Facebook’s decision to ban crypto ads last month apparently wasn’t after organic consideration by the company, but after months of pressure from the FBI and other regulatory agencies which are now pressuring Google.
Jason Roy, a senior investigator at the Manitoba Securities Commission and chairman of Canada’s Binary Options Task Force, said:
“What happened is that Canada’s Binary Options Task Force as well as the FBI explained to Facebook what the concerns were and that these types of ads are leading to people becoming victims.
We’ve been talking to Google and had similar discussions and are waiting for them to take similar action.”
That “explanation” went on for months, with Facebook finally caving in. “We’re very pleased,” Roy said, who is now seemingly trying to force Google to do the same.
“My hope is that Google will enact a similar policy, where they specifically name products like binary options, ICOs and cryptocurrencies,” Roy said.
Apparently, Roy and FBI have been discussing the matter for months, but Google doesn’t seem to be impressed, with a representative stating: “We already ban and enforce against misleading ads and misrepresentation (across all categories).”
Raising the question as to why Roy and FBI want cryptos or ICOs to be named specifically, considering there are plenty of legitimate cryptocurrencies and ICOs.
“There’s just been an explosion of different ICOs and new tokens and crazy offerings. You’re seeing ICOs that are raising large amounts of money and there’s nothing behind them in certain cases, but members of the public are so hyped they’re throwing money at them,” Roy said.
So suggesting that people need to be protected from themselves in a nanny state of sorts where Google and Facebook is to act as law enforcement for the United States government:
“We would look at what they were doing and determine if this is an activity that can be registered and if they had in fact registered,” he said in the context of determining what ICO is legitimate.
So ignoring plenty of jurisdictions that do not require any registration. Just as they seem to be ignoring the fact the law even in US is very unclear on whether a registration is necessary as the classification of tokens as securities is now subject to a court ruling. While Wyoming’s state legislature has explicitly stated they are not securities.
This behind the scene pressuring therefore appears to be an over-reach of the executive, which made it appear Facebook had freely taken a decision rather than had seemingly been pressured into it.
