```html ```

SEC起诉Consensys 律师的游戏开始了？

近日，软件开发公司Consensys对美国证券交易委员会（SEC）及其五名委员提起诉讼，声称SEC精心策划了一场“夺取加密货币话语权”的监管运动，监管机构试图通过针对Consensys和其他公司的特别执法行动来非法监管以太坊，但理论上SEC没有管辖权，理由是加密代币不是证券。

Consensys方表示，SEC已“将目光瞄准”MetaMask 钱包软件，该软件允许用户自行托管ETH和其他加密货币。该公司在文件中强调，他们于4月10日收到SEC发出的Wells通知，警告可能对其MetaMask Swaps和MetaMask Stake产品采取执法行动。SEC在电话会议上表示，Consensys是一家未注册的经纪交易商。据Consensys透露，该公司在2023年收到了三张传票，要求提供与“收购、持有和销售ETH”相关的信息。

作为反击，Consensys在德克萨斯州提起诉讼，并提出ETH不是证券的四大理由。首先是SEC对以太坊的历史立场，2018年，时任SEC金融部主任的William Hinman就发表过重要讲话，明确表示以太坊不被视为证券。SEC当时并未回应这一立场，因而目前改变初衷毫无根据。其次是监管权的对抗，CFTC（商品期货交易委员会）始终认为以太坊是一类商品，并将其延续至KuCoin的诉讼中。最后，Consensys强调以太坊具备足够的去中心化架构，并不存在以太坊的核心控制与开发群体，而共识机制的转变并不影响该点。

然而，根据最新法庭文件表示，美SEC及其Gary Gensler)似乎在至少一年的时间里就已然明确了第二大加密货币以太坊是一种未注册的证券不符合现行联邦法规。就目前而言，SEC对此并未回应。两者的诉讼案将有可能是一场持续数年的拉锯战。市场多认为SEC不会在截止日期（6月11日）到来时批准任何的以太坊现货ETF。

至于去中心化钱包，目前尚不清楚Phoenix和Wasabi是否会是唯一离开美国的钱包，但至少有一家钱包公司Zeus明确表示将继续留下运营。“我们绝对不会迁出，”Zeus的官方账户在X上发文表示。

“我们相信Zeus现在正在遵守法律条文。如果法律发生变化或做出任何判断，我们将做出相应调整。”Zeus创始人Evan Kaloudis表示。

“如果Zeus垮台，所有其他闪电节点运营商都是下一个。如果闪电节点运营商倒台，下一个就会到自托管，自托管就是最后一道防线。”

It is reported that two bitcoin wallets are about to withdraw from the US market. This move may be a response to the recent actions taken by the regulatory authorities on self-managed wallets. It also means that the US Securities and Exchange Commission is turning its attention to the popular Ethereum access point. Self-managed wallets are a kind of encrypted currency wallets, and the private key is controlled by users without relying on a third party. It can be said that this is the closest product to the decentralization of encryption core. Bitcoin, headquartered in Paris, announced on May that it will be applied from the United States due to regulatory uncertainty. The store removed its popular lightning network wallet company, which suggested that users close channels and transfer wallet assets before June, and announced the next day that they would close their private wallet access in the United States. In a statement on June, it said that in view of the recent announcement of the US authorities, American users are now strictly prohibited from using their services, which was also emphasized in the statement, saying that the recent announcement of the US authorities has caused doubts in the industry. Whether it can be regulated as a money service enterprise and subject to such severe supervision is not clear at present which announcement the response is directed at, but the legal actions and recent notices against it indicate that the self-managed wallet is likely to be included in the supervision scope of the US Securities and Exchange Commission. In addition, the US Department of Justice responded to the motion against the co-founder case in the document of May, which indicates that even decentralized self-managed services may need to be implemented and registered with cryptocurrency advocates based on Article of the US Code. It is simply a generalization of the law to cover almost all sectors of the cryptocurrency industry except users who run their own nodes. If money transmission does not need to be controlled, then anything that can make Bitcoin convenient and easy to use may fall into this broad definition. Many crypto community critics point out that the decision to withdraw from the United States is disappointing, but considering the uncertainty of the law, this strategic shift is largely understandable. In response, Elizabeth Stark, CEO of Lightning Lab, said that the news was released after the cryptocurrency company sued, and the CEO and chief technology officer were arrested for operating unauthorized remittance business. The US Department of Justice accused that it had handled more than 100 million US dollars of illegal transactions since 2000 and earned more than 10,000 US dollars, although legal experts did not represent users in holding assets. The reason for the self-hosting platform is highly questioned, but the regulatory authorities around the world have been trying to bring the decentralized system into the regulatory boundary for many years. A typical example is that the European Union, as part of the new anti-money laundering law, has been considering setting a limit of Eurodollars for the encrypted transactions of self-hosting encrypted wallets. The US authorities have also considered introducing legislation to ban self-hosting encrypted wallets in essence, but this legislation was opposed in 2000. From the current point of view, the new legal actions and statements of the authorities have increased the uncertainty. In addition to building wallets, many core encryption activities may be governed by the money transmission law, even including other issues in the field of lightning node hosting and encryption. Similar court decisions will provide important precedents for such issues. This is undoubtedly a regulatory offensive and defensive war and a game of deciding to sue lawyers. Recently, a software development company filed a lawsuit against the US Securities and Exchange Commission and its five members, claiming that it had carefully planned a seizure of encrypted money. The regulatory movement of the right to speak, the regulator tried to illegally supervise Ethereum through special enforcement actions against other companies, but in theory, it had no jurisdiction. The reason was that the encrypted tokens were not the securities side, which said that it had set its sights on wallet software, which allowed users to self-manage and other encrypted currencies. In the document, the company stressed that it had received a notice issued on May, warning that it might take enforcement actions against it and its products. On the conference call, it was revealed that it was an unregistered brokerage dealer. In, I received three subpoenas to provide information related to acquisition, holding and sales as a counterattack. I filed a lawsuit in Texas and put forward four reasons for not being securities. Firstly, I made an important speech on the historical position of Ethereum in, when I was the director of the financial department, and made it clear that Ethereum was not regarded as securities at that time, so I didn't respond to this position at that time. Therefore, there is no basis for changing my original intention at present. Secondly, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has always regarded Ethereum as a kind of commodity and continued it. In the lawsuit, it was finally emphasized that Ethereum has enough decentralized structure and there is no core control and development group of Ethereum, and the change of consensus mechanism will not affect this point. However, according to the latest court documents, Midea seems to have made it clear in at least one year that Ethereum, the second largest cryptocurrency, is an unregistered securities, which does not meet the current federal regulations. At present, the lawsuit between the two will probably be a tug-of-war that lasts for several years. We will not approve any spot of Ethereum when the deadline comes. As for decentralized wallet, it is not clear at present and whether it will be the only wallet to leave the United States, but at least one wallet company has made it clear that it will continue to operate, and the official account that we will never move out has posted that we believe that we are now abiding by the legal provisions. If the law changes or makes any judgment, we will make corresponding adjustments. The founder said that if all other lightning node operators collapse, they will be the next one. Self-hosting is the last line of defense. 比特币今日价格行情网_okx交易所app_永续合约_比特币怎么买卖交易_虚拟币交易所平台

注册有任何问题请添加 微信：MVIP619 拉你进入群

文章转载注明 网址：https://netpsp.com/?id=63801