The Polsinelli Blockchain+ team took a break from the usual Bi-Weekly updates for the Thanksgiving holiday, but the Web3 legal developments did not. There was a significant ruling out of the 5th Circuit, which has major implications on the legal treatment of immutable software code and agency actions after Loper Bright generally. There was also an action brought against the SEC by eighteen states regarding the agency’s handling of digital asset matters, a federal district court ruling overturning the SEC’s recently enacted Dealer Rule, and a host of other legal developments that are sure to have ramifications across the industry. These developments and a few other brief notes are discussed below. 18 States File Lawsuit Against SEC Over Handling of Crypto: November 15, 2024 Background: Eighteen states have filed a lawsuit against the SEC and its Commissioners, accusing them of unconstitutional overreach and unfair persecution of the digital asset industry. The lawsuit was jointly filed in Kentucky federal court by Kentucky, Nebraska, Tennessee, West Virginia, Iowa, Texas, Mississippi, Montana, Arkansas, Ohio, Kansas, Missouri, Indiana, Utah, Louisiana, South Carolina, Oklahoma, and Florida. The lawsuit alleges that the agency’s actions focusing on U.S. crypto companies “defy basic principles of federalism and separation of powers.” Analysis: The DeFi Education Fund assisted with this effort, which is clear from the pleadings. With Chair Gensler’s impending resignation, to be soon replaced with a more digital asset-friendly head of the SEC, this may just be litigation theater. On the other hand, if any case is going to make it to the Supreme Court on an expedited basis regarding the appropriateness of applying Howey to digital assets, it would be a matter brought by a large number of states against the SEC to be heard by a current group of Supreme Court Justices that have shown their predilections to limiting perceived agency overreach. Judge Rules Lido DAO Might Be a General Partnership: November 18, 2024 Background: The Court in Samuels v. Lido DAO has rejected motions to dismiss filed by various investors, holding that Lido DAO is adequately alleged to be a general partnership under California law and that the investors are adequately alleged as general partners, which would make them jointly and severally liable for the actions of the DAO. This means the named parties will need to defend themselves in court or risk being held jointly/severally liable if the challenged DAO actions are deemed illegal. Analysis: The reason for arguments for either corporate wrappers or BORGs is to avoid situations like this where participation in a DAO makes an individual or entity on the hook for everything it does. It seems like judges are easily convinced that the reason for working through DAOs is avoiding liability, as opposed to why many choose the DAO structure to mitigate other risks such as opaque governance and centralized risks. As it stands, it seems like DAOs will need to avoid the U.S. entirely or implement corporate wrappers of some kind to have a target for courts to point a finger to in lawsuits. Texas Court Strikes Down SEC Dealer Rules: November 21, 2024 Background: A Northern District of Texas district court has ruled in favor of the Blockchain Association’s challenge to the SEC’s promulgated the “Dealer Rule,” which expanded the definition of “Dealer” under the SEC’s interpretation of the Securities Exchange Act. The Court’s ruling states, “The SEC exceeded its statutory authority by enacting such a broad definition of dealer untethered from the text, history, and structure of the Exchange Act.” It also incorporated by reference its analysis in the related case, Nat’l Ass’n of Priv. Fund Managers v. SEC, No. 4:24-cv-00250 (N.D. Tex), where the Court noted, “[under the Dealer Rule], many of the world’s largest, most prominent market participants, including the Federal Reserve, may have been operating unlawfully as unregistered securities ‘dealers’ for 90 years without anyone—including the Commission—having previously noticed.” Analysis: The Court didn’t even have to reach the arguments regarding whether the rule was arbitrary and capricious or exceeded the SEC’s authority under Loper Bright to overturn the Dealer Rule. This means that SEC rules enacted under Chair Gensler and challenged in court are now 1-and-5 in surviving those legal challenges. That is more rules overturned by courts than the previous 3 SEC Chairs combined. Chair Gensler has announced his planned resignation but elected to stay on as Chair until January 20th, indicating Chair Gensler believes there are additional matters he wants to finalize that may not get done without him there to break a 2-2 tie, so still more to come. