"That makes sense, but isn’t quite supporting the crypto-world’s preferred narrative."
What gives you that impression? This article is about memecoins, not 'real' cryptos like ethereum or bitcoin.
What gives you that impression? This article is about memecoins, not 'real' cryptos like ethereum or bitcoin.
This reads to me like "we won't treat your crypto like a security if you tie it to pop culture". Intent in purchasing crypto for novelty purposes doesn't change what it is or how people will use it.
Surely this would depend on use. There's nothing essentially different about memecoins that would imply a distinct outcome from say bitcoin. Of all the ways you could use this test, differentiating between "memecoins" and "legitcoins" seems like the worst possible scenario: there isn't actually any qualitative difference to find in the first place. Hence, why this will eventually fall on courts to figure out.
I've never even heard of the term "app coin" before but surely it's just yet another crypto token with similar constraints and lack of obvious use.
It's in the name. It's a token for use in an app. It derives value from the utility of that app and therefore the need to acquire the token to use the app. E.g. Filecoin. That pretty directly meets the Howey test.
A memecoin is explicitly pointless and of no utility. Its only purpose is to be a collectable associated with some pop culture. There is no expectation of value derived from its creator's efforts.
Bitcoin and ethereum are more complicated. Note that the SEC has previously ruled that bitcoin was not a security issuance, but ethereum was (though grandfathered in: the SEC declined to prosecute).