to be
increasingly forced to recognize that what we are allowing, by our
inaction, is a power grab over future network participants that cannot
yet speak for themselves.

Networks should beyond everything else be neutral and neither prevent
users from using them for political reasons, nor inadvertently do so.

Jeff Cliff

On 07/05/2015, Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca> wrote:
> RE: "the technology should not intentionally circumvent laws and
> regulations"
>
> Nor inadvertenty.
>
> Joseph
>
> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 8:57 AM, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com>
> wrote:
>
>> p.s. To emphasize my first point, a quote from the article above: "Ripple
>> Labs will improve the tools being used to analyze transactions on the
>> protocol — but the protocol itself remains unchanged."
>>
>> On 7 May 2015 at 14:55, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Joseph,
>>>
>>> I agree with you that the legalities surrounding payments are important
>>> to our work but I would only say so to the point that the technology
>>> should
>>> not intentionally circumvent laws and regulations and provide mechanisms
>>> for regulators to be able to do their jobs.
>>>
>>> Wrt the Ripple Labs case, I think this article provides a more balanced
>>> view on the matter than many of the click-bait headlines that have been
>>> doing the rounds:
>>> http://www.americanbanker.com/news/bank-technology/what-ripples-fincen-fine-means-for-the-digital-currency-industry-1074195-1.html
>>>
>>> Personally, I think the first (and only when I looked) comment on the
>>> article Tim linked to above says it all.
>>>
>>> In many respects, this is a sign that the traditional finance and
>>> payments industry is waking up to the reality that digital currencies
>>> and
>>> the amazing technologies that are emerging on the back of them are not
>>> just
>>> a passing fad and are starting to take them seriously (either as
>>> threats,
>>> opportunities or both).
>>>
>>> Adrian
>>>
>>> On 7 May 2015 at 14:19, Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> RE: "“Innovation is laudable but..."
>>>>
>>>> Official notices here:
>>>> http://www.fincen.gov/news_room/nr/html/20150505.html
>>>> http://www.fincen.gov/news_room/nr/pdf/Ripple_Facts.pdf
>>>>
>>>> For a W3C context, it's worth considering that this involves just one
>>>> of
>>>> the multitude of legal jurisdictions. This is why, in my post to this
>>>> list
>>>> yesterday entitled "Ongoing alignment of W3C Web Payments specification
>>>> development to other in-scope global standards",  I referred to the
>>>> fully
>>>> global multi-jurisdictional forum which works at the 'root' level of
>>>> e-commerce law, maintaining a set of so-called model laws:
>>>> UNCITRAL WG IV: Working Group IV: Electronic Commerce, United Nations
>>>> Commission on International Trade Law
>>>>
>>>> http://www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/commission/working_groups/4Electronic_Commerce.html
>>>>
>>>> It's not a matter of going-all-legal, so to speak. It (usually) not
>>>> very
>>>> difficult just to take the legal parameters as business architecture
>>>> documentation. Not doing so creates deep architectural bugs that
>>>> inevitably
>>>> result in cases like this one against Ripple Labs. These scenarios suck
>>>> valuable resources and mindshare out of otherwise brilliant
>>>> initiatives.
>>>>
>>>> Joseph Potvin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 4:57 AM, Timothy Holborn <
>>>> timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> FYI...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Ripple Labs has been fined $700,000 by the US Financial Crimes
>>>>> Enforcement Network (FinCEN) in the first successful civil enforcement
>>>>> action against a virtual currency exchange."
>>>>>
>>>>> SOURCE: http://www.finextra.com/news/fullstory.aspx?newsitemid=27314
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Joseph Potvin
>>>> Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations
>>>> The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman
>>>> jpotvin@opman.ca
>>>> Mobile: 819-593-5983
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Joseph Potvin
> Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations
> The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman
> jpotvin@opman.ca
> Mobile: 819-593-5983
>


--
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any
forum and add 1 to the generation


"This communication is intended solely for the addressee and is confidential and not for third party unauthorized distribution"

Received on Thursday, 7 May 2015 14:20:49 UTC