This report (about the DAO) was published yesterday by the SEC, and is the clearest description I've seen so far:
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/investreport/34-81207.pdf
If you skip to section III (on page 10), they go through the reasoning in a fairly clear manner.
- Investors in The DAO Invested Money ...
- With a Reasonable Expectation of Profits ...
- Derived from the Managerial Efforts of Others ...
- And the DAO website was accessible in the US
They also define a security as an "investment contract", saying:
An investment contract is an investment of money in a common enterprise with a reasonable expectation of profits to be derived from the entrepreneurial or managerial efforts of others
A summary is here:
https://www.investor.gov/additional-resources/news-alerts/alerts-bulletins/investor-bulletin-initial-coin-offerings
Thanks for sharing this. I don't have the available mental or emotional capacity to read further on government websites (as a voluntarist, I get depressed realizing most people accept the legitimacy of their control), but I really appreciate your TL:DRs. I and perhaps others may still read the sources you provided.
Another point I'd like to make is: Despite the "clarity" on ICOs or crytpo fundraising being applicable to the SECs jurisdiction (which is what they want), my follow up question is What power does the SEC have to actually persecute or keep track of ICO investment activity? As Vitalic said on Twitter recently -- (paraphrase) They can't stop us all. That's what makes crypto the honey badger.
If people ignore what the government says is required and buy altcoins, we're getting the best available form of decentralization available at this time.
great response man. this is valuable. I saw something about this on zerohedge the other day. and boy let me tell you....its about to get interesting.