So it’s official? You now need to register as a Money Services Business if you want to develop non-custodial wallet software in the US and not go to jail?
Or am I missing nuance?
Thread
Login to reply
Replies ()
I mean loads of people do and seem fine? This case always seemed to be more about making an example out of people who went a bit far poking the bear in their marketing - or potentially a honey pot FED operation all along given how shit a job it did (and that was all about to end anyway so it outlived its use for that purpose anyway.)
But now precedent is a thing and now they have that so maybe we're all just fucked.
Is this the same racket they pulled on the e-gold business mentioned in The Genesis Book?
Very similar indeed, it would appear!
Lot's of nuance necessary here, and entirely unclear as neither Samourai Wallet nor Storm were convicted of licensing violations.
What *is* clear is that non-custodial developers should not, under any circumstances, knowingly transmit criminal funds.
Because the licensing requirement is unclear, it is also unclear *how* developers should do this. I'm not a lawyer and this is not legal advice, but I would either KYC+Chainalysis all the things, or immediately turn off your services for US users so that the DOJ cannot fabricate venue against you.
View quoted note →
developing software vs. running software as a service
So publishing a non-custodial bitcoin/ lightning wallet is what than?
I liked this on Lightning and money transmission: https://medium.com/@ekladous/are-bitcoin-lightning-nodes-money-transmitters-24cc5f1a38c6
If you run a Lightning node, you are obviously running software that helps people to transmit money. However, the transmitter can't steal the money, and that article gives multiple other reasons why Lightning is expected to be safe from the regs
But I'm still a bit nervous about this. Regulators might try to cause trouble for Lightning nodes
developing and releasing software as code.
but is "publishing" mean deployed, maintained, and operated as a contract/service on the network(s)?
Legislation is pending that, if passed, will end the threat:
Bitcoin Magazine
The CLARITY Act Heads To House Floor For Vote With Protection For Noncustodial Tools Intact
The section of the CLARITY Act (H.R. 3633) that protects Bitcoin and crypto users’ right to use noncustodial wallets as well as developers’ rig...
I read the text of the law (it's very short, it seems!) but I'm still not sure where Lightning ⚡ fits into this
If A pays C by Lightning, routing through channels involving B, then it could be argued that B transferred the money from A to C
Of course, Lightning was designed to make it impossible for B to steal the money; B can take the money from A if and only if they first pay C. My fear is that regulators might still abuse this
I guess I should do some research; I'm sure someone has thought of this already 😜
The problem is the government has been regulating by indictment. They have kept things intentionally confusing.
They want all of us to route all bitcoin transactions through intermediaries aka banks
What I don't understand is why you (not you as a person) link so quickly and shamelessly the real identity (Photograph + Real Name) with a cryptocurrency wallet.
Haven't you learned anything from the socialist countries, really?
That's why I raise my eyebrows when they ask for my name and email to open a wallet in Primal. We must protect ourselves; they want to control and censor the free market (as always).
Just build it elsewhere
FUCK KYC
This is about coordinating transactions only. A regular wallet dev has little to fear I think.