法律诉讼
106,844 views
20 Discussing
Hot
Latest
See original
⚖️ Cryptocurrency Developer Sues U.S. Department of Justice, Challenging Biden Era Regulatory Crackdown
Cryptocurrency developer Michael Lewellen has recently filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), accusing the Biden administration of overregulation that stifles innovation in the cryptocurrency space. His lawsuit claims to address the same issues as previous legal actions taken against the developers of Tornado Cash and Samourai Wallet.
Lewellen's collaboration with Pharos has become the focus of this lawsuit. Pharos, as a non-custodial protocol, enables users to raise funds for charitable or various projects safely and transparently without intermediary involvement.
Lewellen stated that suing the DOJ is a stand against excessive regulation and emphasized that it is not just about the rights of Pharos, but also the future of innovation in American cryptocurrency. He believes that Pharos is a tool, not a financial service, and should not be subject to federal funds transfer laws. He also pointed out that the DOJ's enforcement actions against non-custodial protocol developers (like Tornado Cash) represent an overreach of federal power.
Although policymakers insist that increased regulation is crucial for curbing illegal activities and protecting consumer rights, Lewellen and other developers argue that the ambiguity of regulatory policies has led to a shift of innovative activities abroad. This lawsuit highlights the differing views and conflicts of interest between the two sides on how to balance the freedom of innovation with the needs of regulatory safety.
Meanwhile, Amanda Tuminelli, Chief Legal Officer of the DeFi Education Fund, praised Lewellen for voicing the concerns of software developers, and Coin Center's CEO Peter Van Valkenburgh also supported him, emphasizing the importance of maintaining developers' freedom to release software. The unified stance of these two industry leaders further underscores the consensus within the developer community regarding the freedom of software development.
🗣 Conclusion:
Lewellen's lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice is not just a fight for a personal project but also a struggle for the freedom of innovation in the cryptocurrency industry, highlighting the contradiction between regulation and freedom, as well as the dilemmas faced by innovators.
With the support of industry leaders, this case is expected to become a turning point in cryptocurrency regulation, prompting the public to think deeply about the balance between innovation and regulation.
💬 What are your thoughts on Lewellen's lawsuit against the DOJ? How should regulation in the cryptocurrency industry balance innovation and safety? Leave your views and opinions in the comments section!
#加密货币监管 #法律诉讼 #DOJ
Cryptocurrency developer Michael Lewellen has recently filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), accusing the Biden administration of overregulation that stifles innovation in the cryptocurrency space. His lawsuit claims to address the same issues as previous legal actions taken against the developers of Tornado Cash and Samourai Wallet.
Lewellen's collaboration with Pharos has become the focus of this lawsuit. Pharos, as a non-custodial protocol, enables users to raise funds for charitable or various projects safely and transparently without intermediary involvement.
Lewellen stated that suing the DOJ is a stand against excessive regulation and emphasized that it is not just about the rights of Pharos, but also the future of innovation in American cryptocurrency. He believes that Pharos is a tool, not a financial service, and should not be subject to federal funds transfer laws. He also pointed out that the DOJ's enforcement actions against non-custodial protocol developers (like Tornado Cash) represent an overreach of federal power.
Although policymakers insist that increased regulation is crucial for curbing illegal activities and protecting consumer rights, Lewellen and other developers argue that the ambiguity of regulatory policies has led to a shift of innovative activities abroad. This lawsuit highlights the differing views and conflicts of interest between the two sides on how to balance the freedom of innovation with the needs of regulatory safety.
Meanwhile, Amanda Tuminelli, Chief Legal Officer of the DeFi Education Fund, praised Lewellen for voicing the concerns of software developers, and Coin Center's CEO Peter Van Valkenburgh also supported him, emphasizing the importance of maintaining developers' freedom to release software. The unified stance of these two industry leaders further underscores the consensus within the developer community regarding the freedom of software development.
🗣 Conclusion:
Lewellen's lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice is not just a fight for a personal project but also a struggle for the freedom of innovation in the cryptocurrency industry, highlighting the contradiction between regulation and freedom, as well as the dilemmas faced by innovators.
