[1]: https://cryptoslate.com/sec-chair-gensler-confirms-everythin...
1. Bitcoin was classified as “currency” by Clayton.
2. It’s the closest to being decentralized so no “organization will benefit from the work of others”.
3. Growth of Bitcoin wasn’t initially speculative but as a use of currency, which is different from whatever token you fork as its goal would be for speculative trading, failing the Howey test.
https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2019/03/12/sec-chair-clayto...
This creates a regulatory risk, and is one reason for owning BTC instead of ETH. Note I own a few ETH and 0 BTC, and ETH has dropped 10% compared against BTC recently (normally they seem to be highly correlated (even long-term) which implies to me that the market is somewhat driven by generic crypto sector investing).
Edit: Coinbase’s argument that their staking service is not a security: https://www.coinbase.com/blog/coinbases-staking-services-are...
I doubt this claim with extreme prejudice.
https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/07/22/launching-the-ether-sal...
Staking and maybe EIP-1559 could change things?
It's sad since it seems like Coinbase is now directly collaborating with Ethereum developers https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-3651
> The COINBASE address shall be warm at the start of transaction execution, in accordance with the actual cost of reading that account. > The COINBASE address should also be always be loaded because it receives the block reward and the transaction fees.
Looks like Coinbase currently makes up 10% of Eth staking. Would this give special privileges to Coinbase over other exchanges?
No.
I'm not sure if ETH was completely in the clear even with this approach. Vitalik and other founders seemed to have created expectations of profit in their ICO presentations to US investors in a few 2014 videos.
I mean you can say whatever you want but if it quacks like a duck it’s still a security, if you don’t mind my mixed metaphor lol
Dogecoin is arguably in the same category as Bitcoin. So forks don't have to be securities. They do have to be actually decentralized, as in one entity does not decide which fork is the true fork (like with Ethereum, Bitcoin Satoshi Vision, etc).
>Why is Bitcoin not a security but if I fork Bitcoin it is a security?
You are right. Gensler was either misquoted or mispoke.
If somebody forks Bitcoin, distributes the majority of coins for free and renounces control; then random people (not connected to the founder) start voluntarily improving and giving it value, it probably wouldnt be a security.