It is up to the individuals impacted by HF23 to take action. Sonce I am not one of those individuals I cannot.
I've already mentioned why HF23 is different than Hive. Hive is a taxable event in the IS and HF23 isn't. This is the basis of why one was theft and the other wasn't.
If we want cryptocurrencies to gain legitimacy and the mainstream use and value that comes with it, we will be wise to follow existing laws to some degree.
Steemit is an LLC and the sockpuppets are controlled by Steemit. Justin Sun privately owns the company which means he is liablento decisions made by it. In fact he could see jail time if he willfully uses the company to break the law.
It's not a public corporatiion where board members are elected, even though dpos may make it seem like this. Steemit's mistake was voting. Justin will have a difficult time explaining this wasn't his sole decision and responsibility.
He could also be forced to use Steemit inc assets to pay compensation, fortunately Steemit INC has ~60 million Steem to easily cover the ~20million.
When you read the Steemit Inc privacy policy and TOS they recognize certain obligations. This gives people hints at which legal entities they recognize. New York comes up a lot and New York has some good laws (good for the people who were victimized, not for Justin).
Very nice, this is the most compelling argument that anyone has made by a huge margin.
You are bringing a lot to the table here.
I guess the real question going forward is whether it is theft if both sides are decentralized.
There's also the question about whether it matters or not.
I would argue it doesn't matter because decentralized entities are highly resistant to litigatigation.
We have heard a lot of people say Steem is barely decentralized. Also I think it is a bit of a strech to even call Hive decentralized (It's just more decentralized than steem).
You are right if the platform was truly decentralized, it would be harder for governments to hold it accountable. But we could end up with them just making it illegal. If that happens, it won't be popular.
Also, people can still steal from decentralized entities. For example, there is 63million Hive in the dao account. If the witnesses just decided to suddently divide it amongst themselves in a quick hardfork, we would probably take actio. This is also why I think if Bittrex just goes with the Steem consensus, they could be breaking the law.
A good example from the non-crypto world is populism, or tyranny of the majority. Even legitimate democratic states break international law all the time.
It frustrates me that users here don't realize this money is a Red Herring.
They could just as easily destroy it and create other coins out of thin air and gift it to themselves.
Wolf has even advocated that we get rid of author rewards all together and turn those rewards into a token. God I hate that douche. He wants the witnesses to control all the inflation of Hive. Everything he does caters to the elite here.
I completely agree. I just bring it up because it is tangible. There is also the argument that it was created for development and maintenance. It's rational to assume it will be destoryed or used for its intended purpose. I can't say the same for the infinite amount of Hive that could just be forked into existence.
I guess another way to look at it is to consider BTC where all the inflation goes to miners. Maintaining the network just gets transaction fees.
Hive has 20% of the inflation going to maintenance and development as it stands and no transaction fee (there is RC, but it is renewable). Finds need to be used appropriately.
Did somebody mention 'litigatigation'?
never thought about this, but if this is true (an it sounds that it is) you just won this argument :D
also the fact that one account is in full control of what is going on on steem does not help them.
think @edicted commented somewhere below that @freedom stopped voting was a smart thing from his side.
the thing that manager and owner of LLC are responsible for what LLC does is true, and they could end up in jail for things they did. From what i seen in my country most of the time most blame usually goes to the manager, except in cases where manager can prove that owner knew everything that was done.
LLC just means that you can't "take" owners private house because his LLC owns you money.
Yes. I am shocked about people who think corporations can do whatever they want. They are just a 'legal person' when it comes to the account. If I break the law on your behalf, I'm still criminally liable.
Shareholders have to be careful when voting for something illegal. Stealing is a fairly obvious crime. Just because you have the ability to steal (consensus witnesses can hardfork the chain), doesn't make it right.
It's obvious to me, but shocking to see home many people just accept tyranny of the consensus as legitimate. The actions were illegitimate. If Steemit consinutes to donwhat they want, it serves no one else's interest amd gives all dpos, pos, even crypto a bad name.
This is a critical difference in how stockholders of corporations are liable under law. IANAL, but case law has widely differed due to this difference in ownership.
Yes you are right. Generally LLC means owners aren't responsible for financial obligations, the corporation is. However, owners or acting managers are still responsible for crimes. Theft is a crime.