California issued cease and desist order against Bitcoin

California sends a cease and desist order to the Bitcoin Foundation

California sends a cease and desist order to the Bitcoin Foundation submitted by Greasy to technology [link] [comments]

A little perspective: Bitcoin Foundation received a cease and desist order from the State of California back in 2013 (link below). It shows how far we have come in crypto world and this tag of war between regulators and innovators will continue until crypto adoption reach critical mass.

https://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/149335233?access_key=key-2lnhtenm4qb1mydngxac&allow_share=false&show_recommendations=false
submitted by teb1rek to tezos [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Foundation Receives Cease And Desist Order From California for allegedly engaging in the business of money transmission without a license

Bitcoin Foundation Receives Cease And Desist Order From California for allegedly engaging in the business of money transmission without a license submitted by bbbbbubble to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Foundation Receives Cease And Desist Order From California

Bitcoin Foundation Receives Cease And Desist Order From California submitted by gorske to technology [link] [comments]

California sends cease and desist letter to Bitcoin Foundation

submitted by rcking1110 to news [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Foundation Receives Cease And Desist Order From California

Bitcoin Foundation Receives Cease And Desist Order From California submitted by conn2005 to Libertarian [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Foundation Receives Cease And Desist Order From California - Problem is, Bitcoin "Legally" Isn't Money

Bitcoin Foundation Receives Cease And Desist Order From California - Problem is, Bitcoin submitted by WeaponizedTruth to conspiracy [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Foundation Receives Cease And Desist Order From California

Bitcoin Foundation Receives Cease And Desist Order From California submitted by ThatRedEyeAlien to Anarcho_Capitalism [link] [comments]

California issued a cease and desist order against Bitcoin Foundation.

submitted by robgraves to LinuxActionShow [link] [comments]

California sends a cease and desist order to the Bitcoin Foundation

California sends a cease and desist order to the Bitcoin Foundation submitted by jeffchard to cyberlaws [link] [comments]

California sends a cease and desist order to the Bitcoin Foundation

California sends a cease and desist order to the Bitcoin Foundation submitted by pcguy8088_ to TechNewsToday [link] [comments]

Coindesk: California Issues Cease-and-Desist Letter To Bitcoin Foundation

Coindesk: California Issues Cease-and-Desist Letter To Bitcoin Foundation submitted by jgarzik to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Foundation Receives Cease And Desist Order From California

Bitcoin Foundation Receives Cease And Desist Order From California submitted by ChrisLAS to planbshow [link] [comments]

California has sent a Cease and Desist to Bitcoin

submitted by OvidPerl to politcs [link] [comments]

My Take on the Bitcoin Foundation's Cease and Desist letter from California (Ghostbusters Inside)

My Take on the Bitcoin Foundation's Cease and Desist letter from California (Ghostbusters Inside) submitted by SeansOutpost to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

California Sends a Cease and Desist Order To the Bitcoin Foundation

California Sends a Cease and Desist Order To the Bitcoin Foundation submitted by b1ackha7 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Foundation Receives Cease And Desist Order From California - Bitcoin Forum - The Unofficial Bitcoin Forum

submitted by bitcoinforum to Bitcoinforum [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Foundation Receives Cease And Desist Order From California - Problem is, Bitcoin "Legally" Isn't Money [auto-x-post - OP was WeaponizedTruth]

submitted by fringebot5001 to fringediscussion [link] [comments]

Ken Sangha — CEO of Open Platform. Please give me back my Bitcointalk account.

