Sep 22, 2022 03:22 PM
(This post was last modified: Sep 23, 2022 08:24 AM by SUI-3183372.)
https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8590-22
CFTC Charges Ooki DAO for for "Offering Illegal, Off-Exchange Digital-Asset Trading, Registration Violations, and Failing to Comply with Bank Secrecy Act"
"The Commission defines the Ooki DAO unincorporated association as those holders of Ooki tokens that have voted on governance proposals with respect to running the business"
![[Image: Ern3hwo.png]](https://i.imgur.com/Ern3hwo.png)
What a can of worms this opens....
(Sep 22, 2022 03:22 PM)SUI-3183372 Wrote: https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8590-22
CFTC Charges Ooki DAO for for "Offering Illegal, Off-Exchange Digital-Asset Trading, Registration Violations, and Failing to Comply with Bank Secrecy Act"
"The Commission defines the Ooki DAO unincorporated association as those holders of Ooki tokens that have voted on governance proposals with respect to running the business"
What a can of worms this opens....
So how much in assets is this DAO?
(Sep 22, 2022 03:34 PM)Omniscient Wrote: So how much in assets is this DAO?
$11m in treasury
$15m TVL across dApps
Seems like it's a no KYC exchange with a DAO/governance token.
(Sep 22, 2022 03:56 PM)SUI-3183372 Wrote: $11m in treasury
$15m TVL across dApps
Seems like it's a no KYC exchange with a DAO/governance token.
Pretty small footprint really.
Sep 22, 2022 04:04 PM
(This post was last modified: Sep 22, 2022 04:09 PM by SUI-3183372.)
(Sep 22, 2022 03:59 PM)Omniscient Wrote: Pretty small footprint really.
Could set an interesting precedent where simply being a DAO member, voting on governance proposals, puts you in jeopardy.
Seems like a case that entities such as A16Z, who prominently vote across many DAO's, would be very keen on not seeing gain any real traction.
(Sep 22, 2022 04:04 PM)SUI-3183372 Wrote: Could set an interesting precedent where simply being a DAO member, voting on governance proposals, puts you in jeopardy.
Seems like a case that entities such as A16Z, who prominently vote across many DAO's, would be very keen on not seeing gain any real traction.
I'm curious as to how they are going to charge holders on a non KYC exchange lol
Sep 22, 2022 05:21 PM
(This post was last modified: Sep 22, 2022 05:30 PM by SUI-3183372.)
(Sep 22, 2022 04:52 PM)Cooldudex Wrote: I'm curious as to how they are going to charge holders on a non KYC exchange lol
I'd imagine in many cases the address holding the governance tokens is an active DeFi address and has some sort of trail to follow.
(Sep 22, 2022 03:59 PM)Omniscient Wrote: Pretty small footprint really.
Potentially major impact
(Sep 22, 2022 05:21 PM)SUI-3183372 Wrote: I'd imagine in many cases the address holding the governance tokens is an active DeFi address and has some sort of trail to follow.
Potentially major impact
unacceptable, you dont own it or run it under your umbrella, you dont tell people they can and cannot buy it
DO NOT DEAL WITH THIS MEMBER
The only DAO's I have ever participated in is Decentraland, inb4 they take me mana
DO NOT DEAL WITH THIS MEMBER
(Sep 22, 2022 05:21 PM)SUI-3183372 Wrote: I'd imagine in many cases the address holding the governance tokens is an active DeFi address and has some sort of trail to follow.
Potentially major impact
how is this even possible? i mean if BTC is open source, decentralized and everything, how could they ban people from getting some?
Sep 23, 2022 09:02 AM
(This post was last modified: Sep 23, 2022 09:03 AM by SUI-3183372.)
(Sep 23, 2022 08:49 AM)wyvn Wrote: how is this even possible? i mean if BTC is open source, decentralized and everything, how could they ban people from getting some?
My best guess is, they couldn't physically/digitally bar you from buying (at most they could force US exchanges to enforce it), but they can sure as shit charge you with more crimes / impose further penalties if they catch wind of you trading.
DO NOT DEAL WITH THIS MEMBER
(Sep 23, 2022 09:02 AM)SUI-3183372 Wrote: My best guess is, they couldn't physically/digitally bar you from buying (at most they could force US exchanges to enforce it), but they can sure as shit charge you with more crimes / impose further penalties if they catch wind of you trading.
thats all madddd
not liking the sound of that
https://policy.paradigm.xyz/assets/writi...141.1).pdf
Paradigm Capital steps up in defense of Ooki DAO to help prevent poor precedent from being set.
CFTC wins Ooki DAO case, setting precedent that DAOs can be held liable
https://www.theblock.co/post/234019/cftc...eld-liable
Quote:The judgement sets a precedent that other decentralized autonomous organizations could be held liable for legal violations as a "person" under the Commodity Exchange Act and the court found that Ooki violated the law as charged. The precedent may open the door to future actions against DAOs and decentralized exchanges in the near future.
“The founders created the Ooki DAO with an evasive purpose, and with the explicit goal of operating an illegal trading platform without legal accountability,” said CFTC Division of Enforcement Director Ian McGinley in a release. “This decision should serve as a wake-up call to anyone who believes they can circumvent the law by adopting a DAO structure, intending to insulate themselves from law enforcement and ultimately putting the public at risk.”
Not the fight we were hoping for. default judgement awarded to the CFTC.
|
