This is a good point, but unfortunately I think just about any cryptocurrency would be a security if you interpret these guidelines liberally enough.
For example, investing in Bitcoin is 1) an investment of money 2) with the expectation of profit 3) by investing in the global payment network known as the Bitcoin network (as Bitcoin is both the currency and the network) 4) where you will profit if Bitcoin is used by many other parties and promoted by others
I’m not saying Bitcoin is a security, and I’m aware the above case is a lot harder to make with Bitcoin than it is with the obvious tokens such as Etheroll. There’s really no legal precedence when it comes to decentralized systems, so it’s hard to tell what will happen either way.
It could easily be that a token such as Ethbet could be considered a security by some regulatory bodies (even some US states), and not by others. There are so many states and countries that I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s possible for there to be many different outcomes. But we’re nonetheless confident that explicitly removing dividends is a step in the right direction here — it changes things from “This is obviously a security” to “This is a credit token, although it has some other interesting features”.
We can’t provide a legal guarantee that no one will consider this token a security, such a thing can’t reasonably be provided by just about any project due to the lack of information and novelty of the area.But it puts it in a significantly better spot, and if minor changes need to be made much later on, I’m sure we can solve them.