With the support of industry leaders, this case is expected to become a turning point in cryptocurrency regulation, prompting the public to think deeply about the balance between innovation and regulation.
💬 What are your thoughts on Lewellen's lawsuit against the DOJ? How should regulation in the cryptocurrency industry balance innovation and safety? Leave your views and opinions in the comments section!
#加密货币监管 #法律诉讼 #DOJ
See original
🚀 Musk and Tesla win: $258 billion Dogecoin manipulation case dismissed
😎 Elon Musk and Tesla won a lawsuit on August 29 over a $258 billion Dogecoin cryptocurrency.
🔍 The case accuses Musk of using celebrity and social media to influence the Dogecoin market, including his mention of Dogecoin on NBC Radio's popular TV show "Saturday Night Live," intentionally driving Dogecoin price fluctuations.
🤑 The lawsuit was reportedly filed by Keith Johnson and a group of investors who believe that Musk and Tesla touted Dogecoin as a legitimate investment while manipulating the market behind the scenes. The plaintiffs said that Musk's actions caused the price of Dogecoin to soar and then plummet, causing them to lose a lot of money.
👨⚖️ However, Alvin Hellerstein, the judge in charge of the case, believes that the plaintiffs do not have enough evidence to prove that Musk and Tesla actually manipulated the market. The judge said in the ruling that they could not see how the plaintiffs concluded that Musk and Tesla had engaged in market manipulation, a scheme to pump up the stock price, a breach of fiduciary duty (constituting insider trading), or a violation of state law.
🐶 Although the case was dismissed, Musk has always had a great influence on Dogecoin. He calls himself the "Father of Doge" and often talks about Dogecoin on Twitter, and these remarks often cause the price of Dogecoin to fluctuate greatly.
📈 For example, last Tuesday, Musk sent a tweet with a picture humorously mentioning the "DOGE Government Efficiency Department", and the price of Dogecoin suddenly rose by 6%. Although his words sounded lighthearted, his influence on the Dogecoin market is obvious to all.
📊 After the case was decided, the price of Dogecoin also rose slightly, from $0.098 to $0.1005. Analysts say that Dogecoin may still be in the accumulation stage, and if more people continue to buy, it may lay the foundation for a sharp rise in price. On the contrary, if market sentiment deteriorates and Dogecoin falls below $0.098 on the daily chart, its stagnation period may be extended.
💬 What do you think of Musk's influence on Dogecoin? Do you think Dogecoin will have a bright future?Feel free to share your thoughts!
#埃隆·马斯克 #加密货币 #市场操纵 #法律诉讼
😎 Elon Musk and Tesla won a lawsuit on August 29 over a $258 billion Dogecoin cryptocurrency.
🔍 The case accuses Musk of using celebrity and social media to influence the Dogecoin market, including his mention of Dogecoin on NBC Radio's popular TV show "Saturday Night Live," intentionally driving Dogecoin price fluctuations.
🤑 The lawsuit was reportedly filed by Keith Johnson and a group of investors who believe that Musk and Tesla touted Dogecoin as a legitimate investment while manipulating the market behind the scenes. The plaintiffs said that Musk's actions caused the price of Dogecoin to soar and then plummet, causing them to lose a lot of money.
👨⚖️ However, Alvin Hellerstein, the judge in charge of the case, believes that the plaintiffs do not have enough evidence to prove that Musk and Tesla actually manipulated the market. The judge said in the ruling that they could not see how the plaintiffs concluded that Musk and Tesla had engaged in market manipulation, a scheme to pump up the stock price, a breach of fiduciary duty (constituting insider trading), or a violation of state law.
🐶 Although the case was dismissed, Musk has always had a great influence on Dogecoin. He calls himself the "Father of Doge" and often talks about Dogecoin on Twitter, and these remarks often cause the price of Dogecoin to fluctuate greatly.
📈 For example, last Tuesday, Musk sent a tweet with a picture humorously mentioning the "DOGE Government Efficiency Department", and the price of Dogecoin suddenly rose by 6%. Although his words sounded lighthearted, his influence on the Dogecoin market is obvious to all.
