High Noon at Ooki Corral: CFTC Sues DAO Participants - Episode 95

[@ChrisDupres]

"way back in June 2018" says everything you need to know about the maturity of this sector

[@CryptoCriticPod]

4 years is basically a lifetime!

[@gonzalotoscano3310]

There is no second best!!! I can still hear that every time i watch one of your videos guys xD

[@barelylegalbriefs]

This is the Only reliable crapto (spelling?) news source.

[@johndoe1646]

So much trash on youtube, well informed discussion here. Thanks.

[@CryptoCriticPod]

Thank you!

[@sunnohh]

Fun fact the cftc is considered the more toothless of them, the sec and the fed, and they are going kinda effing hard

[@scottkirby5016]

Yeah this enforcement action makes sense to me. if this was a criminal case the DAO participants would all target-able for conspiracy to commit futures/commodities fraud or under something like civil RICO as the purpose of the DAO was to do something (illegal commodities trading) and the DAO members expected to benefit and that they use the already preDAO era case as the previous bad acts to unlock RICO in the first place. Thus it could also be argued that they issued to securities in a criminal or at least illegal commodities fraud scheme...thus giving the SEC each a share of the oversight. I think the B0x group decided to play in a space of regulatory arbitrage and are now getting slammed from both sides and not sure those people like FTX have the ability to help them out anymore. But I figure a few members will plead out to trading suspensions or a small fine (something small enough to not kick off appeals) and the CTFC will take that as the precedent setting they are really after. Medium term I think this is a way to drive DAOs into becoming LLC's or other corps where (due to tokens acting like shares so often) the SEC will get their oversight.

[@CryptoCriticPod]

The other side of this is the class action also being brought: protos.com/judge-says-token-holders-could-be-liable-for-dao-hacks/

[@hairychris444]

IANAL, but I've heard US lawyers (from outside the crypto space but familiar with setting up LLCs & etc) emphasise that DAOs almost certainly fall into the definition of 'general partnership' unless they file additional registration paperwork. The problem with that is that each member of the partnership is individually liable for debts against the entire org if the org is sued - basically the court doesn't care who it gets hold of to pay as long as it gets it's money. This, as you can imagine, is VERY BAD for token holders, especially ones that are in that court's jurisdiction and therefore easy to get hold of! Not surprising that similar may hold true if DAO does something illegal.

[@ryanh8764]

best on the net

[@CryptoCriticPod]

Thank you

[@JamesJansson]

How can I leverage your Crypto Critics' Coin?

[@CryptoCriticPod]

Carefully

[@WS-eo1kr]

Will Ooki end? Is It just rumors?

[@CryptoCriticPod]

I mention towards the end that I expect it to peter out

[@shauncreed1315]

Algorithm

[@CryptoCriticPod]

Thank you

[@FiRezfps]

I wonder if a lot of these issues would be avoided by using PoW without pre-mined tokens over PoS

[@CryptoCriticPod]

No, that would not help the protocol offering unregistered futures products

[@johndoe1646]

Lol, quite the brain on this one

[@dangoraubatuba]

I love these videos but it drives me insane how Bennett insists on enunciating the word "important"