Ken Sangha — CEO of Open Platform. Please give me back my Bitcointalk account. The OP of this ANN thread ”jtnichol” is my account after my account was stolen from me in August 2017 and sold to Open Platform.
Here’s 2 videos I made about this ordeal and the ongoing lack of justice in this whole event.
Video 1: Video Describing this incidence back in February 2018: https://youtu.be/kB35rBhrhBI?list=PLjd9meIcggcZ96B0KRtyf8LDQPEX2yaXK
Video 2: Changing and Erasing Topics/Comments on my BitcoinTalk account: https://youtu.be/L0AWSSq1rR0
What kind of project shills a bounty program using a stolen persona and when it’s revealed to them it was stolen they keep using it!? Because my old Bitcointalk account was a high value account with Sr. Membership, a shitload of merit, and lots of time on the forum. Is it really ethical, moral, and worth it?
Every thread and my post/comment history has been deleted recently. But it hasn’t really….the internet never forgets.
Nothing is gone.
Open Platform has deleted Medium blog posts and Discord is a ghost town. Twitter posts? Not much lately. Reddit? 10k subs and no one is there. Your telegram is your basic line of communication now. Why is the team deleting everything?
I’ve waited a year to get this Bitcointalk account back. Nothing.
So here’s my Cease and Desist Letter https://drive.google.com/file/d/19XIulgf80V3Dssuq2-DiGUERdAn6wC1u/view
An additional Letter to California Business Oversight: https://drive.google.com/file/d/141ZpYG7W2uE1TCKfRRGyjk2fB5LuYTNn/view
There’s a couple more letters I won’t share here.
So here’s the “jtnichol” persona entire comment history on Bitcointalk
Let’s go back to January 28th 2016 where my account profile snapshot includes a Bitcoin address I used to have on Coinbase, a Hyper Crypto address which is a coin I promoted as a social media manager for about a year, my personal website and twitter handle: https://web.archive.org/web/20160128192739/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781
November 27th 2017 profile snapshot after Open Platform hacked/obtained it and changed everything https://web.archive.org/web/20171127074903/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781
This is the exact message containing a “signed” bitcoin message to a moderatoadministrator on Bitcointalk allowed the hacker to secure and eventually transfer by BitcoinTalk handle to Open Platform. This event took place August 25, 2017, 05:25:59 PM Every comment from that date forward was carried out under Open Platform. https://web.archive.org/web/20180420142819/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=996318.msg21199413#msg21199413
The following are all the archived comments that “jtnichol” has made on Bitcointalk as of April 20th 2018 sorted newest to oldest: December 06, 2014 to April 20th 2018 (account was in Open Platform’s hands in August 2018)
https://web.archive.org/web/20180420140417/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts https://web.archive.org/web/20180420140527/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts;start=20 https://web.archive.org/web/20180420140858/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts;start=40 https://web.archive.org/web/20180420141013/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts;start=60 https://web.archive.org/web/20180420141422/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts;start=80 https://web.archive.org/web/20180420141849/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts;start=100 https://web.archive.org/web/20180420141900/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts;start=120 https://web.archive.org/web/20180420141200/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts;start=140 https://web.archive.org/web/20180420141020/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts;start=160 https://web.archive.org/web/20180420141028/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts;start=180 https://web.archive.org/web/20180420141035/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts;start=200 https://web.archive.org/web/20180420141051/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts;start=220 https://web.archive.org/web/20180420142106/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts;start=240 https://web.archive.org/web/20180420142117/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts;start=260 https://web.archive.org/web/20180420142122/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts;start=280 https://web.archive.org/web/20180420142130/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts;start=300 https://web.archive.org/web/20180420142135/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts;start=320 https://web.archive.org/web/20180420142143/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=400781;sa=showPosts;start=340
There’s more archived too…but you get the point. This team is a disaster and what you are doing to your investors is more than ridiculous.
Deeper History on Open Platform A previous CEO
Before Openfuture/OpenPlatform came into its current iteration, the original company was called Open Money. Open Money also had a different CEO than they do now: Fiz Kassam. At that time Angud “Ken” Sangha was the COO. Now Ken is the current CEO. Here’s an article I archive to show that Fiz was involved AND that they did a round of funding long before doing this current 30M round of funding. COO Angud “Ken” Sangha was also quoted in the article. This was an expansion of their previous sale.
https://web.archive.org/web/20180419174734/http://bitcoinist.com/open-money-expands-pre-sale-due-high-demand/
Original “Open Money” Website Archived Oh the changes
First day captured: September 8th 2017 — https://web.archive.org/web/20170908120126/https://www.openmoney.digital/
September 28th 2017: https://web.archive.org/web/20170928070654/http://www.openmoney.digital:80/
January 27th begins the Redirect to the current website as shown here:https://web.archive.org/web/20180127234910/http://openmoney.digital
Vincent Vuong on Github helped author the Original Whitepaper: https://web.archive.org/web/20180419181111/https://github.com/OpenFuturePlatform/WhitePapeblob/masteopen-money-white-paper-english.pdf
Wayback Archives of the OpenFuture.io Website
BOUNTY LINK: https://web.archive.org/web/20180420163342/http://bounty.openfuture.io/2043
BOUNTY SPREADSHEET https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nGrYC9wTkWy2z-uchksHDvG62kW1ricoluP9BaIYE6g/edit?usp=sharing
April 19th 2018 — https://web.archive.org/web/20180419143734/https://www.openfuture.io/
Team Members Shifting “Advisers” Team Changes: Notice how the team members have changed over time. They have been listing people as team members and in one instance FOR SURE the person wasn’t a team member. Look at these dates. Team members and advisers shuffling around every week.
January 27th 2018: https://web.archive.org/web/20180127234913/https://www.openfuture.io/ Kunaal Arya was NEVER on the team. I have Twitter DM verifying this. He spoke to them but NOTHING ever formal evolved.
February 2nd 2018: Poof! Team changes again: https://web.archive.org/web/20180202050657/https://www.openfuture.io/
February 15th 2018: Kunaal Arya back again? https://web.archive.org/web/20180215150614/https://www.openfuture.io/
March 11th 2018: Kunaal Arya gone now they’ve added Chandler Guo? One of the largest Bitcoin Miners ever? WOW…. https://web.archive.org/web/20180311092220/https://www.openfuture.io/
March 30th 2018: Ok. Now Chandler Guo is gone and now Roger Lim is onboard! NEO Global huh? https://web.archive.org/web/20180330142631/https://www.openfuture.io/
April 19th 2018: Current Team https://web.archive.org/web/20180419143734/https://www.openfuture.io/
September 20th 2018: Current Team https://web.archive.org/web/20180920112841/https://www.openfuture.io/team
Plagiarised White Paper:
Original February 11th 2018 Whitepaper:https://web.archive.org/web/20180419145912/https://s3.amazonaws.com/openmoney/Open+Platform+White+Paper+Feb+11.pdffeatures on page 28 the ENTIRE Legal Disclaimer stolen from the LeadCoin team Whitepaper and includes the words “LDC” and “Leadcoin” throughout the whole legal disclaimer.
Compare to Leadcoin Legal Disclaimer: http://coinwoot.com/wp-content/uploads/LeadCoin-White-Paper.pdf
New Open Platform WhitePaper: https://s3.amazonaws.com/openmoney/OPEN+Platform+White+Paper+2018-03-08.pdf
Video I Made Demonstrating This. https://youtu.be/UKoVHMlRz3A?
Allegedly, AirDrops and Token Swaps are all the rage these days. Lots of bounty people aren’t getting helped and it seems like early investors are hoping to be getting paid first, allegedly.
Pre-Sale Allocation Request Google Doc. Wait What? Yup. A Pre-Sale that has been wrapped up in different ways for months now. Video for that below. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHEIs5gIR8Q&
Open Platform CEO saying “No Sale” April 30 2018 (hint: still selling!)
In front of a live audience no less. https://youtu.be/XQUja4DHCtMhttps://web.archive.org/web/20181204033234/
They had a sale back in September of 2017 and more and more sales onward. https://bitcoinist.com/open-money-expands-pre-sale-due-high-demand/
On and on and on. Good luck traders.
submitted by jtnichol to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Colorado Cracks Down On Two Companies For Illegal ICO Promotion

The Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies (DORA) announced its investigation of two companies for promoting unlawful Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs) to Colorado residents, the Denver Post reported May 3.
The Colorado Securities Commissioner said that California-based Linda Healthcare Corp. and Washington-based Broad Investments LLC could potentially be violating Colorado securities law by promoting ICOs.
https://preview.redd.it/gbc8k7gmhuv01.jpg?width=725&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=09174c0318ee10e236a6a6c6e4ea98803fd37a15
DORA discovered that Linda Healthcare is promoting a “LindaHealthCoin” token on its website, which ostensibly can be used to purchase Linda Healthcare’s insurance. According to the website, the token can buy telemedical coverage “through an artificial intelligence chat service that creates medical solutions through use of blockchain technology.”
According to DORA, Linda Healthcare offers no warnings that ICOs constitute a security in the state of Colorado. “The Linda Health Insurance network is, to date, not in operation,” officials reported. A March 19 tweet from the firm directs potential customers to consult its white paper.
As Denver Post reports, Broad Investments firm is allegedly promoting cryptocurrency using a token that is described on its website as “an equity coin that represents shares of the company, like company stocks.” The token would ostensibly give holders a right to a share in returns from Broad Investments’ strategy, which builds stock portfolios with an algorithm. Officials say that the “math-oriented value system” on the website was not operational.
DORA representatives reported that both companies did not provide any information on the risks of investing in crypto or ICOs on their websites. Colorado Securities Commissioner Gerald Rome commented that investments in ICO tokens should be done carefully: “Investment opportunities being sold through ICOs over the internet need to be approached with the same level of caution as for any highly risky investment venture.”
The firms must now prove why the should not be sanctioned under the Colorado Securities Act, according to which the firms will receive cease and desist orders.
Earlier in March, the Massachusetts Securities ‎Division issued consent orders requiring the permanent suspension of five firms’ unregistered ICO sales, citing that the companies were selling unregistered securities.
Source