📊 After the case was decided, the price of Dogecoin also rose slightly, from $0.098 to $0.1005. Analysts say that Dogecoin may still be in the accumulation stage, and if more people continue to buy, it may lay the foundation for a sharp rise in price. On the contrary, if market sentiment deteriorates and Dogecoin falls below $0.098 on the daily chart, its stagnation period may be extended.
💬 What do you think of Musk's influence on Dogecoin? Do you think Dogecoin will have a bright future?Feel free to share your thoughts!
#埃隆·马斯克 #加密货币 #市场操纵 #法律诉讼
See original
Trending
Crypto giants' lawsuit war: Three Arrows Capital claims $1.3 billion from bankrupt Terraform Labs
TerraForm Labs, which has been at the center of controversy over the collapse of its TerraUSD and LUNA coins, is now facing a massive $1.3 billion lawsuit from Three Arrows Capital (3AC). The former cryptocurrency giant is seeking legal recourse to recoup the significant losses it suffered from the May 2022 digital asset crash.
Source: X
This lawsuit is not only a counterattack by 3AC against its own financial difficulties, but also a pursuit of responsibility for TerraForm Labs. The former glory is in sharp contrast to the current predicament. This move by 3AC will undoubtedly bring more uncertainty and attention to the cryptocurrency market.
Source: X
This lawsuit is not only a counterattack by 3AC against its own financial difficulties, but also a pursuit of responsibility for TerraForm Labs. The former glory is in sharp contrast to the current predicament. This move by 3AC will undoubtedly bring more uncertainty and attention to the cryptocurrency market.
See original
Binance co-founder He Yi: Zhao Changpeng’s biggest mistake was ignorance
Binance founder and former CEO Changpeng Zhao (CZ) has publicly apologized for what he called a “poor decision” and took “full responsibility” for his actions.
Meanwhile, Binance co-founder He Yi said that while she acknowledged that CZ may have made mistakes, his biggest mistake was “ignorance.”
CZ issues apology and asks for a second chance
Changpeng Zhao is scheduled to be sentenced on April 30, following a settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in November 2023. Although CZ previously waived his right to appeal any sentence of no more than 18 months, the DOJ is now seeking a 36-month prison sentence for him.
Meanwhile, Binance co-founder He Yi said that while she acknowledged that CZ may have made mistakes, his biggest mistake was “ignorance.”
CZ issues apology and asks for a second chance
Changpeng Zhao is scheduled to be sentenced on April 30, following a settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in November 2023. Although CZ previously waived his right to appeal any sentence of no more than 18 months, the DOJ is now seeking a 36-month prison sentence for him.
See original
Got an offer, but worried about legal risks?
Participated in a transaction, but worried about being ripped off?
Developed a project, worried about compliance risks?
Changyou #Web3 will always encounter various legal issues😕
Welcome to leave your concerns in this message, #曼昆律所 will randomly select lucky people to reply😘Don't worry, other questions will be compiled and answered for everyone!
#FAQ #法律诉讼 #创业
Participated in a transaction, but worried about being ripped off?
Developed a project, worried about compliance risks?
Changyou #Web3 will always encounter various legal issues😕
Welcome to leave your concerns in this message, #曼昆律所 will randomly select lucky people to reply😘Don't worry, other questions will be compiled and answered for everyone!
#FAQ #法律诉讼 #创业
See original
Web3 lawyer: The Bar Association issued a document saying that virtual currency is contraband? It's a bit funny
Written by: Liu Honglin, Attorney at Mankiw LLP
In recent years, with the development of blockchain and virtual currency, virtual currency has gradually developed from a niche technology to an important part of the global financial system, but it has also caused many legal and policy issues due to anonymity and regulatory uncertainty. In a recent article, a certain bar association simply labeled virtual currency as "contraband" and claimed that it should not be identified as property in criminal cases. This conclusion is not only crude and simplistic, but also contrary to the current widespread use of virtual currency internationally.
