

The NFA changed the meaning of the term/word FOREX from On-exchange trading to Off-Exchange trading. This is not possibly legal because it would delude it's entire customer base into thinking they are trading on the real Foreign Exchange when in fact- all accounts belonging to people and or businesses with less than 10 million in assets are traded on simulated gaming platforms that are fully controlled by the brokerage firm your account is with or their partner firm.

There is no actual counter party- your playing against the program- like online poker- or solitaire is more accurate- since there are no other players connected to your copy of the game platform.

The chart movement isn't real. It follows only the general movement of the real stock market. The minute movement is created using a combination of its program algorithms and your trading patterns- shifting the movement of the market to trigger you to jump in big by making the direction seem stable. When you place a stop order- it signals the program to hit the stop. If you place no stop and there's no activity for a set length of time- it will run the wrong way or spike- just enough to trigger a margin call -when your not there to catch it.

The programs are fully controllable by the broker- and usually in the fine print in the agreement- you gave them permission to adjust fill prices AFTER the order has been filled.

It says all of this in the rules on the NFS site.

My complaint is against the NFA for altering the meaning of an internationally used term that is the short for what it stands for- The FOReigh EXchange. Doing this permitted brokers to delude customers. The NFA not only allowed it- they made it possible. They are guilty of spearheading the largest fraud scheme that's ever existed.

The word FOREX must be returned to its organic meaning of On-exchange trading.

I started a white house petition:

They should be removed from their position of regulating the industry. What they did protect the brokers from false advertising violation charges. There is no acceptable defense for their actions. There is no way to change the meaning of an internationally understood term with out causing people to be deluded. The only possible reason to do what they did is to delude people.

Federal Truth in Advertising Law
Truth-in-advertising regulations protect consumers from false or misleading advertising. The law requires advertising to be truthful and non-deceptive

False advertising occurs when a business seeks to induce the public to enter into any obligation by making a statement about its own products or services that is false or misleading and that the business knew, or should have known, was false or misleading.

(a) Civil action


d) Cyberpiracy prevention
Governing Agency
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) enforces advertising regulations through the Federal Trade Commission Act.


Intriguing concept, but I don't know how far it will go. Off exchange trading of other items far predates off exchange currency trading. I don't think the NFA legally defines Stock Trading as having to be on an exchange, since there are stocks out there that can be bought and sold off the exchanges. Obviously, stocks traded on an exchange are subject to much more stringent regulations.

I'm not sure why you ended with the CyberPiracy prevention - that only applies to protected trademarks and service marks. I'd have to look it up, but I'll bet that the NYSE trademarked their name. That wouldn't prevent stock transactions outside of the NYSE, either off exchange or on other exchanges. I don't believe the NFA registers trademarks on types of trading.

I believe this may come down to a chicken or egg argument. Did the NFA redefine the word forex, or did the concept of currency trading independently expand to include retail forex brokers, leaving the NFA to play catchup ever since? I believe the latter explanation covers the proliferation of unlicensed, unregulated, and often highly suspicious binary options brokers.

If you can show an official NFA definition of forex that predates the origin of retail forex brokers and would specifically exclude them, that would go a long way towards supporting your argument that the NFA is directly involved.

I do agree that moving towards a more regulated environment is a good thing, at least when the regulations are well thought out. The NFA's record on coming up with new regulations for retail forex is very mixed. They've done some great things to protect traders and at the same time applied some limits that hamper a trader's ability to use certain strategies and trading styles.


Sergeant Major
Hello new member TheForexPetition,
The Buttonwood Agreement took place on May 17, 1792 only 3 years after the adoption of the US Constitution, thus creating The New York Stock & Exchange Board now called the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). This agreement was signed by twenty-four "Over-the-Counter" Stock Brokers on the sidewalk outside 68 Wall Street, NYC, New York, USA, under a buttonwood tree.
The formation of this first "US Stock Exchange" filled a dire need. It did NOT pre-date the creation of Common Stock itself.
Instead, it provided a means for the public posting of offers to sell or bids to buy common stocks, etc.; thereby reducing transaction costs and spreads by increasing liquidity in the market to levels that had never before been seen.
The current state of the foreign exchange market is just like that of the stock market before the formation of the NYSE.
The forex market has always been an over-the-counter market made up of government entities and major banks representing international business operations, at their will.
The advent of technological developments in the last two decades has enabled individuals and small entities to venture into this formerly telephone-to-telephone market that settled once daily.
If you want some degree of credibility, deal through a major bank that is regulated independently under banking law.
The NFA has established a class of RFED's (Retail Foreign Exchange Dealers) who must meet capital requirements and are subject to NFA Rules established under CFTC Guidlines.
Many retail foreign exchange morons wishing the highest leverages, "bonuses", glittering promises of next day wealth, etc., are willing to dispense with any and all protections, and choose to work with unregulated entities. Not NFA, not UK FSA, not CySec, not FINMA, not even in a country with legitimate regulation of any kind.
I wish you all the best of luck.
Meanwhile, TheForexPetition, you act as if you expected that when speculating in forex you were entitled to the same protections as your grandmother buying a coffee maker at Sears!
You are specifically disclaimed from consumer protections in financial markets, even in the US. Read your terms of service.
If you want guarantees, work with a professional money manager and pay me or others like me a reasonable fee for expert assistance.
Otherwise, if you try to do it yourself you will surely get what you have earned, paid for, and deserve.
Good luck with your "petition".
Anthony Ingrassia, CTA
NFA ID#: 0278164
Last edited:


10 total signatures so far.

Personally, I think you are barking up the wrong tree. What you should be doing is a focused attempt to create a regulated exchange for retail currency trading. Mixing that concept up with an alleged NFA conspiracy detracts from the message.

It is possible to trade currencies in a regulated environment with some futures brokers.
My complaint is the general public does not know they are trading Off-Exchange. Using terms like "retail customer" "otc" trading tell the customer nothing about what they are actually doing.

google or bing "forex trading" and you get Wikipedia, Investopia, one person, and a bunch of links to trading firms like fxcm.

Definition of 'Forex - FX'

Investopedia Says
Investopedia explains 'Forex - FX'

Read more: Forex (FX) Definition | Investopedia

****anyone who reads that thinks this form of trading is done over the counter between different countries. That sounds real to me. Not at all simulated. People trust what they read.

and check out this:
What is Forex Trading | Introduction To Forex Trading | Learn To Trade
Its the only other non-broker site that shows up on google search- first page

What is Forex Trading? Introduction to Foreign Exchange Trading
What is the Forex Market used for?

Forex trading involves transactions in which one party purchases a quantity of one currency by paying in a quantity of another currency. The Forex market is a global decentralized financial market for the exchange of currencies. Around the world various financial centers act as hubs for trading between a wide range of different types of buyers and sellers 24 hours a day, except weekends. It is the foreign exchange market that determines the value of one country’s currency relative to another.

The primary reason the Forex market exists is to facilitate international trade and investment by giving businesses the ability to convert one currency into another. As an example, a U.S. business can import goods from Japan and pay in Japanese Yen, even though the business is based in America and operates in U.S. dollars. The Forex market also provides a medium for speculation which works to add deeper liquidity to the market, making exchange rates less volatile. The “carry-trade” is facilitated via the Forex market, this is a trade in which investors can buy high-yielding currencies against low-yielding currencies and profit from the higher yielding interest rate.

Foreign exchange market
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Forex" redirects here.

The foreign exchange market (forex, FX, or currency market) is a form of exchange for the global decentralized trading of international currencies. Financial centers around the world function as anchors of trading between a wide range of different types of buyers and sellers around the clock, with the exception of weekends. EBS and Reuters' dealing 3000 are two main interbank FX trading platforms. The foreign exchange market determines the relative values of different currencies.[1]

Again- clearly leaves the impression that there's interaction thru a hub of banks and institutions. No mention of Off-exchange trading- however the mention of the only two real trading platforms introduces the concept that platforms are real. There's no mention that they are the only 2 real platforms.

NO trader will bother to dig thru thousands of rules on the NFA website to find out that FOREX has an entirely different meaning. It doesn't matter when the meaning was changed by them- it still contradicts what the main resources on the internet tell people.

My fight is against the obvious affect this would have on the public. Of course people will think its real after reading the above. Investopia, unlike wipi, it written by people who are supposed to know. And if wipi's info is wrong- someone would have corrected it. No one has- supporting my argument that the public thinks the definition being presented is correct.

Federal law prohibits using words and terms recognized as trademarks of a known entity. The word FOREX is the trademark and the derivative of the Foreign Exchange. If using a term to represent something else would cause obvious confusion- its not allowed. Calling OFF-exchange trading FOREX absolutely causes people to think its traded on the Foreign Exchange.

Is my complaint clear enough now?

Regarding trademarks- legally registering a trademark isn't always necessary for a word that's a title or name of something that's globally recognized, to be protected. A car is a car. A swing is a swing. You simply cannot label it a rocking chair because it has similar movement. It's just not done. A scooter isn't called a bike.

Foreign Exchange (FOREX) means transactions traded on the exchange market. Therefore-cannot also mean transactions made on a simulated trading gaming platform.

The NFA is being targeted because they are the ones regulating the industry. They are responsible for protecting people from being taken advantage of. They know the obvious confusion the dual use of the term is causing. Not doing something about it, worse yet- further integrating the word is what makes them liable. If they were really trying to protect the customers-while still using the word FOREX- they would have all advertising contain a disclaimer-informing customers of the change of meaning.

