An Attack on Technology - Open Source Crowdfunding is in Danger

The recent shut down of the Munchee ICO https://techcrunch.com/2017/12/12/sec-shuts-down-munchee-ico/ , we are looking at an attack on innovation. What we have here is nothing more than the old establishment, kickstarter, gofundme, etc. , who have barely learned to walk already coming down on their new younger brother, the ICO.

What is the difference between allowing funders to purchase tokens to support an idea or cause and blindly donating to an idea or cause? In fact there is an argument that offering tokens as some form of reward is even a little superior to offering nothing at all in the form of kickstarter rewards.

If we force every ICO to register as a security we will be killing this technology in it's infancy. If the SEC has been created to protect investors than why not let investors invest? Only letting the rich invest in new technology is no protection at all. It is classism. Anyone and everyone should have the right to support ideas, concepts and innovation.

There must be an out. There must be some acknowledgment of when a token is NOT a security. If there is no acknowledgment, if there is no fight for the other side of the 'coin' then all we will have are new cryptos based on profit sharing and that severely limits what is possible with this technology. If all we have is a new replacement for stocks then how will companies migrate their reward systems, coupons, loyalty points etc.. , on to shareable indisputable token networks. We have a fantastic new technology available for innovation and in the United States there is a great force to limit it to applications of traditional investment. This is only a small part of what is possible with smart contracts non-fungible and fungible assets. We are strangling this baby in the crib.

Who will take advantage of the hole in innovation left by the SEC? Singapore. Gibraltar, Russia, India, and nearly every other country who does not believe it only the right of the rich to engage in innovation. The people of every nation are crying out for this technology and only in the U.S. silencing people who wish to vote with their money. The people voted that they wanted Munchee to succeed and now those people are robbed of their investment. What could have come from Munchee is dashed and the U.S. economy will suffer, not only for Munchee, but for the discouragement of start ups in general.

Maybe Munchee should have worded their marketing copy differently. Maybe they shouldn't have promised financial incentives, but to be forced to give back their money and destroy their business is excessive, destructive, and sets a draconian example that will drive business an innovation out of the U.S. by the drove, by the herd and by the mass. We see it with every new blockchain company that is forced to register in Singapore or ignore U.S. customers.

All tokens are not stocks in companies. Some people want us to believe that. Who are they? The competitors of this new form of crowdfunding and incentive program would feel threatened by this more efficient form of business. These new start ups don't have to give away equity and be ruled by arm chair investors, they don't have to pay fees to middle men, and they can offer services to a larger group of people faster than ever before. This is unprecedented. This essentially defeats traditional crowdfunding websites and droves lawyers who feel entitled to their protection money. But, at what cost to the economy -- to U.S. innovation does this limitation in who can use the technology and what they can use if for cost? It costs our competitive edge in the world in the very software we have slaved to help create.

On behalf of all the innovators, the 150 companies who are now funded to start business, the nascent entrepreneurs, and programmers building applications that as yet have no classification, let us not be stocks, let us not be securities when we are not stocks and when we are not securities. If holding tokens gives you no special rights, if selling tokens implies no financial gain, if exchanging the tokens for a service is part of the business model let us be what we are, carnival tickets for rides, coupons for discounts, rewards points, and other kinds of points that do not imply any ownership in any company. Don't just push from one side of this argument because the other side could benefit the U.S. and it's economy even more.

To the innovators. Speak out. Do not be brow beat by the lawyers and the nay sayers. Stand up for side B. There are enough articles about securities. Write some articles about your utility and your innovation, your functionality. Fight for the new thing and be brave so you don't have to register in another country and be ashamed of your innovation. There is a new thing and it is not a security and it is not a stock.

And to the companies who have had successful ICOs. Please please protect the bridge. Let the rest of us cross. We believed in you and voted for your products. Please help the community before it is washed away.