Regulation
Is China Crypto Ban Over As Bybit Resumes Registration?
![](https://coin2049.io/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Bybit.jpg)
Bybit, the third largest offshore cryptocurrency exchange, has resumed its user sign-up and identification verification in Mainland China where it had previously ceased operations.
This comes even as Bybit continues to note that it does not operate in some jurisdictions such as Mainland China on its website. This creates a paradox, which may indicate the change in the approach of Bybit concerning regulation or strategy.
Bybit Reopens to Chinese Users
Although Bybit has been banned in China for quite some time now to the extent that Chinese residents cannot register and use the platform, the company has recently added registration features for this population.
This decision comes as a surprise since the exchange has been previously in compliance with Chinese laws that prohibit cryptocurrency trading and activities.
Exclusive: The third largest offshore exchange Bybit suddenly opened up registration and authentication for users in China. Bybit has long strictly prohibited the registration and use of all Chinese users. The management team has been very cautious about this. pic.twitter.com/m71BdT4KAq
— Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) June 5, 2024
The exchange’s own certification page has Mainland China among the jurisdictions where its services are not available along with the United States, Singapore and some parts of Canada among others. This conflicting information has not been clarified by Bybit’s management in their subsequent public statements.
Implications for Cryptocurrency Regulations in China
This change in policy by Bybit could be an indication of a slight change in China’s approach towards cryptocurrency but this remains speculative until there is official communication from the relevant authorities.
Until now, China has been quite standoffish when it comes to cryptocurrencies, stating that digital currencies pose a threat to fraud, money laundering, and economic fluctuations.
Bybit withdrew its application for a Hong Kong license earlier. Hong Kong does not allow any entity to develop business in mainland China. This also means that Bybit may give up applying for a Hong Kong license. Currently, Bybit is headquartered in Dubai.
— Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) June 5, 2024
This may present a major shift in the ways of regulation, possibly in coordination with other changes that are happening in the nation’s financial practices and technological advancements. Nonetheless, the extent of the impact of Bybit’s decision will be determined by the future actions of regulators and the exchange’s capacity to maneuver through the legal landscape in China.
Bybit’s Global Operations and Regulatory Challenges
Currently, Bybit is now operating in different regions with different regulatory frameworks. Besides China, the exchange has also pulled out its application for a license in Hong Kong where new laws have put into effect many strict operational conditions for cryptocurrency firms. The city’s efforts towards formalization of the virtual asset landscape has been met with divergent opinions from participants with some halting operations due to the costs associated with regulation.
Furthermore, Bybit has had issues with the law in other countries such as France, where the Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF) accused the exchange of operating without the necessary license. This raises the question of the legal environment that is often fragmented and challenging for international cryptocurrency exchange platforms as they offer their services across various jurisdictions.
However, to meet these challenges and harness market potential, Bybit has expanded its offerings, including the Bitcoin Wealth Management Fund which attracted quick buying interest of over 100 BTC during its initial offering within 7 hours.
Read Also: Celsius Price Analysis As Trading Volume Accelerates 500% To $121M, CEL Explodes 72%
The presented content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market condition. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.
Regulation
FTX Founder Sam Bankman-Fried’s Family Accused Of $100M Illicit Political Donation
![](https://coin2049.io/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/SBF3.jpeg)
New allegations have surfaced surrounding Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF), the founder of the now-collapsed crypto exchange FTX. SBF’s family is now accused of being involved in a $100 million illicit political donation scheme. Moreover, these claims can lead to intense legal trouble for the accused.
Sam Bankman-Fried’s Family Accused Of Illegal Political Donation
Emails disclosed by The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) have brought to light the extensive involvement of SBF’s family in orchestrating these political contributions. Furthermore, an important point to note is that these donations were allegedly funded by misappropriated FTX customer assets.