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Issues Digital Wallet Rule: November 21, 2024 Background: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) finalized its rules to supervise digital funds transfer and payment wallet apps. In announcing the final rule, the CFPB stated it “made several significant changes from its initial proposal. The transaction threshold determining which companies require supervision is now substantially higher, at 50 million annual transactions. Given the evolving market for digital currencies, the CFPB also limited the rule's scope to count only transactions conducted in U.S. dollars.” Analysis: While Coinbase, the DeFi Education Fund, the Blockchain Association, and others all sent staunch opposition to the proposed rule encompassing self-custody digital asset wallets, most expected the agency formed by Elizabeth Warren would still go through with the rules as written. So the CFPB expressly limiting the rule to wallets for U.S. dollars was a pleasant surprise. Either way, this saves a ton of industry time and effort in not having to file lawsuits to challenge the rule if it had been enacted as previously written. Fifth Circuit Overturns OFAC Sanctions of Tornado Cash Smart Contracts: November 26, 2024 Background: The Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) sanctions of the open-source digital asset software protocol known as “Tornado Cash,” which forbid any dealings with the Tornado Cash smart contracts, were overturned by the 5th Circuit. This case was brought by various users of Tornado Cash, claiming the open-source, self-executing software is not sanctionable under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (as opposed to the rogue persons and entities who abuse that software, who are sanctionable). The Court agreed, holding OFAC only had the power to sanction the “property” of a foreign national or entity, and since Tornado Cash’s immutable smart contracts are not the “property,” they are outside of OFAC's statutory powers to sanction. Analysis: The Court’s use of diagrams and plain speak to explain how Tornado Cash works was (other than some minor technical misspeaks on pg. 5) surprisingly well done. Hats off to the lawyers that had to effectively teach 76, 65, and 59-year-old judges the fairly complex technical aspects of the mixing platform enough for those judges to recite it back (mostly) accurately and reach the right result. This case may get attention outside of crypto law, as it turned primarily on Loper Bright grounds, which redefined the level of deference (previously known as Chevron deference) given to federal agencies in interpreting statutory text. Now we await the outcome of the various Tornado Cash developer cases. There is also the case pending in the 11th Circuit, which had oral arguments heard recently and is available here. Briefly Noted: SEC Chair Gensler Announces Planned Resignation: This was likely going to happen regardless of who won the Presidential election, but Gary Gensler announced he will resign from the SEC effective on inauguration day. With Commissioner Lizárraga also announcing his resignation, that will leave only Commissioners Peirce (pro-crypto), Uyeda (pro-crypto), and Crenshaw (anti-crypto, but on an expired term) left until new Commissioners are appointed by the President and approved by Congress. Kraken Request for Early Appeal Denied: The judge in SEC v. Payward Ventures (aka Kraken) has denied the exchange’s request for an interlocutory appeal of the dismissal denial ruling. So the case marches on. Frozen Staking Rewards Still Income: This was released the first week of November, but that was a busy week in crypto legal updates, so our update neglected to include this letter memo where the IRS clarified that their position is staking rewards are taxable the year earned, even if inaccessible due to being frozen on a platform or otherwise locked in a protocol. Various Articles Published on BSA and Sanction Authorities: The Blockchain Association published this deep dive into the history of the Bank Secrecy Act and argues that the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”) is neither fit nor constitutional when applied to digital asset transactions. There was also this recent publication worth reading on the attempted criminalization of the development of open-source cryptocurrency mixing software. Report on Dollar Dominance Through Stablecoins: Another publication worth reading is this work from the Digital Chamber on how stablecoins are supporting the continuation of U.S. Dollar dominance. Also, be sure to check out this letter from the Digital Chamber calling for the end of the policy forbidding crypto regulators from owning even a de minimis amount of crypto. Forbidding regulators from using the products/services they regulate is simply not sound policy. Southern District of New York Toning Down Crypto Cases: The co-chief of the SDNY U.S. Attorney’s Office securities and