The threat of state regulation in the crypto world: an appeal about the LBRY vs SEC case

It's funny the defense of certain legal monopolies over certain areas in entrepreneurship as a whole. You cannot lend money at interest to your friend, because that is the crime of “lending money”, but the bank can do it with interest even more abusive than yours and still receive rewards for making more money from it than other banks, you can't sell your company's shares directly to your friend, because financial transactions have to go through the stock exchange, even DAO end up at risk with this, since, as each token works like a share, it gets into the same problem of you selling the stock directly (and don't think I'm talking a conspiracy theory, Odysee and LBRY are suffering right now for this kind of thing). And we know that, in the LBRY case, this is not what actually happens, since the token only grants you power within the network, and not a part of the company, which offers other services, such as Odysee, for example. Do you happen to receive any income from Odysee ads, or do you have any kind of real decision-making power over the platform other than saying what you liked and what you didn't like just because you have LBC? So how the hell can you say this is an action? That doesn't even make sense.

If you want to dig deeper, Gensler's lawyers have stated, according to LBRY, that the fact that people buy the token in parallel markets for speculative purposes makes each of the tokens is an investment contract.

European and American governments have already shown themselves to be particularly opposed to the crypto market, including wanting to ban certain coins that have certain characteristics that make control and regulation difficult. Let's not forget, for example, the past proposal to ban mining using PoW in Europe, or the block 682170, which was a serious attack to Bitcoin fungibility. Governments don't like something that allows people to transact or interact with each other without state regulation, or that allows people to disregard scribbled papers stamped by politicians, and we can't forget that, or try to cover the sun with the sieve, thinking that this only hits suspected millionaires in tax havens laundering drug money, and that it will never affect us.

I, personally, am afraid that this will happen with some DAO that I follow, like Shapeshift and Giveth, two DAO whose governance token gives you the right to vote on community proposals.

What happened with LBRY in the United States also serves as a wake-up call for the rest of the world, as, while the LBC token clearly cannot be considered a stock of a company, a government body said that the token is a stock, and that the company is trading illegally, and, if the result is positive, this will mean that there are both local and international precedents for destroying startups that have ties to blockchains, even if there are no clear reasons for doing so, and it is especially dangerous. for social networks that work on or have links to blockchains, such as Hive, Blurt or even CosTv.

Now is the time to show the governments of the world that we don't want this, and that freedom is far more important to us than any random law to protect the interests of the American stock exchange. Sign the petition for LBRY's defense in the LBRY v SEC case, defend cryptocurrencies and protect your individual freedom. You may not believe what I say, or think that I am exaggerating, but keep in mind that those of you who follow me on Odysee may miss it, and that those of you who are reading this text on Hive, Blurt, Steem or other networks may be the next in line to have their networks censored.

And, of course, if you still don't know Odysee, come to Odysee too =)