#Cryptocurrency #ICO #Blockchain #TokenSale #daico #w12 #Token #AI #coin #bonus #platform #bitcoin #ethereum #crypto #currencies #project #marketplace #cryptotrading #icoinvest #iconews #technology #platformmarket #DORA #Colorado #website #ColoradoSecuritiesCommissioner

submitted by W12io to u/W12io [link] [comments]

Study Highlights 46 percent of Past ICOs Took Place Without Working Plan in Place

While the ICO market is showing no signs of slowing down, a study by an Amsterdam-based company that specializes in rating ICOs, ICO Rating, has highlighted that a total of 412 projects raised a whopping $3.3 billion in the first quarter of 2018 alone. This figure represents a five percent increase over the capital raised in the last quarter in 2017.
The most shocking revelation made by the study, however, was that 46 percent of the companies looking to raise capital did not have actually start any development until the date of the ICO, a worrying concern for the industry.
https://preview.redd.it/hb6z6xsmjtw01.jpg?width=780&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8236a0f30e60839130cbdf333f2d9e51af9bbc97
Highlights of the Report
The research, titled ‘ICO Market Research Q1 2018,’ noted the total amount raised by the ICO industry to be at around $6.14 billion. It reported that only half of the total companies managed to raise an amount that exceeded $100,000. While the Telegram ICO, better known as the TON project, managed to bag $1.7 billion, it was not considered in the sample size.
The report highlighted that several companies tend to not disclose internal management, capital allocation or operational structure. Furthermore, nine firms that had managed a successful ICO closed down.Legal Hurdles for ICOs
Many countries and financial institutions do not view ICOs as a legal source of fund-raising or the issued token as a security. This makes legality a key problem of the industry. However, more than a quarter of the companies involved in ICOs actually had no legal entity at the time of raising capital.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman, Jay Clayton, issued a statement in December 2017, stating, “A number of concerns have been raised regarding the cryptocurrency and ICO markets, including that, as they are currently operating, there is substantially less investor protection than in our traditional securities markets, with correspondingly greater opportunities for fraud and manipulation.” He then said:
“Investors should understand that to date no initial coin offerings have been registered with the SEC. The SEC also has not to date approved for listing and trading any exchange-traded products (such as ETFs) holding cryptocurrencies or other assets related to cryptocurrencies.”
There could be one possible way for any company to do an ICO without triggering the SEC’s registration requirement. For this, the initial coin offering has to be structured in a way similar to that employed by companies manufacturing physical products, using a Regulation D exempt.SEC Intervention in the ICO Market
In December 2017, the SEC forced a California-based company to temporarily suspend its ICO after it grew suspicious amid registration concerns surrounding the company. The company in question, Munchee Inc., was later forced to return all capital raised by the ICO to its investors. The company also consented to the cease and desist order of the SEC.
Later in January 2018, the SEC obtained a court order to suspend Arise Bank’s $600 million ICO for a decentralized bank. According to CNBC reports, the SEC said in its complaint that:
“The ICO is an illegal offering of securities because there is no registration filed or in effect with the SEC, nor is there an applicable exemption from registration.”
A report by Ernst and Young highlighted that ten percent of the total combined amount raised by companies from an ICO had been lost to hackers. The study said that regulators were now beginning to regulate them rather than ignore them.
“ICOs have become synonymous with hype and excessive risk,” said the report, before adding, “The future of ICOs will be determined by the transparency of blockchain technology and the ability to set new standards that are accepted by all participants.”
Source
#Cryptocurrency #ICO #Blockchain #TokenSale #daico #w12 #Token #AI #coin #bonus #platform #bitcoin #ethereum #crypto #currencies #project #marketplace #cryptotrading #icoinvest #iconews #technology #platformmarket #SEC #Market #RegulationD #California #US #industry #ETFs #TON
submitted by W12io to u/W12io [link] [comments]

