Ripple is defective. It's nice that you'd like to contribute to a healthier marketplace, but the answer is not building yet more nonsense on broken ideas and with bad tools. "Regulatory fears" are not the enemy here. They're but a symptom of the specific ineptitude of those who have followed similar "let's build with broken bits" paths.
Well, point #3 can be disabled by a setting (Edit: Also it is wrong - if you trust your boss and he trusts his daughter, this does NOT mean you can end up with USD.daughter unless you trust her too. You can disable 1:1 implicit trading/"rippling" via a setting, that's what I initially thought was the perceived problem. Him being bankrupted because he set up a [too high] trust line to his daughter is outside of the system and also not likely with the current use cases. Gateways are encouraged to NOT trust anyone and let the markets be made either from other of their accounts or 3rd parties.), #2 is wrong (you CAN be compensated as liquidity provider and 0% interest is not part of the system but part of the individual agreements of gateways with their users) and #1 is something that is true for MPEX as well, in case one deposits coins there.
Anyways, using colored coins, Ripple, Mastercoin or OpenTransactions will neither solve any issues at all with regards to regulations - only with regards to resilience and eliminating (exchange) operator risk. With neither of these systems (well, a bit with OpenTransactions...) there is any chance that you go on a holiday and suddenly your exchange has changed their ToS and you are to provide documents and whatnot or it has shut down.
There is still a good chance that "doxxing" can happen (check out Gigamining, once listed on MPEX by the way!), just that the business owner then will require KYC documentation, not the exchange platform.
Edit:
In case anyone is more interested in these "lemon laws" that are mentioned in the article linked by MPOE-PR, I can recommend the book
http://www.cs.cornell.edu/home/kleinber/networks-book/