版权声明：
以下内容来自微信公共帐号“EOS技术爱好者”，搜索“EOSTechLover”即可订阅，译者Lochaiching。转载必须保留以上声明。仅授权原文转载。
本文原文内容链接来自于https://medium.com/@bytemaster/is-google-an-illegal-money-transmitter-and-securities-exchange-ed27fa53b301，作者Daniel Larimer，由本号“EOS技术爱好者”翻译。
Is Google an Illegal Money Transmitter and Securities Exchange?
谷歌是不合法的货币兑换商或证券交易所吗?
作者：Daniel Larimer
翻译：Lochaiching
It’s the year 2025. Alice and Bob form a company and issue themselves 1000 shares which they document using Google Sheets. They then proceed to sell shares to the public in exchange for shares of another company which also managed their cap table in a Google Sheet. Everyone has some permission to edit the spreadsheet to transfer their shares from one person to another person.
这是2025年，Alice和Bob成立了一个公司，他们基于Google Sheets（谷歌电子表格，可以理解为记账用的账本）的文件发行了1000份股票，然后在同一个平台上开始向公众出售这个股票来换取另一家公司的股票，该公司也在Google Sheets 中管理了他们的股东结构表。每个人都有权限更改spreadsheet，来转移他们个人持有的股份。
The only difference between this example and real Google Sheets is that this story is set in the year 2025 after Google moved the backend of Google Sheets to a blockchain.
这个例子和目前真实的Google Sheets版本之间唯一的区别是，这个故事发生在2025年，Google Sheets已经将后端移到区块链上了。
Today, thousands of less-sophisticated companies manage their shareholder cap tables on Google Sheets. These Google Sheets even log the edit history just like a blockchain. Does the fact that they use Google Sheets instead of Apple’s Numbers or Microsoft’s Excel change the legal nature of the Google Sheets service? Is Google now an issuer, custodian, administrator, and/or money transmitter?
如今，成千上万不太成熟的公司在Google Sheets上管理他们的股东结构表。这些股东结构表甚至像区块链一样记录编辑历史。他们使用 Google版而不是Apple的 Numbers 或是Microsoft的Excel，这是否改变了Google服务的法律性质? Google现在是发行人、托管人、管理人员或货币兑换商（money transmitter，具体解释链接：https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_transmitter）吗?
Blockchain as a Public Spreadsheet
A blockchain could be viewed as a spreadsheet and each cell may contain a value or an equation. Each equation could be viewed as a smart contract which has the ability to read other cells and update itself. The only difference between traditional spreadsheets and this blockchain spreadsheet is the cell-level permission management.
区块链作为一个公开的Spreadsheet
区块链可以看作是一个Spreadsheet，里面每个单元格包含一个值或一个等式。每个方程都被看作是一种智能合同，它具有读取其他单元并更新的能力。传统Spreadsheet和区块链Spreadsheet之间的唯一区别在于单元级别权限管理。
Paid Service Provider
Google requires that companies pay for commercial use of Google Sheets. This payment is typically in the form of a monthly payment of dollars on a per-user basis. Generally, Google also provides the service free-of-charge for non-commercial use. It is clear that Google has great flexibility in choosing if and how to charge for its service. Based upon this, it is also reasonable for future Google to accept shares of private entities in exchange for service.
支付服务提供商
Google 要求商业公司支付Google Sheets的使用费用，通常是按月支付。一般来说，Google会为非商业用途提供免费服务。显然Google在选择是否和如何收费方面具有很大的灵活性。基于此，未来Google会接受私人实体的股份来支付Google提供的服务也是在情理之中。
Does the idea that, in the year 2025, Google accepts payment-in-kind (shares of the businesses they serve) in exchange for the use of their Google Sheets service make Google the issuer of the shares they receive or money transmitters when they sell said shares?
在2025年，Google接受实物支付(它们所服务的企业的股票)来提供Google Sheets的服务，同时，这也让Google在出售所持股份时，可以将其所接收的股份或货币兑换商（money transmitters）的发行者变成谷歌的吗？
Ability to Export Spreadsheet
As a service provider Google does not lock users into their service. The data in every Google Sheet can be exported and evaluated in other spreadsheet platforms such as Apple’s Numbers or Microsoft Excel or even other online service providers such as Microsoft Office365. This means that Google Sheets does not own nor control the data; it is merely a service provider acting on behalf of its users rather than an fiduciary responsible to shareholders.