In recent years, with the development of blockchain and virtual currency, virtual currency has gradually developed from a niche technology to an important part of the global financial system, but it has also caused many legal and policy issues due to anonymity and regulatory uncertainty. In a recent article, a certain bar association simply labeled virtual currency as "contraband" and claimed that it should not be identified as property in criminal cases. This conclusion is not only crude and simplistic, but also contrary to the current widespread use of virtual currency internationally.
See original
SEC loses lawsuit: ordered to pay $1.8 million in legal fees for "gross abuse" of power
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has suffered another setback in its crackdown on cryptocurrencies after a judge ordered the regulator to pay $1.8 million after losing its lawsuit against Debt Box.
Last year, the SEC accused crypto mining company Debt Box of “lying to investors” in a “fraudulent scheme” that raised $50 million in Bitcoin and Ethereum.
Yesterday, however, Utah District Court Judge Robert Shelby ruled that the case was invalid and ordered the regulator to pay its legal fees in cash. Previously, the judge said in March that the SEC's actions were "an egregious abuse of the power granted to it by Congress."
Last year, the SEC accused crypto mining company Debt Box of “lying to investors” in a “fraudulent scheme” that raised $50 million in Bitcoin and Ethereum.
Yesterday, however, Utah District Court Judge Robert Shelby ruled that the case was invalid and ordered the regulator to pay its legal fees in cash. Previously, the judge said in March that the SEC's actions were "an egregious abuse of the power granted to it by Congress."
See original
Elon Musk's X faces legal storm as US judge rules against bonus payments
Elon Musk's media company X Corp has been hit by a legal storm recently, with a U.S. judge ruling not to pay employee bonuses, creating more challenges for the company.
In a legal setback for Elon Musk's media conglomerate X Corp, a federal judge ruled Friday that Twitter (now X Corp) breached its contract by not honoring promised bonuses to employees. Notably, Twitter’s former senior director of compensation, Mark Schobinger, filed a lawsuit accusing the social media giant of breaching its contract by not honoring Musk’s promised 2022 target bonus after Musk was acquired.
In a legal setback for Elon Musk's media conglomerate X Corp, a federal judge ruled Friday that Twitter (now X Corp) breached its contract by not honoring promised bonuses to employees. Notably, Twitter’s former senior director of compensation, Mark Schobinger, filed a lawsuit accusing the social media giant of breaching its contract by not honoring Musk’s promised 2022 target bonus after Musk was acquired.
See original
🌐【Ripple Vs SEC lawsuit is expected to reach a settlement in a closed-door meeting this Thursday! 】📊
Have you heard? The lawsuit between Ripple and the SEC may have big news this week! According to foreign media reports, the SEC is scheduled to hold a closed-door meeting on July 18, and many people are guessing whether it will settle with Ripple. 🤫
💸 Previously, the SEC asked for a fine of nearly 2 billion US dollars from Ripple, but now it has suddenly dropped to 102.6 million. Is this the rhythm of a settlement? Ripple is not to be outdone and proposed to give a maximum of 10 million. This drama is getting more and more exciting!
👀 However, don't rush to draw conclusions. Some knowledgeable lawyers think that the possibility of a settlement is not great. Fred Rispoli of Hodl Law said that although some disputes can be discussed, the overall possibility of a settlement is hard to say.
📈 Regardless of whether a settlement can be reached, this is definitely a big event for those of us who follow cryptocurrencies. If a settlement is reached, it may be a big boon to the market, but if it doesn't happen, we may have to wait and see for a while.
👥 What do you think? Do you think there will be any results from this week's closed-door meeting? Let us share your views in the comments section! #XRP #加密货币 #法律诉讼 #Ripple #SEC
Have you heard? The lawsuit between Ripple and the SEC may have big news this week! According to foreign media reports, the SEC is scheduled to hold a closed-door meeting on July 18, and many people are guessing whether it will settle with Ripple. 🤫
💸 Previously, the SEC asked for a fine of nearly 2 billion US dollars from Ripple, but now it has suddenly dropped to 102.6 million. Is this the rhythm of a settlement? Ripple is not to be outdone and proposed to give a maximum of 10 million. This drama is getting more and more exciting!
