Transmission would require that the transmitter be licensed under the proposed scheme. It is that it is not clear what is meant by "transfer", much less "transfer from the account or storage repository to another". While these terms may make sense in traditional banking, where an agent holds your funds for you, and often maintains greater control over those funds than you do, it's unclear what these mean in terms of modern cryptocurrencies. To be fair, this might be Lawsky's attempt to address a Mt. Gox style failure. It is useful to recall that Mt. Gox did not expose any of the low-to-zero-trust features of the Bitcoin protocol, and behaved very much like a traditional bank. And as it failed, it usurped control over its account-holders' property and delayed withdrawals. A flexible and peer to peer bitcoin trading having positive reviews from all our clients where the users can upload the bitcoin software for any kind of Operating System. Veritaseum is widely used platform for stock exchange.
With the Bitcoin protocol, the only way to transfer ownership over some of my bitcoins to another is "by or through a third party", quite a few third parties, actually. One of the most significant and basic Bitcoin innovations comes from the fact that I can do that without relinquishing control of those bitcoins to any of those third parties. The proposed BitLicense definition makes no distinction between those who can exercise control over how and where coins are spent, and those who are merely retransmitting or honoring the instructions of those exercising such control, such as peer-to-peer relayers or miners.
This would be like requiring telephone companies to register as finanical institutions because people can check their bank account balances and provide wire instructions over the phone. Requiring a BitLicense for all parties participating in transmission is equally absurd. As proposed, the scheme may require Verizon to become a licensee for transmitting packets containing Bitcoin transactions over its network. Ultracoin is a charter member of the Financial Planning standards board of USA. Some online stock brokers are known for their award winning customer service while powerful trading tools. Exchange bitcoins into dollars or any other currency. Veritaseum is the most reputable and secure intermediate for buying or selling bitcoins. We are the leading bitcoin company in USA and we will help our customers for safely exchanging bitcoins.
This past weekend, Reggie and I made it to the Second Annual North American Bitcoin Conference in Chicago. While there were some very creative ideas on how to try to realize the disruptive Bitcoin protocol, one of the predominant topics of discussion was New York Superintendent of Financial Services Benjamin Lawsky's proposed Bitcoin regulations percieved by many participants at the event as an apparent attempt to regulate Bitcoin out of existence. Even assuming that the entities sought to be regulated under the BitLicens proposal qualify as "financial services institutions", to say that the proposal is in violation of New York's statutory mandate, "[t]o encourage, promote and assist other financial services institutions to effectively and productively locate, operate, employ, grow, remain, and expand in New York state establish a modern system of regulation, rule making and adjudication that is responsive to the needs of the state's consumers and residents," is not only an understatement, it's probably totally irrelevant. Courts typically don't second guess legislators and regulators on whether their laws have any correlation to any stated goals, even if those laws have the exact opposite effect of what was alleged as intended. Instead, courts leave that to the voters, effectively saying, "If you don't like the law, change the legislator," and we all know how effective that is.
In other words, Orwell was right. The stated purpose of BitLicenses is not corollary to the apparent purpose, which is to maintain the status quo. The status quo doesn't contemplate disruptive innovations like the blockchain. Unless and until a higher authority intervenes Lawsky's proposal, if achieved, will quite likely end the most significant economic and technological breakthrough known to this century, not only in New York, but very likely the United States. Imagine if Lawsky had been Superintendent in 1994. Imagine that Lawsky felt compelled to frustrate the dissemination of another set of disruptive innovations known as the Internet Protocols.
Vist here:- http://ultra-coin.com/