Re: [ANN][TAO/XTO] Tao - Real Solutions for the Music Industry!
You never answered my question upthread: what specifically do you think is in violation of US securities law?
THE PREMINE?
LOLOK, since you didn't answer my question to you that I asked right before the post you're replying to, I'll ask again, what premine? I'm going to assume you mean the money mined at the start that was publicly announced before hand and that was used for the crowd sale in 2016. Is that what you're referring to?
If that's what you mean, it does not violate securities laws.
There is an exemption for the Howey Test if you cap fundraising at $100,000. Bryce did exactly that. He's worked with regulators from the start. There's photographic evidence. There's evidence on the SEC website.
If you have access to some other information I'm not aware of, do tell.
Making a throwaway to point out that this is, in fact, a lie.
Bryce did put a cap on the fundraiser, but at 30 million (1USD = 1TAO), not $100 000. The latter is just what he managed to raise (in fact, he raised slightly more than that, according to contemporaneous PR material).
See e.g. https://bitcoinprbuzz.com/tao-network-announces-the-crowdsale-of-its-cryptocurrency-and-the-tao-of-music-project/
Quote
The TAO Network has made 30 million TAO tokens available for the ongoing month-long crowdsale. Rest of the tokens are allocated for development, marketing and community building exercises. The platform has announced that the value a TAO token will not be more than $1.00 during the crowdsale. Participants in the crowdsale shall receive a 25% bonus on their deposit if the deposit is made prior to Friday, August 5th.
You might want to re-read that a little more carefully. "Not be more than $1.00" isn't the same as setting it specifically to $1 the way you're representing it. The amount paid per Tao was proportional to the amount raised, and it ended up at approximately $0.003 per Tao, which is a long way from $1.00
Whether it was capped or only raised ~$100K is irrelevant to the question of whether it qualifies as a security.
It does not.