👀 However, don't rush to draw conclusions. Some knowledgeable lawyers think that the possibility of a settlement is not great. Fred Rispoli of Hodl Law said that although some disputes can be discussed, the overall possibility of a settlement is hard to say.
📈 Regardless of whether a settlement can be reached, this is definitely a big event for those of us who follow cryptocurrencies. If a settlement is reached, it may be a big boon to the market, but if it doesn't happen, we may have to wait and see for a while.
👥 What do you think? Do you think there will be any results from this week's closed-door meeting? Let us share your views in the comments section! #XRP #加密货币 #法律诉讼 #Ripple #SEC
See original
How can blockchain technology companies assist public security in combating virtual currency crimes while ensuring legal compliance?| Mankun Web3 Legal Awareness
Written by: Qian Wei, Mankun Law Firm.
In recent years, with the rapid development of blockchain technology and the growing prosperity of the digital currency market, virtual currencies have gradually become a new type of investment and payment tool. However, the anonymity and decentralization characteristics of virtual currencies have also become favorable tools for criminals, leading to frequent occurrences of virtual currency crime cases.
Given the current insufficiency of investigation methods, and to effectively combat such criminal activities, public security organs often rely on the support of blockchain technology companies during investigations. As a result, an increasing number of cryptocurrency practitioners are transforming to establish relevant blockchain technology companies to assist judicial authorities in combating virtual currency crimes, while local public security organs take a positive attitude towards such cooperation due to factors such as technological capability, case scale, and financial needs.
In recent years, with the rapid development of blockchain technology and the growing prosperity of the digital currency market, virtual currencies have gradually become a new type of investment and payment tool. However, the anonymity and decentralization characteristics of virtual currencies have also become favorable tools for criminals, leading to frequent occurrences of virtual currency crime cases.
Given the current insufficiency of investigation methods, and to effectively combat such criminal activities, public security organs often rely on the support of blockchain technology companies during investigations. As a result, an increasing number of cryptocurrency practitioners are transforming to establish relevant blockchain technology companies to assist judicial authorities in combating virtual currency crimes, while local public security organs take a positive attitude towards such cooperation due to factors such as technological capability, case scale, and financial needs.
See original
🔥 Ripple Co-founder Criticizes SEC Chairman, Calls Him 'The Worst Public Servant Ever'!
The legal battle between Ripple Labs and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is intensifying! The latest development is that Ripple's co-founder Chris Larsen launched a fierce attack against SEC Chairman Gary Gensler during an interview with CNBC, calling him 'the worst public servant ever'.
This dispute began at the end of 2020 when the SEC accused Ripple and its CEO Brad Garlinghouse of violating securities laws by selling XRP in an unregistered manner. Ripple countered that XRP is not a security and cited Gensler's previous comments to support its position. By October 2023, Ripple attempted to dismiss these charges, while Garlinghouse accused the SEC of trying to destroy his personal life.
Finally, in July 2023, the presiding judge ruled that Ripple's sale of tokens to institutional buyers violated securities laws, but sales to retail exchanges were legal. The SEC then filed an appeal, insisting on holding Ripple executives accountable. Ripple also fought back with a countersuit.
Under Gensler's leadership, the SEC has taken a tough stance on the cryptocurrency industry, starting with actions against Binance and Coinbase, and later a series of actions specifically targeting Ripple, sparking widespread attention and heated debate in the industry. At the same time, the SEC has faced criticism for failing to prevent major collapse events like FTX.
Currently, this legal battle is not just about Ripple and the SEC; it concerns the future and regulatory direction of the entire cryptocurrency industry. However, Gensler's hardline stance and Larsen's sharp criticism reflect the increasingly tense regulatory environment within the cryptocurrency space.
In summary, as the legal proceedings advance, we may see more details about this controversy. This is not only a test for Ripple but also for the SEC's regulatory methods and the entire cryptocurrency industry.