The possibility of customer confusion about what product or service they are signing up for isn't even mentioned on the NFA site. Seems like an important topic to skip completely.

I have a suggestion. Forex Army: Lets find out how many people understand what FOREX Trading is. I used the term Market to follow NFA's labeling.

Please run the following multiple choice poll on your home page. Its as unbiased as I could think of. Either they know the answer or they don't.

The FOREX Market is:
A. Foreign Exchange Transactions
B. Off-Exchange Transactions

The Retail Market is for:
A. Small investors to trade on Off-Exchange on simulated Trading Platforms.
B. Small investors to trade on the Foreign Exchange using Trading Platforms

Assets required to trade on the Foreign Exchange?
A. 125 thousand
B. 500 thousand
C. 1 million
D. 10 million

If I'm wrong- I'll walk away. Staff members cannot answer poll. Dare to find out the truth. I think for a poll's results to be considered a valid representation, it has to be answered by 2,000 people.


Your poll is biased. For Question 1 "foreign exchange transactions" could include both on and off a regulated exchange (see discussion of the definition of exchange farther down in this post). Question 2 assumes that no trades are ever sent outside of any retail forex broker. There are brokers like this, but there are also brokers that have real STP and ECN connections to real LPs. Question 3 makes no sense in terms of retail forex. You can open a nano account with 5 dollars (less in some cases). You can open an account at a regulated, on-exchange futures broker offering currencies for a lot less than the smallest number you quote.

Overall, Question 2 reminds me of a poll I once saw that had a question like:

Which would you prefer? A. Clean renewable solar power. B. Sitting by as your children are killed with nuclear radiation.

You've got a severe misunderstanding of trademark law. I'm not a lawyer, but I've been known to fake it pretty well. :cool:

A mustang is a horse. Mustang is also a trademark owned by an American car company and describes a specific model of car. The dictionary police were silent when this trademark was registered.

If I decide to sell television sets and call them oranges, I might be crazy, but there's absolutely no violation of trademark law (unless someone registered orange for a related product category). It's even possible someone might just be crazy enough to sell computers and call them apples. :p

If I sell oranges and call them apples, then the Federal Trade Commission and possibly the Food and Drug Administration will probably drag me to a small, dark room to have a chat with me about truth in labeling laws, but I'd come out a total victor in any court case if any person or agency tried to claim this was a trademark violation no matter how many dictionaries disagree with me.

Words can have more than one meaning. As new concepts emerge, sometimes existing words gain new meanings. I don't recall seeing any lawyers representing the International Association of Spiders suing for trademark violation when someone came up with the term world wide web and suggested that urls begin with www.

The word exchange has more than one meaning. Yes, an exchange is a central place to make trades, but it may or may not be regulated. Forcing this to only apply to regulated exchanges would shut down every airport kiosk and bank window that has a currency exchange or foreign exchange sign hanging over it.

In the case of money, exchange has another meaning all together. In forex, one form of currency is exchanged for another. This is true whether it's on a central, regulated futures exchange, at a retail forex broker, at an airport money changer, or if I'm swapping currencies with a friend. If you try changing money in a temple, Jesus might chase you with a whip, but I would be very surprised if He took time out to argue with you about whether you can call your service forex or not. :D

All brokers that are subject to the tiniest amount of regulation (and some that aren't) cover the concept of not being linked to a central, regulated exchange in their fine print. If they didn't, some enterprising lawyer would already have tried dragging them into court for deception. Any decent education overview of retail forex covers this topic.

As far as I know, retail forex got loose before the NFA had any formal definition of forex. Their only regulation of the industry prior to the appearance of retail forex was regulating futures companies - some of which have currency contracts. The NFA and CFTC have been playing catch up ever since. Some of the regulations suck. Others, such as only having 15 minutes to "adjust" prices in the event on some sort of error, absolutely rock.

Look up some definitions of options trading. I'll bet you can find some that either state or imply that these are done with regulated brokers on central exchanges. Are you going to blame the NFA for the wave of unregulated binary options brokers that have appears in the last few years?

Overall, I think chasing the NFA and claiming a conspiracy on this is a waste of effort. Attempting to tie trademark law to dictionary definitions is taking your whole message completely off topic.

Focusing on a push for the creation of a real central forex exchange (foreign exchange exchange :)) for major liquidity providers would be a far better way to approach this.
Last edited:


Sergeant Major
Take a breath.
This is nothing more than a sophomoric display of outrage at one's own ignorance.
I suggest theforexpetition invest $3 in a hand-held mirror, necessary to examine one's own vagina (it worked for many in the '60s).


What? You don't want me to post a picture of a money changing booth that has the word "Forex" on it? :D