Hacker News Reader

Comment by busymom0 | Hacker News Reader

Slightly off topic but SEC is going after small competition to YouTube LBRY and Odysee platform by claiming their LBRY Credits are "securities" and thus need to be regulated. If this happens to LBRY, then other cryptocurrencies will be next.

https://helplbrysavecrypto.com/faq

Video summaries:

> SEC vs. LBRY Could be DEVASTATING! Viva & Barnes HIGHLIGHT:

https://youtu.be/kB_TrpRikq8

> SEC vs. LBRY Crypto Lawsuit

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JyIPFuUbWg

View on HN

There are very specific requirements with strong precedent (see: Howey Test https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/howey-test.asp) that must be met to be considered a security, and it is very clear that currencies like Bitcoin don't meet them. If various bodies wish to regulate it, there are plenty easier and stronger tools to use than securities laws. With that said, many companies involved in minting their own cryptocurrency (primarily during the IPO craze a few years ago) did sell unregistered securities in plain sight, often committing massive fraud alongside it, and it's no surprise that the SEC has been catching up with it over the last few years.

Most of your comment is okay but the last line in your comment seems to making a slight allegation that LBRY did something fraudulent which is not what happened nor is being accused here by the SEC. Nor is this a recent development. SEC has been harassing LBRY since May of 2018 and they have spent over a million in legal fees so far.

If this harassment continues, how any startup will be able to continue fighting bigger fish like YouTube, FB etc is beyond me.

> ...how any startup will be able to continue fighting bigger fish like YouTube, FB etc is beyond me.

Maybe by not selling unlicensed securities. Like bitchute is doing, or daily motion, or rumble, or even peertube.

I'm not saying that selling unlicensed securities should be illegal, but it currently is, and if you look at LBRY, there's a strong case that it did sell an unlicensed security.

that's okay, the market hasn't seemed to really care about any of that. its been a Sword of Damocles hanging over many tokens heads, and sometimes they've dropped pretty hard on the teams and the market shrugged it off.

the issue is that actual unregistered securities can't be traded by custodial exchanges, and registered securities have to be traded by broker dealers, and none of that exists or has any liquidity in crypto land.

but the autonomous non-custodial exchanges have more volume and liquidity now anyway

so nobody cares.

Is LBRY a registered business?

I don't see how SEC could regulate cryptos much more than they already do. I suppose the could force US exchanges to disable withdrawals like the Chinese government did a while ago for Chinese exchanges. Other than that there's nothing they can do regulation wise.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com