💬 Lastly, what are your thoughts on this legal struggle between Ripple and the SEC? Do you think Gensler's policies are positive or negative for the cryptocurrency industry? In this ever-changing regulatory era, how should we balance innovation and protection?
#RippleVsSEC #加密货币监管 #GaryGensler #法律诉讼
The legal battle between Ripple Labs and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is intensifying! The latest development is that Ripple's co-founder Chris Larsen launched a fierce attack against SEC Chairman Gary Gensler during an interview with CNBC, calling him 'the worst public servant ever'.
This dispute began at the end of 2020 when the SEC accused Ripple and its CEO Brad Garlinghouse of violating securities laws by selling XRP in an unregistered manner. Ripple countered that XRP is not a security and cited Gensler's previous comments to support its position. By October 2023, Ripple attempted to dismiss these charges, while Garlinghouse accused the SEC of trying to destroy his personal life.
Finally, in July 2023, the presiding judge ruled that Ripple's sale of tokens to institutional buyers violated securities laws, but sales to retail exchanges were legal. The SEC then filed an appeal, insisting on holding Ripple executives accountable. Ripple also fought back with a countersuit.
Under Gensler's leadership, the SEC has taken a tough stance on the cryptocurrency industry, starting with actions against Binance and Coinbase, and later a series of actions specifically targeting Ripple, sparking widespread attention and heated debate in the industry. At the same time, the SEC has faced criticism for failing to prevent major collapse events like FTX.
Currently, this legal battle is not just about Ripple and the SEC; it concerns the future and regulatory direction of the entire cryptocurrency industry. However, Gensler's hardline stance and Larsen's sharp criticism reflect the increasingly tense regulatory environment within the cryptocurrency space.
In summary, as the legal proceedings advance, we may see more details about this controversy. This is not only a test for Ripple but also for the SEC's regulatory methods and the entire cryptocurrency industry.
💬 Lastly, what are your thoughts on this legal struggle between Ripple and the SEC? Do you think Gensler's policies are positive or negative for the cryptocurrency industry? In this ever-changing regulatory era, how should we balance innovation and protection?
#RippleVsSEC #加密货币监管 #GaryGensler #法律诉讼
See original
Web3 lawyers, less scaremongering and more building
Written by: Liu Honglin, Attorney at Mankiw LLP
A few days ago, several students from the Huazheng Blockchain Association came to Mankiw Law Firm for exchanges. We talked about the current development status of the Web3 industry at home and abroad, China’s regulatory policies and encouraging attitude towards the development of virtual currency and blockchain, and the very important topic of what legal professionals/lawyers can do in this industry.
What impressed me most during the communication was that they originally thought that as lawyers in the Web3 industry, our main job was to help clients with "criminal defense" and handle criminal cases such as illegal fundraising, fraud, and pyramid schemes in virtual currencies. However, after the conversation, they realized that the role of law in this field is far more than that.
A few days ago, several students from the Huazheng Blockchain Association came to Mankiw Law Firm for exchanges. We talked about the current development status of the Web3 industry at home and abroad, China’s regulatory policies and encouraging attitude towards the development of virtual currency and blockchain, and the very important topic of what legal professionals/lawyers can do in this industry.
What impressed me most during the communication was that they originally thought that as lawyers in the Web3 industry, our main job was to help clients with "criminal defense" and handle criminal cases such as illegal fundraising, fraud, and pyramid schemes in virtual currencies. However, after the conversation, they realized that the role of law in this field is far more than that.
See original
Is Coinbase poised for success? Bloomberg legal experts give SEC 70% chance of winning case
As the legal battle between the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and U.S. cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase unfolds, presiding judge Katherine Polk Failla has expressed doubts about the SEC’s position and motivations for pursuing the case.
The development tipped the scales in Coinbase's favor, as the judge showed interest and indicated he might be inclined to support the exchange's arguments.
Coinbase’s defense gains momentum
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed a lawsuit against Coinbase in June, accusing the exchange of facilitating trading in crypto tokens that should have been registered as securities.
The development tipped the scales in Coinbase's favor, as the judge showed interest and indicated he might be inclined to support the exchange's arguments.