commodities task force said not to expect more crypto cases from the office any time soon with Jay Clayton expected to take over the office. Conclusion: In a dynamic and rapidly evolving legal landscape, the past few weeks have highlighted the interplay between innovation, regulation, and judicial oversight within the Web3 ecosystem. From challenges to agency overreach, such as the 18-state lawsuit against the SEC and the Fifth Circuit’s groundbreaking Tornado Cash decision, to rulings that reshape industry practices like the Lido DAO partnership liability and the Dealer Rule’s invalidation, the implications are profound. These developments emphasize the critical need for clarity and balance in how laws and regulations intersect with emerging technologies. While the legal battles are far from over, the outcomes will undoubtedly shape the future of digital assets, decentralized platforms, and blockchain innovation. As always, staying informed and engaged is key as we navigate this complex yet promising frontier. If you have any questions about how the above developments affect your blockchain plans or any other questions regarding the legalities around various aspects of this rapidly developing industry, contact any member of the Polsinelli Blockchain+ team to set up a time to talk and see how we can be of assistance. Also, please subscribe to the BitBlog for alerts when new stories or updates are posted by our attorneys.

It was a busy two weeks in Web3 law, as Binance lost in an appeal that could have wide-ranging jurisdictional implications outside of just digital assets. Coinbase also went on the offensive against the SEC in appealing the SEC’s denial of rulemaking, and Coinbase was supported by many industry stakeholders as amicus a week later. This all came around the same time as the House of Representatives held a hearing titled “SEC Overreach: Examining the Need for Reform” and the administrative agencies overseeing U.S. intellectual property registration released their long-awaited study on non-fungible tokens (“NFTs”). These developments and a few other brief notes are discussed below. Binance Loses Appeal With Far Ranging Jurisdictional Implications: March 8, 2024 Background: Binance lost on an appeal that previously dismissed the cryptocurrency exchange from a class action lawsuit on jurisdictional grounds. While Binance has requested a rehearing en banc in front of the Second Circuit, this was a blow to an exchange that recently settled with the DOJ/CFTC and is still facing a lawsuit against the SEC. The case was previously dismissed at the district court level under the presumption against extraterritorial application of U.S. securities laws to foreign entities. Summary: Binance denied having a principal place of business in any jurisdiction, which was the basis for the appellate court overruling the prior dismissal. The Second Circuit determined that because plaintiffs’ alleged (1) Binance’s use of Amazon Web Services for much of its infrastructure made that U.S. centric; and (2) Binance’s U.S. infrastructure made it more likely to be used by U.S. individuals, that Binance’s lack of physical offices made that the best thing to look to when looking at where a transaction was completed. This was a Motion to Dismiss, so the Court was required to accept the infrastructure claims as true, and it’s very possible that these claims will be rebutted through evidence on discovery. But this is still a blow, which makes it more likely for decentralized companies to be subject to U.S. securities laws based on their web services infrastructure even if they put into place attempts to weed out U.S. buyers. Coinbase Appeals SEC’s Denial of Rulemaking for Digital Assets: March 11, 2024 Background: In July of 2022, Coinbase petitioned the SEC for rulemaking regarding digital assets, requesting sufficient rules to create market certainty on whether the Commission would view a particular digital asset to be an “investment contract” subject to registration and oversight by the SEC. After challenging the SEC’s lack of action on the exchange’s petition, the SEC formally denied the request, clearing the way for judicial review of that denial. Coinbase has now filed a 78-page brief seeking such a judicial review. Summary: You can look at the chart on page 12 of the brief (document page 16) to get the gist of the argument. The primary author is Eugene Scalia, who has played a part in overturning numerous recent laws and regulations and gets more leeway on stylistic decisions. Pages 40-46 explaining the unworkable nature of existing securities laws with blockchain functionalities was probably the best part of the briefing (and reads like a summary of the Paradigm 3-part series on the subject). As expected, Coinbase continues to avail itself to all avenues of judicial review of the SEC’s actions (and inactions). The