is not considered that it is "not an offering" until you show them it isnt,and the SEC doesnt rely on the "obvious",they want facts
They didn't file anything saying it wasn't an offering, because it wasn't. That's the SECs hangup.
What information was he supposed to supply to prove it wasn't an offering. All they did was cite the law back to the SEC and the SEC agreed. See the case law they cited below:
Shouldn't the regulators already know the law as good as Ken's lawyers did? I think so. His lawyers were like, "uh, hello, here's the law...why are you saying it's an offering...it's not." LOL
Just my point, sometimes the regulators don't know the regulations.
I don't want to argue though. I appreciate the discussion though.