Cryptocurrency

Subscribe to Cryptocurrency

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced it has reached a settlement with the bankrupt crypto company Voyager over the company’s alleged deceptive crypto marketing practices. Specifically, the FTC’s complaint alleges that from at least 2018 until its declaration of bankruptcy in July 2022, Voyager enticed consumers with promises that their deposits were insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and were “safe.” However, consumers’ deposits with Voyager were not eligible for FDIC insurance and were not protected in the event that Voyager failed.

The FDIC only insures deposits held by insured banks or savings associations, and only up to certain limits. Voyager, however, is not a chartered bank or savings association. While Voyager’s bank partner was FDIC-insured, FDIC deposit insurance protects deposits only in the event of the insured institution’s failure, not the failure of a non-bank partner in the event of that company’s failure. According to the FTC, Voyager’s false assurance lured customers into entrusting their funds to the company, resulting in significant losses for those affected by the company’s bankruptcy in July 2022.Continue Reading FTC Settles with Bankrupt Crypto Company, but Pursues CEO for Deceptive FDIC Claims

This week, a federal court in California issued an 80-page opinion that painstakingly walks through claims made against several celebrities who had promoted the Ethereum Max (EMAX) cryptocurrency, also called tokens.

The lawsuit was filed last year against Kim Kardashian, Floyd Mayweather, and former professional basketball player Paul Pierce, challenging their EMAX endorsements and social media posts. Since then, the plaintiffs have amended the complaint multiple times.

Among other issues it addressed, this week’s court decision provided a helpful reference point showing where a court aligned with and diverged from the Federal Trade Commission’s Endorsement Guides.

First, the court found that the “#AD” disclaimer in the following post made clear that Kardashian was being paid, even though it appeared toward the bottom of the post.Continue Reading Court Provides Guidance on Social Influencer Advertising in Ethereum Max Crypto Lawsuit

The first quarter of 2023 hasn’t started much better for the blockchain and cryptocurrency industry than the fourth quarter of 2022 ended. Last week, in Friel v. Dapper Labs, Inc et al., a federal judge declined to dismiss a class action complaint alleging securities law violations, finding that the Plaintiffs plausibly alleged that the non-fungible tokens (NFTs) sold on the NBA’s Top Shot platform could be securities. The ruling was the first of its kind, and while the court expressly stated that it is narrow in scope and other NFTs may not be securities, the holding could ultimately have far-reaching implications for other NFT projects and marketplaces as applied, particularly in today’s uncertain environment.

NBA Top Shot is an NFT platform, owned and operated by Dapper Labs, that allows consumers to buy, sell, and trade “Moments” NFTs (digital video clips of player highlights) on Dapper Lab’s Flow Blockchain. On February 22, 2023, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York denied Dapper Labs’ motion to dismiss, holding that although “it is a close call and the Court’s decision is narrow,” Moments NFTs qualify as securities under the Howey test, the four-pronged test created by the Supreme Court in SEC v. Howey Co. to determine whether certain transactions qualify as investment transactions and are thus regulated securities. In its decision to deny the motion to dismiss, the court focused on prongs two and three of the Howey test.Continue Reading Layup or Airball? Court Holds NBA Top Shot NFTs May Be a Security in Friel v. Dapper Labs

On Monday the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission issued a cease-and-desist order to Kim Kardashian for failing to disclose that she received $250,000 to promote EthereumMax’s digital tokens, “EMAX tokens,” on social media.

The SEC considers the EMAX token to be an investment contract, a type of security under the SEC’s jurisdiction. EMAX tokens are available for public trading on cryptocurrency exchanges, and the SEC found that purchasers would have had a reasonable expectation of profits from their investment in EMAX tokens as a result of the efforts of the company behind the token.Continue Reading Keeping Up with Disclosures: SEC Punishes Kim Kardashian for Crypto Promotion

In its much-anticipated cryptocurrency executive order issued earlier this month, the Biden administration called for a coordinated interagency approach to the regulation of digital assets and to the study of their potential risks.

A significant part of this effort focuses on the nation’s primary consumer protection agencies, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).

Historically, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) have played the primary roles in regulating digital assets, with the FTC and CFPB largely taking a wait-and-see approach. But this has left open a regulatory gap for crypto activities that do not involve a security or a commodity derivative.Continue Reading Biden Tasks Consumer Protection Agencies with Stepping Up Cryptocurrency Oversight

A class action lawsuit filed against Kim Kardashian, Floyd Mayweather, and former professional basketball player Paul Pierce earlier this month underscores the need for celebrity endorsers to take care when they approach any endorsement activity in the cryptocurrency space.