Spreadsheet输出的权限
作为一个服务提供商， Google并没有在服务中限制用户。每个Google Sheet的数据都可以在其他不同的比如Apple的Numbers，Microsoft的Excel或者Microsoft的Office365等其他在线服务提供商上导出和评估。这意味着Google Sheets没有控制数据的权限；它仅仅是代表对用户而不是对股东负责的服务提供商。
Multiple Service Providers
In order to prevent vendor lock-in, and in order to obtain competitive rates, Alice and Bob periodically vote to switch service providers. One week they use Google, the next Microsoft, and the next Apple. As Alice and Bob are the owners of their company they can use whatever provider gives them the best service for their money (or property-in-kind) and they do not have to get permission from the service provider(s) to switch to another.
多个服务提供者
为了防止厂商限制用户权限和提高竞争力，Alice和Bob通过定期投票来替换服务提供商。可能这周用Google，下周用Microsoft，接着是Apple。因为Alice和Bob是公司的所有者，他们可以优先选择使用其中提供者们提供的最好的服务，而不需要提供者的许可。
Trust in Service Provider
As Alice and Bob move from service provider to service provider they are trusting each provider to enforce the permissions defined the spreadsheet. Each provider has the ability to deny or delay service to users wishing to login and edit the spreadsheet. If any provider interferes with the editing process then Alice and Bob can simply move to a new provider. If any provider attempts to allow unauthorized edits then Alice and Bob can reject the edit and go with a new provider.
信任服务提供者
当切换服务提供者时，Alice和Bob需要相信每个提供者会按spreadsheet的权限来执行事务。有需要进行登录和编辑spreadsheet的用户，可能会遭到服务提供者的拒绝或延迟，要是出现这样的问题，Alice和Bob可以轻易切换到其他提供者上面继续进行用户的请求。如果出现未经授权的编辑改动，那么Alice和Bob可以拒绝这次行为，替换掉允许出错的提供者。
Does the fact that Google has the ability to freeze a shareholder’s account by preventing them from making an edit does make Google the custodian of the shares nor an intermediary between two shareholders attempting to buy/sell their shares in like-kind exchanges?
有没有一种可能性，Google自己能中心化地在股东之间进行编辑改动，来减小托管人从中抽取的股份份额，从而转移到Google上？（ like-kind exchanges 具体解释链接： https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Like-kind_exchange）
Corporate Account
In the particular case of a corporate account, Google is not creating an account for Alice and Bob but rather for their company, AB Co. The authorization for the account creation and share issuance to pay Google comes from the AB Co. shareholder agreement and votes cast by the AB Co shareholders. The decision to hire Google vs Apple is made by the vote of AB CO. shareholders and therefore Google or Apple know they have a properly authorized service contract.
公司账户
在特定情况下的企业账户, Google不是创建Alice和Bob的个人帐户而是AB有限公司账户。为创建账户和发行股票的授权，需要支付Google这笔关于公司股东同意和投票的费用。雇佣Google和Apple是由AB公司的股东投票决定的，因此Google或Apple这两个公司他们自己知道过程中有一个经过相关授权的服务合同。
Illegal Public Offering of Shares
Suppose AB Co. issued shares in violation of applicable securities regulations. Google is not the party who offered the shares and it is doubtful any reasonable court or regulator would find Google guilty of operating an illegal money transmission business, failing to follow know-your-customer regulations, or illegal securities issuance just for having provided spreadsheet services.
In this case the only law broken was the illegal public offering of shares by Alice and Bob.
非法公开发行股份
假设AB公司违反证券法规发行股票，Google不是参与方，但是任何一个合理的法院或监管机构发现了Google在经营非法资金兑换业务时犯了错误，比如没有遵循KYC（“了解你的客户”）的规定，或只是为了提供spreadsheet服务而非法发行证券。
在这种情况下，Alice和Bob所触犯的条例为非法公开发行股票。
What if Tokens are not Securities?