wheels of justice turn slowly but grind exceedingly fine. Copyright, Patent, and Trademark Offices Release Study on NFTs: March 12, 2024 Background: The U.S. Copyright and U.S. Patent and Trademark Offices released their collaborative study on the impact of NFTs on IP law and policy. The big takeaways were (1) the recognition of the value NFTs can bring to artists and brands and (2) the insistence that existing law is sufficient to address infringement concerns related to NFT applications. Summary: This study was the result of the President’s Executive Order on Digital Assets from September 2022. The study determined that incorporating NFTs into existing intellectual property registration and recordation practices is not necessary or advisable at this time, as these technologies can be registered under existing laws without the need for specialized carve-outs. The main takeaway from the study was the executive agencies’ willingness to interact and receive feedback from interested stakeholders through various roundtable discussions and open-door meetings. It will be interesting to see if existing doctrines, such as the first sale doctrine, will continue to apply to digital works when the change of ownership of those digital works does not require the creation of a “copy” of that digital work. Amici Support Coinbase Appeals SEC’s Denial of Rulemaking for Digital Assets: March 18, 2024 Background: The industry continues to show up in filing amicus briefs on important cases, this time with amicus briefing filed in support of Coinbase’s appeal of the SEC’s denial of digital asset rulemaking. Briefs were filed by Paradigm, LEJILEX, the Texas Blockchain Council, the Crypto Council for Innovation, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. This level of legal activism is not something often seen in commercial endeavors, but is becoming commonplace in the digital asset industry, where collaboration of unaffiliated stakeholders and decentralization are part of the industry’s fabric. Summary: As we previously stated in our breakdown of the Coinbase briefing, the key to many of these briefings is demonstrating the illogical nature of the SEC’s “come in and register” talking points while failing to provide a route to registration that is possible based on the technology at issue. Paradigm’s brief especially weighed in and crystalized this point with specific cites to applicable Code of Federal Regulations sections. The Chamber of Commerce’s support was also strong. “The SEC’s belated, conclusory denial is a textbook example of agency action that is arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion—in other words, action that must be set aside under the APA. Whatever discretion agencies ordinarily possess, a refusal to undertake rulemaking cannot stand if it is ‘plainly misguided.’ House Subcommittee Holds Hearing on SEC Oversight: March 20, 2024 Background: The House Subcommittee on Capital Markets held a hearing titled “SEC Overreach: Examining the Need for Reform,” which included witnesses from the Cato Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Center for American Progress, and the Committee on Capital Markets Regulation. While the hearing did not focus specifically on digital assets, the topic was hit on at various points throughout the hearing. Summary: The witness from the Heritage Foundation had especially strong words against the agency, stating, “Perhaps the leading area in which the Commission has been irresponsible is the area of digital assets, or crypto assets… If you were to write a book on how not to regulate, the Commission’s modus operandi in this area would be the first chapter.” There were also remarks from Congressman French Hill, the potential next head of the Financial Services Committee, regarding the SEC’s approach to digital assets and recent court decisions involving digital assets. KuCoin Charged With Violating BSA and Commodity Exchange Act: March 26, 2024 Background: The CFTC and Department of Justice filed parallel civil and criminal actions against the companies operating the KuCoin exchange. In the civil complaint, the CFTC alleges that KuCoin illegally dealt in off-exchange commodity futures transactions and leveraged, margined, or financed retail commodity transactions, operating in the US without registering as a futures commission merchant, swap execution facility, or designated contract market.  