Why don't they ever regulate something that actually fills up the dockets at the courthouse?.....because it's not a threat to the powers that be yet. Duh. The bigger question answered is see those things do end up in a court of law, you must have missed the article the other day concerning some cypto being recognized because basically the lawsuits being brought forth can't proceed if what was claimed to be lost couldn't be traded or have value to justify the losses being sued for. (It was complicated) But now the lawsuits can move forward. It's easy for you to sit here and blabber on and on because you aren't the one who would eventually be left to face the music as they say.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
You did miss the article. Okay, that crypto can now be traded on the open market, as in stock exchanges, meaning now they DO have to follow REGULATORY guidelines, (I'll give you a minute to say ouch and recover)....the reasoning being is that these losses/claims being filed in courts couldn't move forward because without there being a recognized value attached there couldn't be any claims of damages brought forth. So yes this has become a significant issue, so yes this is a small step forward, so yes people running crypto currencies will slowly face the possibilities of being regulated and sued, so they had better get their ducks in a row.
OMG, Steemit is a PRIVATELY HELD COMPANY, those running the company are directly responsible for following regulations. It wasn't a judge but someone on a regulatory committee who approved a crypto currency to trade on the open market, to bring it under regulatory controls, because so many claims for losses were being filed, in order to address those losses there had to be recognition of it to have value, once value is confirmed people can file against people who start their own crypto currencies founded companies. So, and just for example, say someone sues Steemit because they lost thousands of dollars for being flagged like this guy claimed for no real good reason, and because Steemit owners allow this to happen that person can directly file suit against the owners of Steemit because they are the one's in control of how it is structured, the way they structured the program led to the losses. Flagging is meant for a purpose not for a revenge tool, if Steemit continues to let it be abused for ways other then it was intended they could potentially be held liable if Steem were also added to the open market.
Do you also understand that 19 witnesses get together with those who structure the programs to find ways to come into compliance so they don't have to go to jail, spend all their money defending themselves...and that would only be if the feds didn't freeze their assets. I mean really man makes some sense, do you think that dozens upon dozens of people want to disrupt their lives, lose their fortunes, just so some guy can abuse a flagging system in a way that was not intended? Really? Honestly? I know 19 witnesses who'd rather give up being a witness and call it good.
You were the one who brought the witnesses into this. I wasn't even thinking about them, why on earth would someone want to sue the witnesses?....it's the owners that would get sued. I don't know what country you come from but here in the US people get protected from abuse, and your blockchain can abuse all they want but you know what?...those who develop and allow the abuse can be sued for loses of those abuses if regulatory value is instilled. Once again, Steemit is a privately held company, as a privately held company the owners can be held liable for abuse.
Now you are going off on a censorship rant. Listen to you. Okay Steemit was built that thwart not just censorship from government but from censorship period. Meaning if someone was using the flagging system to censor someone into oblivion a person could file in court that the platform was built to avoid censorship, therefore the flag being used to silence someone is in violation of the rules, the rules have to apply overall, the companies failure to apply the rules overall opens them up to liability from the affected filer. If you are flagging someone to silence them that is abuse of the flagging system.