reply on: SN elects to go noncustodial on Nov. 5th

pull down to refresh

10 sats \ 4 replies \ @k00b OP 16 Oct \ parent \ on: SN elects to go noncustodial on Nov. 5th - FAQ & AMA meta

Because we are choosing to pay that money to territory owners on daily basis. Even if it were "custody," my understanding is that territory owners are like merchants and SN is like a Shopify and custody of revenues in such cases does not qualify as money transmission.

10 sats \ 3 replies \ @k00b OP 16 Oct

The distinction is subtle but again, just my understanding, is that the poster/commenter/zapper doesn't not spend with the intent of giving the territory founder money. SN isn't taking custody of money as party A gives it to party B. SN is merely cutting the territory founder into SN's own revenue like it does with rewards - albeit more predictably.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @chris42 17 Oct

Thanks for replying, so in your opinion would a lightning faucet count as a money transmitter? So user A adds a reward and some user claims it.

1030 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b OP 17 Oct

No imo. The general spirit of most money transmitter laws is consumer protection, ie protection from false claims like "If you give me money, I'll give it to this specific person for you."

Not legal advice, but if it were a donation to the faucet and the faucet chose to "drip" it to people at its own discretion then the faucet is simply spending its own money.

15 sats \ 0 replies \ @chris42 17 Oct

Thanks, thats really helpful!