But don't they all have that language? Just by saying, "Oh, no, this isn't a security, it's a donation with no rights" doesn't make it so in the eyes of the law.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
But don't they all have that language? Just by saying, "Oh, no, this isn't a security, it's a donation with no rights" doesn't make it so in the eyes of the law.
Yeah, that's true. They have to also be able to make a reasonable argument that they don't fit the legal definition of "security" or that they're exempt. Even then, regulators may see things differently or even contradict themselves. Sometimes I really want to leave this country...
Have you seen this one?
https://www.rootproject.co
I'm confused by these projects that have a "pre ICO" before the real ICO. I just don't get it. It does seem like any interesting project though. I like the idea of cryptocurrency helping impoverished people.
It's just a pre-sale with a bonus. They also said they "needed to do the pre-ICO before legally forming because the nonprofit element brings in a whole other sector of law, and requires 50k-ish of lawyer bills."
I am not a lawyer and don't understand how RootProject can claim to be so well protected. Just asked in their slack. Hopefully they've got more than that statement on the website!