The lawsuit alleges that the celebrities collaborated with Ethereum Max, a company offering ERC-20 cryptocurrency tokens (EMAX Tokens), and its executives to engage in a “pump-and-dump” scheme promoting investments in the company’s tokens. The complaint alleges that the three celebrity influencers misleadingly promoted EMAX Tokens to potential investors, touting the ability of investors to make significant returns due to the favorable “tokenomics” of the EMAX Tokens, when in fact the tokens were practically worthless. The class action alleges violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law, California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act, aiding and abetting, and unjust enrichment/restitution.

According to the complaint, EthereumMax’s entire business model relies on marketing and promotional activities, and the celebrity promoters received EMAX Tokens and/or other compensation in return for promoting the tokens. (EthereumMax “has no connection” to Ether, the second-largest cryptocurrency, the lawsuit said, adding that its branding appears to be an effort to mislead investors into believing the token is part of the Ethereum network.) The promotional activities at issue included, among other things, making social media posts, wearing EMAX-branded shirts, and promoting the cryptocurrency at a conference.Continue Reading “Are You Guys Into Crypto????”: Celebrities Promoting Cryptocurrencies Become Class Action Targets

Game developers and platform providers are increasingly integrating non-fungible tokens (NFTs), virtual currencies, and digital marketplaces into their games and platforms, creating seamless, novel, and interactive experiences. While the industry has moved ahead quickly, federal and state regulators are taking a much closer look at how these technologies fit within existing legal frameworks.

In a recent webinar, partner Ellen Berge and associate Chris Boone of Venable’s Advertising Law and Payments groups explored the latest regulatory developments and addressed how to spot and avoid compliance and regulatory risks associated with NFTs, virtual currencies, and other platform-based monetization mechanics. We received insightful questions from members of the audience, which our lawyers answer below.Continue Reading You Asked, We Answered: NFTs and Virtual Currency in Games: Compliance Issues and Legal Risks

In the iconic words of DJ Khaled: “Another one.” That’s right, folks. Another round of celebrities have fallen on the wrong side of the federal government’s enforcement of its advertising disclosure rules. Recently, the SEC announced that it settled charges against Floyd Mayweather (professional boxer) and DJ Khaled (entertainer and music producer) for failing to tell their social media followers that they received money for promoting investments in Initial Coin Offerings (“ICOs”). This case is especially noteworthy, considering that this is the first time the SEC brought an action against a paid celebrity endorser involving ICOs.

In Mayweather’s case, he received a $300,000 payment for ICO tweets like this one: “starts in a few hours. Get yours before they sell out, I got mine…”

Likewise, DJ Khaled received a $50,000 payment for this tweet: “I just received my titanium centra debit card. The Centra Card & Centra Wallet app is the ultimate winner in Cryptocurrency debit cards powered by CTR tokens! Use your bitcoins, ethereum, and more cryptocurrencies in real time across the globe. This is a Game changer here. Get your CTR tokens now!”Continue Reading All I Do is Win, Win, Win?: SEC Settles Charges with Floyd Mayweather and DJ Khaled

blockchain technologyThe FTC just announced that it, too, will join the federal government’s growing crypto/blockchain regulation club, right alongside the ranks of the SEC, CFTC, and Congress.

Officially, this means the FTC has now created its own internal “Blockchain Working Group.” Though the FTC has been publishing information about cryptocurrencies since 2014 (see this hilariously-titled and well-written informative alert, Back, Back, Back It Up, for example) and brought its first cryptocurrency-related case as early as June 2015, the agency’s decision to form a working group shows a deeper level of commitment by the agency to engaging with players in the crypto space. And, certainly, it shows that blockchain and crypto assets are likely here to stay.

But does the creation of the FTC’s Blockchain Working Group mean *terrified gasp* . . . more regulation? Well, frankly, the amount of regulation doesn’t really matter in this context, so that isn’t even the right question to ask (the “right question to ask” appears at the end of this article). Preoccupation with the number of new laws aimed at regulating this previously unregulated space is futile. The crypto community enjoyed the absence of specific government oversight for years, but that didn’t stop state and federal agencies from bringing enforcement actions based on existing laws. Of course, the existing laws those agencies asked the courts to apply never contemplated the existence or consequences of this new, world-changing technology.Continue Reading The FTC Formed a Blockchain Working Group (And Maybe That’s A Good Thing)