Selling unregistered securities internationally appears to be asking to put oneself in multiple-jeopardy because you become culpable to numerous jurisdictions and court interpretations.
My reading of USA law is that if CK coins were obtained at any time by USA citizens or residents as investment securities from some controlling entity, then plausibly the SEC (if it has the cooperation of the other nations) can prosecute the controlling entity and take actions to shut down the coin, such as declare running the protocol to trade the illegally produced securities an illegal act.
Maybe find a way to prevent US citizens from accessing the coin? It's just 5% of the earth population, as we see it's Asia that influences cryptoindustry, not USA.
This interpretation does not address the anti-fraud and anti-manipulation provisions of the securities laws, which will continue to reach all Internet activities that satisfy the relevant jurisdictional tests. Even in the absence of sales in the United States, we will take appropriate enforcement action whenever we believe that fraudulent or manipulative Internet activities have originated in the United States or placed U.S. investors at risk. Further, we are not addressing the circumstances under which a U.S. court could exercise personal jurisdiction over a non-U.S. person with respect to that persons offshore Internet offer.
It appears that securities regulation in the EU is limited to shares in companies (and certain bonds), but if you are selling coins which you used to fund development activities and you are controlling the coin ongoing, one might argue this is equivalent to a company operating an exchange which trades the shares it issued. In other words, you didn't register your company but it is still operating as a company. Thus I do think offering ICOs in Europe are potentially culpable especially as EU totalitarianism proceeds with the sovereign debt collapse the push to federalize the governance and taxing power to Brussels as a "solution" to the ("incorrigible nations") debt crisis, i.e. the member nation debts need to be consolidated thus fiscal policy and thus law needs to be consolidated (the Euro was the Trojan horse to full integration of sovereignty). Does anyone think this interpretation of potential risk is ludicrous and if so then why?
Perhaps a securities case will be brought as part of a class action lawsuit, such as if Ethereum investors become disgruntled.
http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1472&context=ilj#page=9http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31989L0298:EN:HTMLCouncil Directive 89/298/EEC of 17 April 1989 Section 1, Article 2: 2(e) 'transferable securities' shall mean shares in companies and other transferable securities equivalent to shares in companies, debt securities having a maturity of at least one year and other transferable securities equivalent to debt securities, and any other transferable security giving the right to acquire any such transferable securities by subscription or exchange;
Even in the Philippines (Asia) you can't even take an exemption from registration without applying to the Commission and paying a fee:
http://www.sec.gov.ph/laws/src%208799-chapter_iii.html10.3. Any person applying for an exemption under this Section, shall file with the Commission a notice identifying the exemption relied upon on such form and at such time as the Commission by rule may prescribe and with such notice shall pay to the Commission a fee equivalent to one-tenth (1/10) of one percent (1%) of the maximum aggregate price or issued value of the securities.