Yes, the idea they have is to target basically everyone possible with a NY-similar bitlicense scheme and to drive people away that have a shred of logic. These same bills have been defeated before in past years (brief summary below).
In 2022, California's bitlicense bill was reborn once again in a bill called AB 2269 introduced by Grayson (basically the same bill that we are seeing today with the AB 39 proposal), but AB 2269 was vetoed by the Governor. That didn't stop Grayson of course, he came back with the same bill repackaged as AB 39 this year. Regardless of any small changes that have been made to the bill since last year, AB 39 suffers from the same flawed thinking as did AB 2269 in 2022, AB 1489 in 2019-2020, AB 1123 in 2017-2018, and AB 1326 in 2015-2016 (all versions of California's proposed bitlicense bills we have defeated): The fact remains that AB 39 is a bill intended to suppress legitimate business in California.
As such, California will lose revenue if AB 39 becomes law, and more importantly it will lose innovators and the ability to legally support critical innovation (such as bitcoin development and business that associates itself with the same). That technological innovation WON'T STOP HAPPENING, it will just happen somewhere else other than California.
In 2016, AB 1326 (arguably the earliest version of the proposed California bitlicense) was opposed by at least 17 organizations formally as well as being opposed by hundreds of thousands of individuals, which led not only to its defeat but the defeat of other bills like it. And when bitlicense was enacted in New York, to describe the effect there, many companies simply stopped serving New York clients.
As of the date and time of this reply here, AB 39 has not yet been signed or vetoed by the California Governor.
freethinkingperson /
npub1gw…t4pha
2023-10-06 07:24:57
in reply to nevent1q…89wg
Author Public Key
npub1gw3phl4qrul5mre27zshty0n6m06p6thwugcr3362202e6xqhafsmt4phaPublished at
2023-10-06 07:24:57Event JSON
{
"id": "3bc4309283ac080bacdc76397e2e17bb5f52209015479c646135fd73dd06ddd0",
"pubkey": "43a21bfea01f3f4d8f2af0a17591f3d6dfa0e977771181c63a529eace8c0bf53",
"created_at": 1696577097,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"6e468422dfb74a5738702a8823b9b28168abab8655faacb6853cd0ee15deee93",
"wss://purplepag.es",
"Gigi ⚡🧡"
],
[
"p",
"69a0a0910b49a1dbfbc4e4f10df22b5806af5403a228267638f2e908c968228d",
"wss://purplepag.es",
"bleetube"
],
[
"e",
"e16b89aa8f11770520323f4e06ff3af5857fa44420a7c309aa8b92179abe9594",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"af1d85063566c39d9fb46e3a70c093870ea56793afcf85a5336925ed26fc5c56",
"wss://nos.lol",
"reply"
]
],
"content": "Yes, the idea they have is to target basically everyone possible with a NY-similar bitlicense scheme and to drive people away that have a shred of logic. These same bills have been defeated before in past years (brief summary below). \n\nIn 2022, California's bitlicense bill was reborn once again in a bill called AB 2269 introduced by Grayson (basically the same bill that we are seeing today with the AB 39 proposal), but AB 2269 was vetoed by the Governor. That didn't stop Grayson of course, he came back with the same bill repackaged as AB 39 this year. Regardless of any small changes that have been made to the bill since last year, AB 39 suffers from the same flawed thinking as did AB 2269 in 2022, AB 1489 in 2019-2020, AB 1123 in 2017-2018, and AB 1326 in 2015-2016 (all versions of California's proposed bitlicense bills we have defeated): The fact remains that AB 39 is a bill intended to suppress legitimate business in California.\n\nAs such, California will lose revenue if AB 39 becomes law, and more importantly it will lose innovators and the ability to legally support critical innovation (such as bitcoin development and business that associates itself with the same). That technological innovation WON'T STOP HAPPENING, it will just happen somewhere else other than California.\n\nIn 2016, AB 1326 (arguably the earliest version of the proposed California bitlicense) was opposed by at least 17 organizations formally as well as being opposed by hundreds of thousands of individuals, which led not only to its defeat but the defeat of other bills like it. And when bitlicense was enacted in New York, to describe the effect there, many companies simply stopped serving New York clients. \n\nAs of the date and time of this reply here, AB 39 has not yet been signed or vetoed by the California Governor.",
"sig": "8530c6915ccdca32ee218197fe28f1dec17b00e267e30c344b9be907688751e3bf507bac740f22f3c595a57fe94f91af0ff11ae111d35af988afe66da2873460"
}