Pushing on Rope: How the State is creating an underground darknet

The top few articles on /bitcoin right now are about the cease letter sent to Bitcoin foundation:
http://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/1gwuql/bitcoin_foundation_gets_cease_an_desist_order_fo
To catch everyone up to speed:
As pointed out by another poster, similar precedent was set with the LimeWire case where defendants were ruled against for developing software for their users actions.
I made this post so people can manage their expectations and understand how things play out in response and why so many people are using crypto tools now like RetroShare, TOR, and I2P.
If they start targeting or intimidating people like Gavin and other developers all you will see is those developers disappear and be replaced by entirely anonymous developers - quite possibly the same people and you'll never prove it even if you are monitoring their internet connections.
The same is true for making rules against whistle-blowers. All you're going to get now are purely anonymous leaks, probably very slowly over time to protect the interests of the leaker.
Please start using more crypto tools and help make those networks robust.
Thanks!
submitted by KayRice to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

I Received a Cease and Desist Letter How to Get Donald Trump to CEASE & DESIST Like LINKIN PARK Can Bitconnect fix cease and desist with 3 words? Why Bitconnect has Cease and desist orders in US & Solution Illuminati Satanic baphomet 666 hidden agenda in Child Support & Marin County Superior Family Court

The bitcoin community was reeling over the weekend, after it was revealed that California’s state financial regulator had issued a cease and desist order against the Bitcoin Foundation. On May 30, 2013, the California Department of Financial Institutions (“CADFI”) issued a cease and desist letter to Bitcoin Foundation, a not-for-profit organization established to standardize California's Department of Financial Institutions has issued a cease and desist warning to Bitcoin Foundation for allegedly engaging in the business of money transmission without a license. California telling the Bitcoin Foundation to cease-and-desist from changing money is like us telling California to stop being such a fiscally responsible and socially conservative state. The Bitcoin Foundation does not trade, change, or exchange money for third parties. The closest thing to currency exchange that the organization does is to The Bitcoin Foundation has been sent a "cease and desist" letter from California's financial regulator for allegedly engaging in money transmission without a license.

[index] [21614] [4720] [2002] [7762] [25982] [15614] [21159] [29614] [5397] [5266]

I Received a Cease and Desist Letter

A Cease and Desist Letter … That’s what I discuss in today’s video about the battle between Linkin Park & Donald Trump. Linkin Park cited President Trump for a copyright violation -- Trump ... Illuminati Satanic baphomet 666 hidden agenda in Child Support & Marin County Superior Family Court. The criminal scam of water fluoridation must end. Go and pledge to my Kickstarter Project: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/sephirothsword57/last-dream-central-vii-cloud-of-emergency Even though we rece... A cease and desist has been issued,” the surviving members said in a tweet. In 2017, Bennington expressed his dismay with the president in a scathing tweet. “I repeat…..

Flag Counter