Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Crypto Winter Leads to Explosion of Regulatory Activity
Legendary investor Warren Buffet famously said, "only when the tide goes out do you discover who has been swimming naked." In the past year, following the Crypto Winter, there has been an explosion of activity by United States regulators and enforcers. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in particular has made clear that it thinks everyone in the crypto pool is swimming without their trunks. Ironically, while the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) have brought a great deal of enforcement actions, they also have loudly disagreed with each other over who has jurisdiction, i.e., which digital assets are securities and which are commodities. Crypto companies, for their part, have complained that it is not clear what digital assets, if any, are securities, and that they have not been given clear regulatory rules of the road.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has paved its own path forward in the crypto space. Judge Rakoff once famously wrote, "to prosecutors of white collar crime, the mail fraud statute is our Stradivarius, our Colt 45, our Louisville Slugger, our Cuisinart — and our true love." Jed S. Rakoff, The Federal Mail Fraud Statute (Part 1), 8 Duq. L. Rev. 771 (1980). Modern day white-collar prosecutors have often relied on mail fraud's cousin, wire fraud, and have used that statute to great effect in the crypto space. By principally relying on the wire fraud statute, federal prosecutors have largely sidestepped the question of whether and which digital assets constitute securities or not.
Aggressive Regulatory Enforcement and Turf War
With no federal regulatory framework specifically designed for digital assets in the United States, there has been an ongoing turf war between the SEC and the CFTC over whether certain digital assets should be regulated as "securities" or "commodities" or both. The SEC has made clear that it intends to be the lead regulator in the crypto market and that it believes that virtually all digital assets are securities. On the other hand, the CFTC claims that certain digital assets, such as Bitcoin and Ether, are commodities.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- 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
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
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.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
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.
The Article 8 Opt In
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?