So far we have assumed that Alice and Bob sold securities (shares in their company) and tracked those shares in a spreadsheet. For a “share” to be a security they must be someone’s liability. If instead Alice and Bob sold monopoly money for which they made no promise to buy back or pay dividends, then this monopoly money is not a security. Instead, the spreadsheet is simply being used to play a game.
如果代币不是证券呢?
到目前为止，假设Alice和Bob出售证券(他们公司的股票)，并在spreadsheet中跟踪这些股份。为了让“股份”变成一种证券，必须要有人负起相应的责任。相反，如果Alice和Bob卖了没有承诺回购或支付股息的货币，那么这种货币就没有证券的意义。这个时候spreadsheet只是一个游戏性质的东西而没有其他意义。
Google may choose to accept game-tokens as payment just like they could choose to accept nothing as payment. These game tokens may even be highly valuable to those who care about the game. The market value of the tokens is based upon supply and demand and not on the ability to enforce a liability on Alice and Bob.
Google可以选择接受游戏币的支付，甚至可以选择没有任何回报。游戏代币对那些关心游戏的人来说是非常有价值的。代币的市场价值是基于供求关系，而不是基于Alice和Bob承担连带责任的能力。
Does Google give the Tokens Value?
Over time Google increases the performance of their service and enables larger spreadsheets, higher performance, and lower costs. These performance/cost improvements benefit all users of the spreadsheet service which may indirectly make some game tokens more valuable. Some people may even buy tokens speculating that Google will increase performance and make the tokens more valuable. Google may even promise to increase performance if Alice and Bob pick them as a service provider.
These facts are no different than any other business promising to provide better service if you switch to them. The promise to improve the service of Google Sheets does not make Google liable for the token’s market value.
Google能赋予代币价值吗?
随着时间的推移， Google提高了服务的性能，支持更大的spreadsheet、更高的性能和更低的成本。性能和成本的提升让使用spreadsheet的所有用户受益，这也可能间接地使一些游戏代币升值，甚至有些人可能会对赌因此升值而提前买入Google的代币。Google甚至可能会许下如果被选中作服务提供者就提高性能的承诺。
这和承诺提供更好服务的企业没有什么不同。关于提高Google Sheets服务的承诺也不能让Google对代币价值承担责任。
Conclusion
The mere existence of a token does not create a security nor a liability. The provision of computation-as-a-service does not make one a money transmitter or securities exchange. Paying service providers-in-kind does not make the service providers issuers nor money transmitters.
结论
仅仅存在一个代币并不会让其产生证券或需要负责连带责任。提供计算服务并不会使你成为一个货币兑换商（money transmitter）或证券交易所。付费的服务提供者并不会变成服务提供发行者或货币兑换商。
In the future, Google’s cloud based document editing and storage application services may be powered by a blockchain and people will be able to implement currencies, ICOs, and everything else that Etheruem does, on a spreadsheet powered by the open source EOSIO software created by block.one.
在未来，Google的云服务文档编辑和存储应用服务可能由区块链提供支持，人们能够在由block.one创建开源的EOSIO软件提供的spreadsheet ，实现像在以太坊那样的货币功能、筹集或其他其他功能。
I hope that this interpretation will help regulators understand how to interpret the relationship between block producers, miners, and users. A blockchain is simply a public database-as-a-service. The operators of this service do so with greater transparency and integrity than every other unregulated computation-as-service provider.
我希望这一解释将有助于监管机构理解区块生产商、矿工和用户之间的关系。区块链只是一个公共数据库服务，其中的操作者比其他不受监管的计算服务提供者都要更加透明和完整。
If there must be regulation on the issuing of securities and money transmission then it is the users who are liable for issuing the securities rather than the internet service providers, power companies, computer manufactures, and other parties that the foundation upon which digital issuance depends.
如果必须对发行证券和货币兑换进行监管，那就应该由用户负责发行证券，而不是互联网服务提供商、电力公司、计算机制造商和其他基于数字发行的主体。
本号翻译转述，
文中观点不代表本号任何立场
本文图片来源于网络
本文原文内容链接来自于https://medium.com/@bytemaster/is-google-an-illegal-money-transmitter-and-securities-exchange-ed27fa53b301，作者Daniel Larimer，由Lochaiching翻译。转载请参照本文文首说明。
