You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Why SMTs are not a distraction but a necessity
All great but where are the lawyers? Developers don't tell us if the SEC is going to crack down on Steem SMTs done wrong. Before I even consider issuing or launching an SMT I would have to know how they fit legally and what it could cost me in terms of regulatory risk.
ICOs are great but unless the ICO raises enough money to pay the fines of the SEC it's not going to be worth risking it.
It's not the blockchain jobs or Steemit job to give your lawyers or law advices to make an ICO lawfully in your country. If you want to start a business, you should be responsible of the legals just like you would be with everything else.
So when the SEC cracks down do you think they are going to care? Fact is, if people get arrested and it makes news or if countries ban Steemit then how is this good for the price of the Steem token? It's not.
We might not agree with the SEC or the crackdown but if we know there is a crackdown then an ICO market on Steemit will invite those concerned about ICOs to investigate the Steemit community. Not an ideal situation for the price of Steem.
Maybe one of the first ICOs over this SMT platform should be from a legal services company. A lot of money can be made helping people legally do ICOs over Steemit.
Do you see Ethereum foundation doing legal counseling for ICOs? No. EOS and other serious companies do their homework first. The fear of an SEC crackdown is exactly what is going to keep people in line.
When did I ever say Steemit Inc should do legal counseling? What a bizarre reply to a comment I never made.
And it's not a matter of "fear". It's a matter of being organized so that if you want a bunch of ICOs or token sales that it can be done in a compliant way so that people can make money over Steem and actually keep it. You cannot grow an ecosystem if most of the money goes to legal fees and fines.
Lawyers and similar need to sell a token we can all buy for their services. This way speculation on the risk of a crackdown can cause people to buy the tokens in advance if they feel they might need them. The big issue is going to be there could be a shortage of lawyers to go to. The other issue is the cost of the lawyers is so damn high that we all have an incentive to reduce the cost of the legal fees using the Steemit technology if possible.
Please respond to my argument and not a phantom argument.
Implying that it would be their job to tell you all the regulatory risks of SMTs.
I don't need to imply. I was talking about lawyers in these comments who usually post when anyone mentions ICOs. Suddenly they aren't around?
And yes I do think while Steemit doesn't have to do anything to mitigate the risks it is still appropriate for Steemit to warn about the risks. It is what I would do if I were running the company because people need to know and weigh the pros and cons.
I will offer an example just for instance. If you go to any crowd funding website which is legitimate then no they do not offer "legal counsellings" but they do make it clear that there are risks and that you may need to seek legal counsel before you do certain things. Then they direct you to the resources you need.
Steemit Inc in my opinion should make the risks clear and then direct people to the resources they may need. This doesn't mean Steemit Inc has any responsibility to provide legal services because Steemit isn't a legal services company. To launch something like SMT while not even mentioning that it might be legally risky is in my opinion a mistake. Let people go into it knowing the situation, and then they can pay for the legal services necessary to launch.