Prosecutors asserted that Bankman-Fried orchestrated a sprawling influence campaign ahead of the 2022 election, leveraging stolen customer funds to the tune of over $100 million. The newly revealed emails suggest that key family members played pivotal roles in the scheme. These include SBF’s parents, Joe Bankman and Barbara Fried, along with his brother, Gabriel Bankman-Fried. They managed these funds and directed donations to various political causes and candidates.
Moreover, Joe Bankman, a Stanford University law professor, is accused of advising on financial strategies to facilitate these political donations. The WSJ reports that emails show Joe Bankman’s direct involvement in the illicit operations, indicating he was well aware of the illegal straw-donor scheme.
Barbara Fried, who co-founded the political action committee (PAC) Mind the Gap, allegedly used her position to channel funds towards progressive groups and initiatives. Meanwhile, Gabriel Bankman-Fried is accused of directing donations to pandemic prevention efforts. This coordinated effort to disperse funds across the political spectrum aimed to amplify their influence and support favored causes without drawing attention to the origin of the donations.
Also Read: Fmr Obama Solicitor Says Regulators Are “Deliberately Debanking Crypto”
Former FTX Execs Also Involved
David Mason, ex-chairman of the Federal Election Commission (FCE), weighed in on the matter. Mason highlighted that the evidence presented in the emails constituted “strong evidence” of Joe Bankman’s knowledge and participation in the scheme.
The political donation scheme, as detailed by the WSJ, also involved Ryan Salame and Nishad Singh, two former FTX executives. They have already pleaded guilty to participating in the illegal straw-donor scheme. According to prosecutors, Salame directed funds to Republican candidates to dissociate the contributions from Bankman-Fried, while Singh supported liberal candidates.
The allegations have led to several legal proceedings, with the potential for significant legal liabilities for those involved. Moreover, Mason’s remarks underscore the gravity of the situation. It suggests that Joe Bankman could face direct legal consequences under campaign finance laws if the allegations are substantiated.
Despite the mounting evidence, a spokesperson for Joe Bankman has refuted claims of his involvement. They stated that Bankman had “no knowledge of any alleged campaign finance violations.” This defense, however, stands in stark contrast to the detailed emails that have surfaced.
Also Read: Just-In: Mt. Gox Starts Repaying Creditors, Bitcoin To Dip Further?
The presented content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market condition. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.
Regulation
OpenAI Challenges NYT to Prove Originality of Articles in Copyright Case
![](https://coin2049.io/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/OpenAI-e1695289963155.jpg)
In a notable legal confrontation, OpenAI has requested that the New York Times (NYT) validate the originality of its articles. The AI firm demands the court mandate NYT disclose detailed source materials for each copyrighted article. This move is part of an ongoing lawsuit in which the NYT accuses OpenAI of using its content without permission.
OpenAI Requests Transparency from NYT
OpenAI’s legal team has approached a New York court with a significant demand. They insist that the NYT provide comprehensive details about the creation process of its articles. The request includes access to the reporter’s notes, interview records, and other source materials. OpenAI argues that this information is crucial to determine the originality and authorship of the articles in question.
The court filing by OpenAI aims to explore the depth and authenticity of the NYT’s journalistic process. Their lawyers argue that the NYT’s claim of substantial investment in high-quality journalism prompts a need for transparency. They believe understanding the creation process is essential for the court to make a fair judgment.
OpenAI argues that such disclosure is necessary for its defense. Detailed insight into the NYT’s authorship process will help ascertain whether the articles are original works. The NYT made this request following allegations that OpenAI unauthorizedly used its content to train AI models.
Also Read: German Lawmaker Wants Government To HODL Bitcoin (BTC), Not Sell
NYT Fights Back on Copyright Infringement
Responding swiftly, the NYT’s legal team filed a motion to dismiss OpenAI’s request on July 3. They argue that OpenAI’s demands are excessive and could set a troubling precedent for copyright law. The NYT contends that the intricacies of their journalistic practices are irrelevant to the issue of copyright infringement.
