Proposal “legal-201610“ (Closed)Back

Title:Legal Part 2 (Oct)
Owner:babygiraffe
One-time payment: 1733 DASH (333177 USD)
Completed payments: 1 totaling in 1733 DASH (0 month remaining)
Payment start/end: 2016-10-05 / 2016-11-19 (added on 2016-09-24)
Final voting deadline: in passed
Votes: 1275 Yes / 444 No / 0 Abstain

Proposal description

This is a cross-post from the Dash Forum

This proposal is simply to complete the second half of the required funding for the working being conducted by the PIllsbury law firm. If you are not familiar, the original proposal with additional details can be found here: https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-legal-sept.10457/

After the initial approval, we have signed an engagement letter with Pillsbury and the initial retainer has been funded. The legal work should begin within the next week or two. The total cost estimate ranges from $35,000 to $45,000, and the first $20,000 has been committed thus far. We will therefore need approximately another $20,000 to complete the project, which this proposal will fund.

The first set of questions we are in the midst of addressing consists of the following on masternode investing and liabilities, and exchange liabilities for regulated fiat exchanges:

1) Legal opinion on the treatment of masternode block rewards under the Internal Revenue Code
a. Whether they are treated similarly to mining rewards, interest, or other tax treatment
b. Tax treatment of the initial collateral “investment”

2) Liability of masternode owners for the transactions they facilitate
a. Whether masternode owners may be responsible for criminal activities connected with transactions they facilitate
b. If so, under what circumstances
c. Whether participation in “mixing” services might give rise to criminal liability
d. If so, under what circumstances

3) Liability of exchanges that support Dash transactions and guidelines on meeting existing compliance
a. Whether an exchange might be held liable for criminal activity
associated with PrivateSend transactions and under what circumstances

Requested funding is as follows for the October 5th budget cycle:
Total: 1733.46 Dash

Note: Any unused budget will be applied toward other legal expenses

Show full description ...

Discussion: Should we fund this proposal?

Submit comment
 
0 points,9 months ago
Before considering anymore legal fees and before there's a Legal Part 3, some questions need to be answered:

Is this a fixed fee arrangement or will it be supported by their timesheets with an hourly rate with perhaps a fee cap?
Have other firms been approached with the same scope and requested for a quote? Which firms?
Is the full scope based on the above questions?

https://www.dash.org/forum/threads/proposal-legal-part-ii-oct.10786/#post-105430
Reply
1 point,9 months ago
The only thing that should be done about legal issues is finding ways to stay out of opressive jurisidictions, especially the US.
Reply
1 point,9 months ago
I hate taxes (and lawyers). I will abstain from voting this one on principles.
Reply
1 point,9 months ago
can't this wait till next month? there are so many good proposals this could bump out.
Reply
1 point,9 months ago
Correct, 4-5 proposals are doomed because of this one. Including core proposals. Would be better to postpone this one ...
Reply
1 point,10 months ago
The history of Bitcoin provides a lot of the legal clarity. Our blockchain is a clone of Bitcoin, is it not? This is a very expensive proposal. Do we really need a lawfirm to tell us their opinions? I hate to vote no to lose the first half of the investment, but soooo much money. I hope we don't ever do this again.
Reply
1 point,10 months ago
I do not vote on it - if Satoshi had asked a law firm Bitcoin would have never been here
Reply
1 point,10 months ago
Like Bitcoin, the DASH genie is out of the bottle. We are begging for forgiveness, not asking for permission.
Reply
1 point,10 months ago
honestly, i see Dash as an alternative "banking" for Americans living abroad... While this proposal is very US centric, i think it needs to take into consideration that the biggest use case and adoption for Crypto will likely be outside the US, same way smaller countries leapfrog the US in terms of internet usage, cell network speed, etc... Africa had 4G before it was available in the US. Americans outside the US are basically at this point not able to bank outside the US thanks to FACTA.
Reply
1 point,10 months ago
I agree, however the U.S are the world police (they have the biggest guns), so any legal framework needs to be started there. People don't get extradited to Africa for breaking African laws despite never having been to Africa. This is a good place to start, and hopefully different localities will adopt these principles to fit the laws in their area.
Reply
2 points,10 months ago
I hope that this initiative will give clarity to businesses and exchanges who are thinking about Dash. If it helps to spread adoption and add fiat on-ramps, I am all for it. This is my hope, and why I will vote yes.
Reply
0 points,10 months ago
I'll vote yes on this.

But, many of the questions are very US-centric. Questions should be expanded to include the ramifications for doing the same thing in other parts of the world.

The US is Claiming "exceptionalism" and world jurisdiction, which means there is a need to look at options where the US is as far out of the loop as possible. Maybe a Cryptocurrency refugee program, but the question if DASH Holdings qualify for asylum needs to be analysed.
Reply
0 points,10 months ago
But what if they give us answers we don't like? What do we do then?
Reply
0 points,10 months ago
My suspicion is that the team was already given a superficial "no major problems apparent," from the law firm before moving forward to the actual opinion. Engagements like this are never done completely in the dark.
Reply
0 points,10 months ago
Move to Canada?
Reply
0 points,10 months ago
That won't help if your market is USA.
Reply