41–50 of 105 posts
Alternative: telegram launches anyway, and the SEC does... what exactly? Bans them from being traded on US exchanges? It would be impossible to stop the software, just as they can’t stop bitcoin.
It seems impossible when you think about it for a little while, but when someone thinks long and hard about it because it's their full-time government job, maybe someone finds a way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Resisting unjust legal action (initiated either by officer or judge) can happen any number of ways, including telling the court to stuff it. Plea deals are the overwhelming number of convictions in the US, something like 90%. Most people do not have access to legal recourse and trusting any US court to operate sanely is a bad idea. Best to avoid it if you can.
> Most people do not have access to legal recourse This is a red herring. Telegram have access to lawyers.
SEC is blocking their launch. On the face of it, telegram has been complient with the SEC up to now and have filed exemptions for their sale. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1729650/000095017218... On their own discounts are not illegal. I think what’s obvious is that the network is not truly decentralized and depends on telegram and investors expect to profit from telegrams work on the network. So they shoul…
This matches exactly the concept of collectible items. In fact, there's a blockchain based TCG: https://godsunchained.com/.
Is the point of the card packs not in large part speculation? One card apparently went for ~$60k, and there is a discount being offered for early buy-in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> telegram launches anyway, and the SEC does... what exactly? Refers Telegram to the DoJ for criminal prosecution, which results in bank accounts being frozen, any SAFT holders (or anyone else) who sold their Grams being on the hook to the buyers, and the seizure of Telegram’s assets in America and anywhere else with a mutual prosecution treaty, which covers much of the EU. At the point of wilfully defying a court or…
But these are foreign corporations? I think I’m confused about how Russians, with offshore corporations, and foreign bank accounts, can suddenly be banhammered by the SEC...
Also, a big part of their target audience of Gram early holders is in USA, so they also obviously care about the legality of these transactions. For them it's not sufficient to have some technical workaround that enables them to sell the tokens they have, they need a solution that allows them to do so legally.
SEC is blocking their launch. On the face of it, telegram has been complient with the SEC up to now and have filed exemptions for their sale. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1729650/000095017218... On their own discounts are not illegal. I think what’s obvious is that the network is not truly decentralized and depends on telegram and investors expect to profit from telegrams work on the network. So they shoul…
>I think what’s obvious is that the network is not truly decentralized and depends on telegram and investors expect to profit from telegrams work on the network. This matches exactly the concept of collectible items. In fact, there's a blockchain based TCG: https://godsunchained.com/ . Is the point of the card packs not in large part speculation? One card apparently went for ~$60k, and there is a discount being offer…
If you want a decentralized TON, get all the investors together and launch a genesis block with the open source code. That’s basically what EOS did.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Most people do not have access to legal recourse This is a red herring. Telegram have access to lawyers.
It's not. They have access to lawyers, but can they outspend the SEC or any other agency that wishes to participate? One of the best predictors of whether a lawsuit succeeds is money spent.
which essentially is just what is done with IPO's in the stock market, quite legally and unethically, big institutions buy, they pump it up, then dump it on the retail suckers at the height, then the bottom falls out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where are the two corporations that substantially control your app being on phones located?
Ok so the SEC order really has teeth because they can use it to pressure Apple and google to remove telegram from their app stores? That’s a significantly less impressive penalty than what Internet lawyers have been telling me.
They can sanction individual directors (ban them from holding office in any US corporation)
They can freeze any US assets
They can ban any US companies transacting with them
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not. They have access to lawyers, but can they outspend the SEC or any other agency that wishes to participate? One of the best predictors of whether a lawsuit succeeds is money spent.
Another good predictor of lawsuit success is what the law says, and in this case it's pretty clear Telegram is in the wrong.
It's almost always about money. On the defensive side, there are enough ways to stall that you can almost always outspend someone to win. On the offensive side, you can spend more time investigating and almost assuredly turn something indictable up. Have you really never heard of this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that's arguable. You're completely within your rights to refuse an unlawful order from a police officer. That it usually would lead to you getting shot reflects poorly on our society, not on the judgement of the person refusing the unlawful order.
> You're completely within your rights to refuse an unlawful order from a police officer Subpoenas are court-ordered requests for documents. If you disagree with them, you fight them in court.
This is not an unusual state of affairs; something like ~300 federal enforcement missions can independently issue subpeonas.