There’s been a lot of discussion about whether online or virtual accounts can be deemed securities under the U.S. federal securities law. The most well known at the moment is Bitcoin.
A case was just decided where the court found that Bitcoin was a currency. Based on that fact, and that the protaganist in the case was offering a money making scheme (you put in money, wait and make more money off Bitcoin), the scheme was subject to the securities laws. We’ll have to parse out the holding. The court did not hold that the Bitcoin itself is a security, but rather that Bitcoins are a type of currency – because they can be converted into currency (which I’m not sure I agree with – any commodity, product or item can somehow be converted to currency – and the distinction between selling and converting seems like a big deal). Here’s the link to the case, its actually rather short and sparse on legal analysis for one that makes such huge leaps in legal doctrine as applied to a concept which the court is probably not overly familiar with. The old adage that bad facts make bad law seems to be the culprit again, as the scheme the guy in Texas was attempting to pull off was not something a judge would let him off on.
I’m pretty sure this isn’t the last we’ve heard of the SEC v. Bitcoin debate. Mark it up as SEC 1, Bitcoin 0 so far, unfortunately.
I’ll give a breakdown of the securities laws and how they could be, and have been, applied to virtual goods, online items, and currency, including Bitcoin (which I’m not conceding is technically a currency). Read more