Coinbase’s defense gains momentum
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed a lawsuit against Coinbase in June, accusing the exchange of facilitating trading in crypto tokens that should have been registered as securities.
See original
Web3 Lawyer: USDT Virtual Currency OTC Traders Do Not Touch Foreign Exchange, Yet They Are Suspected of Illegal Operations?
Written by: Xu Xiaohui and Liu Fuqi, Mankiw LLP
Due to its anonymity and decentralized features, virtual currencies are widely used in illegal ways such as money laundering and cross-border funds. Therefore, countries and regions around the world often have a strong regulatory attitude towards the sale of virtual currencies. In the Chinese cryptocurrency circle, Web3 players are often exposed to criminal risks such as pyramid schemes, opening casinos, and illegal operations. Among them, illegal operations are one of the most common crimes for OTC merchants. Previously, the article published by Mankiw Law Firm (Web3 Entrepreneurship Criminal Risk Prevention Guide (II): Foreign Exchange Trading Type Illegal Operation Crime) analyzed one of the problems that are easily involved in arbitrage in the cryptocurrency circle.
Due to its anonymity and decentralized features, virtual currencies are widely used in illegal ways such as money laundering and cross-border funds. Therefore, countries and regions around the world often have a strong regulatory attitude towards the sale of virtual currencies. In the Chinese cryptocurrency circle, Web3 players are often exposed to criminal risks such as pyramid schemes, opening casinos, and illegal operations. Among them, illegal operations are one of the most common crimes for OTC merchants. Previously, the article published by Mankiw Law Firm (Web3 Entrepreneurship Criminal Risk Prevention Guide (II): Foreign Exchange Trading Type Illegal Operation Crime) analyzed one of the problems that are easily involved in arbitrage in the cryptocurrency circle.
See original
OpenAI and Microsoft face another lawsuit over New York Times AI training
Following the New York Times report, OpenAI and Microsoft faced another lawsuit, sparking speculation and concerns about copyright infringement in the artificial intelligence field.
In a legal dispute that could reshape the landscape of artificial intelligence development, OpenAI and Microsoft find themselves embroiled in a lawsuit filed by nonfiction authors Nicholas Basbanes and Nicholas Gage. The authors claimed that their works were improperly used to train OpenAI’s ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence services, which constituted copyright infringement.
The legal battle, meanwhile, comes as the New York Times ramps up pressure by suing OpenAI and Microsoft, two nonfiction writers who allege their journalists’ work is being misused for AI training.
In a legal dispute that could reshape the landscape of artificial intelligence development, OpenAI and Microsoft find themselves embroiled in a lawsuit filed by nonfiction authors Nicholas Basbanes and Nicholas Gage. The authors claimed that their works were improperly used to train OpenAI’s ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence services, which constituted copyright infringement.
The legal battle, meanwhile, comes as the New York Times ramps up pressure by suing OpenAI and Microsoft, two nonfiction writers who allege their journalists’ work is being misused for AI training.
See original
📊 The outcome of the lawsuit between Coinbase and the SEC could be a turning point in the altcoin season? 🚨
We all know that in June last year, the SEC sued Coinbase, accusing multiple cryptocurrencies on its trading platform of being unregistered securities.
In April of this year, Coinbase appealed the case, a request based on the SEC's recent appeal in the Ripple lawsuit, which is currently in the trial stage.
Coinbase's legal team pointed out that according to the Howey test (four criteria for assessing whether an asset is a security), the altcoins traded on their platform do not meet the definition of securities and should not be classified as securities, but should be regarded as assets. In addition, the SEC's recent appeal against Ripple's lawsuit has further affected the growth of the virtual asset market.
It is worth noting that on September 18, the SEC filed an application for an extension of the Coinbase lawsuit, extending the original October 18 deadline for evidence submission to February 2025. This is good news for Coinbase, because there is a view that February 2025 is likely to be the outbreak period of the altcoin market. If Coinbase can win the lawsuit against the SEC, it may trigger the next wave of altcoin surge.
In response to this case, Coinbase's lawyers argued that the SEC's allegations against Coinbase seem unreasonable, because Coinbase has been trying to comply with SEC laws, but the SEC's legal interpretation of securities and assets is very vague and lacks transparency. Therefore, the lawyer believes that the SEC's lawsuit against Coinbase is making trouble for no reason and lacks reasonable logic.
At present, given the SEC's application extension and the SEC's inability to prove whether these cryptocurrency projects are securities, the general market view is that Coinbase has a high chance of winning this legal battle.
On the other hand, if evaluated according to the standards of the Howey test, most altcoins should be classified as assets rather than securities. Therefore, there is reason to believe that in the next few months, we may see a clearer result of the SEC's legal lawsuit against Coinbase.
🔍What do you think of the legal lawsuit between Coinbase and the SEC? How do you think this will affect the altcoin market? Feel free to leave your comments in the comments section!
#Coinbase #SEC #山寨币市场 #法律诉讼 #山寨季
We all know that in June last year, the SEC sued Coinbase, accusing multiple cryptocurrencies on its trading platform of being unregistered securities.
In April of this year, Coinbase appealed the case, a request based on the SEC's recent appeal in the Ripple lawsuit, which is currently in the trial stage.
Coinbase's legal team pointed out that according to the Howey test (four criteria for assessing whether an asset is a security), the altcoins traded on their platform do not meet the definition of securities and should not be classified as securities, but should be regarded as assets. In addition, the SEC's recent appeal against Ripple's lawsuit has further affected the growth of the virtual asset market.
It is worth noting that on September 18, the SEC filed an application for an extension of the Coinbase lawsuit, extending the original October 18 deadline for evidence submission to February 2025. This is good news for Coinbase, because there is a view that February 2025 is likely to be the outbreak period of the altcoin market. If Coinbase can win the lawsuit against the SEC, it may trigger the next wave of altcoin surge.
In response to this case, Coinbase's lawyers argued that the SEC's allegations against Coinbase seem unreasonable, because Coinbase has been trying to comply with SEC laws, but the SEC's legal interpretation of securities and assets is very vague and lacks transparency. Therefore, the lawyer believes that the SEC's lawsuit against Coinbase is making trouble for no reason and lacks reasonable logic.
At present, given the SEC's application extension and the SEC's inability to prove whether these cryptocurrency projects are securities, the general market view is that Coinbase has a high chance of winning this legal battle.
On the other hand, if evaluated according to the standards of the Howey test, most altcoins should be classified as assets rather than securities. Therefore, there is reason to believe that in the next few months, we may see a clearer result of the SEC's legal lawsuit against Coinbase.
🔍What do you think of the legal lawsuit between Coinbase and the SEC? How do you think this will affect the altcoin market? Feel free to leave your comments in the comments section!
#Coinbase #SEC #山寨币市场 #法律诉讼 #山寨季
See original
How should retail investors view the latest judicial interpretations of the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate, and how to ensure that they are not involved in illegal activities and "black U"? Three senior lawyers, OTC merchants and security product professionals will provide you with in-depth interpretation! #安全出金小常识 #法律诉讼 #合规 #3friends #usdt各种套路合集
3Friends
--
Must-read for users | The future is here. How can the crypto industry survive and innovate under strict regulations? —— Experts deeply interpret the judicial interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate
Against the backdrop of the ever-changing global cryptocurrency regulation. On August 19, the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate of China jointly issued an interpretation on several issues concerning the application of law in handling criminal cases of money laundering, which clearly listed "virtual asset" transactions as one of the methods of money laundering. The "interpretation" has caused widespread discussion in the industry, and some traffic media and users have many misunderstandings about the "interpretation". After paying attention to the response of the market and the community, we are also thinking about how to promote the stability and transparency of the industry on the basis of compliance, while promoting growth and innovation? At 22:00 on the evening of August 28 (UTC+8), 137Labs, OKLink and many industry experts jointly held an X Space with the theme of [In-depth interpretation of the judicial interpretation of the "two highs" to clarify the identification standards of money laundering crimes, "virtual asset" transactions are included, where is the future of the crypto industry? ]