Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

LDGRToken - A compatible security token for issuing and trading SEC-compliant securities #1450

Merged
merged 20 commits into from
Oct 15, 2018

Conversation

johnshiple
Copy link
Contributor

Simple Summary
LDGRToken is an ERC-20 compatible token that complies with the new Securities Act Regulations: Regulation Crowdfunding, Regulation D, and Regulation A.

Abstract
LDGRToken facilitates the recording of ownership and transfer of securities sold under the new Securities Act Regulations. The issuance and trading of securities is subject to the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) and specific U.S. state blue sky laws and regulations.

LDGRToken manages securities ownership during issuance and trading. The Issuer is the only role that should create a LDGRToken and assign the RTA. The RTA is the only role that is allowed to execute LDGRToken’s mint, burnFrom, and transferFrom functions. No role is allowed to execute LDGRToken’s transfer function.

We welcome all feedback, commentary, and discussions.

@johnshiple
Copy link
Contributor Author

Fixed file name.

Removed co-authors in an attempt to address this submission error:
"Liquid Exception: Liquid error (/home/travis/build/ethereum/EIPs/_includes/eiptable.html line 11): comparison of Array with Array failed included in all.html"
@Arachnid Arachnid merged commit bfc76d5 into ethereum:master Oct 15, 2018
@lex-node
Copy link
Contributor

I don't think any ERC standard can be said to automatically/inherently "compl[y] with the new Securities Act Regulations: Regulation Crowdfunding, Regulation D, and Regulation A."

Moreover, something that is intended to work under a Reg A (resulting in freely tradeable securities) certainly would not ALSO simultaneously comply with Reg D (transfer restrictions under Rule 144 apply). Maybe say "facilitates compliance with any one or more of..."?

Also I'm pretty sure Regulation D can't credibly be called "new" considering it was enacted in 1982.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants