1994-08-21 - Re: e$: e-cash underwriting

Header Data

From: Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 04edd09ba5d1324194f98d9baae0f562b065d05a2d8aeedec05447cbe990b761
Message ID: <199408211725.KAA06943@jobe.shell.portal.com>
Reply To: <199408210219.WAA15566@zork.tiac.net>
UTC Datetime: 1994-08-21 17:25:53 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 21 Aug 94 10:25:53 PDT

Raw message

From: Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 94 10:25:53 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: e$: e-cash underwriting
In-Reply-To: <199408210219.WAA15566@zork.tiac.net>
Message-ID: <199408211725.KAA06943@jobe.shell.portal.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

rah@shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) writes:
>While I think the technical mechanics are simple (you all seem to, anyway),
>I'd like to see what regulatory and legal roadblocks have been identified.

Come on, Bob, we've talked about a lot of problems in the last few weeks: the
prohibitions on most forms of bearer bonds; the prohibitions on banks
issuing their own currency; the stringent regulations for private scrip
circulation.  Our people who know securities law can probably list a few

>The only way to find out about the *market* for the product is to test it.

OK, but also one way to find out whether it is legal or not is to test it.
If you end up in jail, I guess it wasn't legal.  Maybe that's not the
best strategy, though?

Send mail to netbank-info@agents.com for info on their non-anonymous (I
think) cash-like system.  I wonder whether they have worried about these
issues or whether they are trying out the strategy above.