The NYT’s opposition stresses that the request undermines the basic principles of copyright law. They believe that proving the content creation process does not pertain to the alleged misuse. The NYT’s lawyers highlight that the focus should remain whether OpenAI used the copyrighted articles without authorization.
Furthermore, the NYT accuses OpenAI of attempting to divert the court’s attention from the real issue at hand. They maintain that the lawsuit should concentrate on the legality of OpenAI’s use of the NYT’s copyrighted content. The newspaper defends its rights to its intellectual property, arguing that the creation process should remain protected.
Also Read: Core Scientific Founder Claims Bitcoin’s True Value Not Yet Realized
The presented content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market condition. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.
Regulation
Former Solicitor General Paul Clement Joins Crypto Industry Fight
![](https://coin2049.io/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Custodia-Bank-CEO-Caitlin-Long.webp.webp)
A week after Custodia Bank filed an appeal in the 10th Circuit Court challenging the Fed’s power to deny it a master account, former Solicitor General Paul Clement has now filed an amicus brief on behalf of the crypto industry.
Paul Clement Takes Custodia Bank vs Fed Fight Ahead
As said, in the recent Custodia Bank vs. Fed case, Paul Clement filed an Amicus brief on Wednesday, July 3, while supporting the crypto industry. Clement has gained popularity in his recent success in overturning the Chevron Defence in the Supreme Court case in the Supreme Court case involving Loper Bright fishermen.
Also Read: US SEC Takes Major Blow In Chevron Howey Test Case, Implication For Crypto
In this ongoing legal fight, The Digital Chamber (TDC) and the Global Business Blockchain Council-USA (GBBC-USA) have expressed their significant interest and unique perspective. With extensive experience in the digital assets industry, the two organizations have argued that denying state-chartered banks a reliable path to participate in the national banking just because of the involvement with digital assets will threaten the growth and success of the trillion-dollar blockchain industry.
The two organization argue that upholding the lower court’s decision will give politically unaccountable federal officials and unchecked power to stiffle innovation thereby cutting off legitimate businesses from having crucial access to the global financial system.
The District Court stated that the “Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (“FRBKC”) has unreviewable discretion to denynonmember depository institutionsa master account”.
TDC and GBBC argued that despite following the legal boundaries, this court decision set dangerous precedence for any industry that might fall out with the Fed officials.
Paul Clement Raises Constitutional Concerns on Fed’s Structure
In the amicus brief, the former Solicitor General has raised some constitutional questions regarding the Fed’s structure. Clement states: “In sum, by affording Federal Reserve Bank presidents significant and largely unconstrained discretionary power, the district court’s decision raises serious constitutional questions under Article II.”
“The district court’s decision threatens the dual system by granting Federal Reserve Bank officials unreviewable discretion to “effectively crippl[e]” state-chartered banks operating legally,” he added.
Also Read: Custodia Bank CEO Predicts “Rip Roaring” Bitcoin Bull Market
The presented content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market condition. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.
-
Blockchain2 months ago
Hong Kong’s Securities Association Tips Authorities On Crypto Self-Regulation
-
Regulation2 months ago
CFTC Appoints Dr. Ted Kaouk as First Chief AI Officer
-
Altcoin2 weeks ago
Are Solana, Cardano, Polygon Commodities As US SEC Ends Ethereum Investigation?
-
Regulation2 months ago
Terraform Labs Refuses to Pay $5.3 Billion Fine, Says SEC Has No Evidence
-
Market2 weeks ago
TON Foundation’s Plan to Onboard 500 Million Users
-
Market3 weeks ago
Avalanche (AVAX) Under Pressure: Prolonged Downtrend Next?
-
Altcoin2 weeks ago
2.52 Million Altcoins Are Ruining Crypto’s Future
-
NFT3 weeks ago
New And Upcoming NFT Projects
✓ Share: