When did Howard Wang solicit funds from anyone?
We have no idea what his role is. If he was merely an employee, I dont see a problem. But since he is the one who started this, Id be surprised if he didnt have a management role in the company.
As far as TheSwede is concerned, it could be a problem for him, I suppose. But he (obviously) doesn't run labcoin.
Apparently there is no point in arguing with you, because every statement I make and document with links goes in one ear and out the other. Theswede isnt in trouble for running labcoin, he is in trouble for " knowingly or recklessly" providing "substantial assistance" in soliciting these funds. You could probably also argue he is liable as controlling person through agency
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/77oAlso, you seem to be missing the point that there is a huge legal difference between a scam, which is illegal everywhere, and simply selling unregistered securities. If the US government were actually going to go out of their way to prosecute people who did that, it would apply equally to ASICMiner, NEOBEE and the rest - and even more so ActM, since it's US based.
I dont miss that
at all. My point is that Labcoin is violating US law even if its not a scam. And yes, that applies to pretty much every security on BTCT, Bitfunder and other exchanges that are readily available in the US and accept US investors' funds. As for Active miner, the shares issued are for the Belize company, not the US based sales company, but indeed that doesnt make it any more legal.
If the US government wanted too it could try to shut down bitcoin entirely, as well. They could make bitcoin mining illegal and try to prosecute anyone who does it, since mining technically means certifying transactions as legitimate they could argue that bitcoin mining represents a form of money transfer, which means that you would need to know someone's identity in order to include transactions from them in the block chain.
THis is indeed unclear at the present afaik. More info here:
http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-law-what-us-businesses-need-to-know/But that changes nothing about the legality of issuing unregistered company stock and seems far less likely to provoke action by the SEC or other agencies.
Again, if Labcoin is a scam and they just ran off with all the money then clearly there could be legal consequences. If not, there there are no more likely to be legal consequences from them then for every other bitcoin stock,
I never said anything else, excpt:
which depends on their local laws.
For crying out loud. How can you be this dense?
In general, all securities offered in the U.S. must be registered with the SEC or must qualify for an exemption from the registration requirements
http://www.sec.gov/answers/regis33.htmAre you saying these securities are not made available in the US? Does it say that securities related to foreign companies are excempt?
People in the US, and/or doing business in the US need to follow US law.
Yes and those offering securities in the US, regardless of their nationality of the issuer or the nature and object of the security.
Secondly, it's just as likely that the government will crack down on bitcoin itself as it is they'll crack down on bitcoin shares. If you don't think you should have any money in something that the government theoretically crack down on then you should immediately sell all your bitcoin, as the government could declare it illegal tomorrow, if they wanted.
THey can also make drinking softdrinks illegal if they want, but its not illegal now. However, selling unregulated securities to unsophisticated investors already is beyond a shadow of doubt.