The criminal complaint reportedly is charging them with violating the Bank Secrecy Act, operating an unlicensed money transmitter business, and conspiracy to violate the Bank Secrecy Act and operate as an unlicensed money transmitter business. Summary: This isn’t the first time KuCoin has landed in hot water, as it was recently barred from operating in New York and was effectively kicked out of Canada. It shouldn’t be a huge surprise that an exchange offering otherwise regulated products without either geofencing US IP addresses or requiring basic KYC verification would get in trouble. Interestingly, the CFTC press release provides that they “failed to impose any IP address restrictions during the relevant period to prevent U.S. customers from trading commodity interests or account for commonly used technology such as virtual private networks (VPNs) that could potentially circumvent IP address restrictions.” It is unclear how one would prevent VPN users from accessing the exchange short of blocking all VPNs (which is untenable for many reasons, not the least of which is that about 30% of all internet users are using a VPN, usually for completely legitimate reasons), or why someone would need to block VPNs when they’re not geofencing to begin with. The CFTC also made it a point to clarify that Ether is a commodity subject to CFTC jurisdiction, perhaps to prevent the SEC from asserting regulatory jurisdiction over the asset. Briefly Noted: Ethereum Foundation Reportedly Under Investigation: While not independently confirmed, numerous sources have reported that the Ethereum Foundation may be under investigation by the SEC, purportedly relating to Ethereum’s shift from a proof of work validation mechanism to a proof of stake mechanic. This could also involve an effort for the SEC to classify ETH as a security since earnings from staking are easier to analogize to some traditional securities products than earnings from work. This may also be an effort for the SEC to distance itself from the Hinman Speech, where the then-head of the Division of Corporate Finance declared that “current offers and sales of Ether are not securities transactions,” particularly given the looming May deadline for the SEC to approve or deny a potential Ethereum exchange traded fund.  Bitcoin Fog Developer Convicted: Roman Sterlingov was convicted on all four counts of money laundering for his involvement with crypto-mixer BitcoinFog. This conviction is likely to be appealed, particularly over some claimed logical leaps taken by the DOJ’s cryo-tracing experts. Court Determines Craig Wright is not Bitcoin Creator: A Court determined Craig Wright is not Satoshi, despite his sister’s testimony that he pretended to be a ninja well into his adulthood. This is the result of a multi-year litigation battle over Mr. Wright’s claims of being the primary author of the Bitcoin Whitepaper, attributed to the pseudonymous “Satoshi Nakamoto.” SEC Issued Sanctions in Digital Asset Case: While we will not comment on the contents of the Court’s Order, it is a development worth noting that the Court in SEC v. Debt Box issued an Order requiring the SEC to pay certain costs and fees as a sanction in that case. Conclusion: The past two weeks have marked a pivotal period for Web3 law, characterized by significant legal developments that highlight the ongoing tension between regulatory bodies and the rapidly evolving digital asset industry. The appeal loss by Binance not only sets a precedent for jurisdictional reach over decentralized entities but also emphasizes the complexities of applying traditional securities law to the unique nature of digital assets. Coinbase's bold move to challenge the SEC’s stance on rulemaking, backed by considerable industry support, underscores the sector's call for clear, applicable regulations that foster innovation while ensuring market integrity. Moreover, the House of Representatives' hearing on "SEC Overreach" and the release of the study on NFTs by U.S. IP agencies collectively signal a growing recognition of the need to adapt legal frameworks to the realities of the digital age. As the legal landscape continues to evolve, these developments serve as a reminder of the delicate balance that must be struck between regulation and innovation in the digital asset ecosystem. The industry’s resilience and willingness to engage in legal battles reflect its commitment to establishing a regulatory environment that is both fair and conducive to growth. This period may well be looked back upon as a watershed moment in the journey towards achieving a harmonious coexistence between digital asset innovations and regulatory oversight. In addition, SDNY denied Coinbase summary judgment on most of its claims in their case against the SEC, though they did succeed in getting the claim regarding self-custodial wallets dismissed.  We’ll have more on this decision soon.  If you have any questions about how the above developments affect your blockchain plans or any other questions regarding the legalities around various aspects of this rapidly developing industry, contact any member of the Polsinelli Blockchain+ team to set up a time to talk and see how we can be of assistance. Also, please subscribe to the BitBlog for alerts when new stories or updates are posted by our attorneys.