Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

In The Courts

By Juliet Gunev
September 01, 2019

Maryland Jury Convicts Former CEO of Israeli Company for Role In $145 Million Binary Options Fraud

Lee Elbaz, an Israeli citizen and former CEO of Israel-based company Yukom Communications (Yukom), has been found guilty following a three week jury trial in Maryland for her part in orchestrating a global scheme to defraud tens of thousands of investors via the fraudulent sale of $145 million worth of financial instruments known as "binary options." Elbaz, employed as a team leader overseeing sales agents at Yukom in mid-2014 before being promoted to the company's CEO, was convicted on three counts of wire fraud and three counts of conspiracy to commit wire fraud in connection with the scheme. The trial followed her arrest at New York's JFK airport in September 2017.

The scheme related to sales, marketing and investor retention services provided by Yukom to two Web-based businesses, BinaryBook and BigOption, both of which fraudulently sold and marketed binary options to customers globally, including in the U.S.. Binary options involve speculating on the value of a financial asset such as currency or stock at a certain time of day — essentially betting on whether the price will rise or fall within a set period. In return for investing, option holders were promised that they would receive either a pre-determined amount of cash or nothing, depending on the accuracy of their prediction.

According to the evidence presented at trial Elbaz, in her role as CEO, and a number of co-conspirators fraudulently induced investors to deposit funds by falsely guaranteeing profits while misrepresenting expected returns and the nature of financial incentives being received by Yukom representatives. In scripted passages to be used with customers, Yukom sales people claimed to be representing the interests of investors ("I only make money when you are profitable") — when in fact sales commissions were based on net investor deposits and Yukom only made money if their customers lost money. Under Elbaz's supervision, sales representatives also made false statements about investors' ability to withdraw funds by relying on deceptive use of made-up benefits referred to as "bonuses," "risk free trades," and "insured trades."

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.

The Stranger to the Deed Rule Image

In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.