Legal Battle Dash Stash

Kevin Stalker

Kevin Stalker

Active member
I propose that in the future, a few months or so away, we will start to face legal fees.

The government don't know what to do about cryptocurrency, they don't even know what it is. If its currency they can use financial conduct laws to control it, but they can't tax profit on it. If its an asset they can tax you when you buy and sell it, but then buying things with it is barter. Its really more like a piece of computer software which you can't copy. Its everything and nothing.

But when they get their act together they will make laws and regulate us.

What do we have other currencies don't have?

1. Privacy. They will use money laundering laws and say we are complicit because we have privacy.
2. Power. By then we will be a/the market leader.
3. Organisation. We have offices and people and income and money.
4. Evolution. See below.

Currently governments are trying to tax crytocurrency when you turn it back into fiat. They control banks. But as soon as people can buy products directly with dash, so that it circulates without ever becoming fiat, they will lose their ability to tax it. This wont do.

They can make laws that suit them, then enforce those laws. They have already made a start.

We clearly need a large stash of money in a kitty which we can use to defend, as best we can, against legal challenge.

I suggest that I create a budget proposal for 250 dash per month, for 3 months (+5 for the proposal - its traditional). The dash will be put into a multi-signature wallet with 5 nominated people able to sign. If 4 out of the 5 agree, some dash can be used from the wallet to pay for legal advice and/or representation in the event of it being required. This might include being sued by private individuals, companies, or the state.

I plan to be a nominee, but the other 4 people will have to put themselves up for the task and be agreed, perhaps by consensus.

I can't decide if we should require 4 signatures or 3. The money cant get locked in, but also cant be accessible by individuals without consensus.

Comments?
 
Kevin Stalker said:
I suggest that I create a budget proposal for 250 dash per month, for 3 months (+5 for the proposal - its traditional). The dash will be put into a multi-signature wallet with 5 nominated people able to sign. If 4 out of the 5 agree, some dash can be used from the wallet to pay for legal advice and/or representation in the event of it being required. This might include being sued by private individuals, companies, or the state.
Click to expand...

Something like this would require a well-formulated policy to make it clear which claims would be valid and accepted, and which won't be.
 
Just a question on this, what happens to the unspent bit of our dash budget each month? You know, the bit that doesnt go into winning proposals?

This idea is for a stash of cash to fund legal costs. Have we actually got that?
 
Right, so the idea of creating a sevure wallet containing coins to be spent by a comittee for legal defence has merit then
 
Don't get your hopes up. As usual core keeps back some of the finer details and the amount allocated for legal purposes could not possibly protect against a widespread take-down of servers by the FBI. Nor will it protect anyone outside of the US.
 
We could use a second legal opinion in lieu of the latest opinion from Cooley which didn't provide much substance. I didn't read the ATM sections but the short paragraphs on taxes and money laundering they provided was easily searchable through a few hours on Google. There's a few good public legal studies out there too already I'll be making a thread on.
 
For my part i still think the dash stash idea is good, but the people with influence seem to think its not needed. It was just a thought. It has to get a yes vote from the masternodes to get implemented, which seems unlikely given the level of support it has had.
 
Thinking on it further, one of the big reasons big companies won't touch crypto is because of the ambiguity surrounding the security ruling. Looking into getting an official ruling on dash from the SEC or Futures Trading Commission would be more fruitful than asking firms and lawyers.
 
But its a big world. Every country has its own ideas. At the moment they cant make their minds up whether its a threat or an opportunity. I think the idea that you could get any sort of ruling that would be binding even across all the states of the usa is optimistic, but even if you did it wouldnt affect the majority of us.
 
I agree there should be a sizable legal defense fund held in dash. It could also be used for lobbying activities. Preferably it would be managed by the foundation or legal specific group.

There are a couple reasons to have it pre-funded. As legal action would not take a full cycle of funding to start. If the budget is full in the future it would not take away from activities as there is a savings account. It's a form of insurance against inbound threats. Also advertising as news sites love to cover drama.

Small businesses usually pay 1%+ of revenue just for basic insurance coverage. Not sure if the dash development team even has that, unless its required by the state for w2 employees etc.
 
It seems you and i agree perfectly. Legal costs can be sudden and high. it wouldnt do much harm to stash some dash somewhere now, especially if the price is likely to be higher by the time we need it. Some will worry about how it is controlled, but surely a committee of trustees is possible.
 
Kevin Stalker said:
For my part i still think the dash stash idea is good, but the people with influence seem to think its not needed. It was just a thought. It has to get a yes vote from the masternodes to get implemented, which seems unlikely given the level of support it has had.
Click to expand...
Why do you keep on bitching about this? Are you so desperate to have stash somewhere?
 
Nick said:
Thinking on it further, one of the big reasons big companies won't touch crypto is because of the ambiguity surrounding the security ruling. Looking into getting an official ruling on dash from the SEC or Futures Trading Commission would be more fruitful than asking firms and lawyers.
Click to expand...
I think that continuing the path of attempting to legitimize ponzi-by-proxy-of-feature-set-failure is silly for a currency that fixes that feature set failure, or, at least advertises that it does.

Zero fucks given what the SEC has to say. Not because I hate the SEC or not. But, because crypto should not be going down that road to begin with. Bitclones have become that monster because they're not good for anything else, and, frankly, any excuse the SEC can make to keep it out, is simply common-sense.

DASH doesn't have to follow. DASH has the feature set. It can be actual money. But, it keeps failing to capitalize on the very concepts it invented because it is beset by that ponzi mentality in the community, and the massive ego problems of it's leadership.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top