个人中心 - 老虎社区

sc72

IP属地：未知

帖子 · 12帖子 · 12
关注 · 0关注 · 0
粉丝 · 0粉丝 · 0

- sc72sc72
  ·2021-08-10
  Like [财迷]
  Bayer loses third appeals case over glyphosate weedkiller
  FRANKFURT, Aug 10 (Reuters) - Bayer lost a third appeal against U.S. court verdicts that awarded dam
  Bayer loses third appeals case over glyphosate weedkiller
  382 评论
  3
  分享
  举报
- sc72sc72
  ·2021-08-08
  Ok[财迷]
  SEC Moves First DeFi Unregistered Securities Lawsuit
  The United States Securities and Exchange Commission sued the organization responsible for the development of a decentralized finance protocol over activities involved with the project for the first time.What Happened: According to a Friday SEC announcement, the agency has sued Cayman Islands-based Blockchain Credit Partners and two of its top executives over allegedly selling unregistered securities through its DeFi Money Market platform from February 2020 to February 2021. The firm purported
  SEC Moves First DeFi Unregistered Securities Lawsuit
  497 评论
  6
  分享
  举报
暂无粉丝

热议股票

关于我们·老虎社区守则·老虎社区账号管理规范·老虎社区服务协议·老虎社区隐私政策

公司名称：北京至简风宜信息技术有限公司

违法和不良信息投诉：010-5681-3562（工作时间9:30-18:30）

邮箱：service@laohu8.com

老虎社区侵权投诉指引

中国互联网举报中心·北京互联网举报中心

网络谣言曝光台·扫黄打非举报中心

网络110报警服务

© 2018-2024 老虎社区版权所有

营业执照：91110105MA01A4U55R

ICP备：京ICP备18016422号

网安备：京公网安备11010502036490

qrcode

关注我们

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"isCurrentUser":false,"userPageInfo":{"id":3583729529212261,"uuid":"3583729529212261","gmtCreate":1621056536696,"gmtModify":1621065888499,"name":"sc72","pinyin":"sc72","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/aa32dee5a1f0a5dc743d33ec555b17ac","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":3,"headSize":303,"tweetSize":12,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":null,"userBadges":[{"badgeId":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561-1","templateUuid":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561","name":"出道虎友","description":"加入老虎社区500天","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0e4d0ca1da0456dc7894c946d44bf9ab","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0f2f65e8ce4cfaae8db2bea9b127f58b","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c5948a31b6edf154422335b265235809","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.10.02","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001}],"userBadgeCount":1,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":"未知","starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"page":1,"watchlist":null,"tweetList":[{"id":896532845,"gmtCreate":1628592028487,"gmtModify":1633745917196,"author":{"id":"3583729529212261","authorId":"3583729529212261","authorIdStr":"3583729529212261","name":"sc72","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/aa32dee5a1f0a5dc743d33ec555b17ac","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3583729529212261"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like&nbsp;[财迷]&nbsp;","listText":"Like&nbsp;[财迷]&nbsp;","text":"Like [财迷]","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/896532845","repostId":"2158947382","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2158947382","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Reuters.com brings you the latest news from around the world, covering breaking news in markets, business, politics, entertainment and technology","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Reuters","id":"1036604489","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868"},"pubTimestamp":1628587855,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2158947382?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-10 17:30","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Bayer loses third appeals case over glyphosate weedkiller","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2158947382","media":"Reuters","summary":"FRANKFURT, Aug 10 (Reuters) - Bayer lost a third appeal against U.S. court verdicts that awarded dam","content":"<p>FRANKFURT, Aug 10 (Reuters) - Bayer lost a third appeal against U.S. court verdicts that awarded damages to customers blaming their cancers on use of its glyphosate-based weedkillers, leaving the German drugs and pesticides group to pin hopes for legal relief on the U.S. Supreme Court.</p>\n<p>A California appeals court late on Monday upheld an $86 million verdict that found Bayer responsible for a couple's cancer after using Bayer's glyphosate-based Roundup against weeds.</p>\n<p>Bayer in February 2020 filed an appeal, saying the verdict could not be reconciled with sound science or with product clearance from the federal environment regulator.</p>\n<p>Roundup-related lawsuits have dogged the company since it acquired the brand as part of its $63 billion purchase of Monsanto in 2018.</p>\n<p>\"We respectfully disagree with the Court’s ruling as the verdict is not supported by the evidence at trial or the law. Monsanto will consider its legal options in this case,\" Bayer said in a statement.</p>\n<p>It reaffirmed plans to file a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court this month to review a similar Roundup case that went in favour of Roundup user Edwin Hardeman.</p>\n<p>Bayer struck a settlement deal in principle with plaintiffs last year but failed to win court approval for a separate agreement on how to handle future cases, as Bayer intended to keep the product on the market.</p>\n<p>Last month, it announced an additional litigation provision of $4.5 billion to brace for any unfavourable ruling by the top U.S. court. That came on top of $11.6 billion it previously set aside for settlements and litigation in the matter.</p>\n<p>Among measures to contain the legal damage, Bayer plans to replace glyphosate in weedkillers for the U.S. residential market with other active ingredients. It will continue to sell the herbicide to farmers, who rely on it heavily.</p>\n<p>\"We continue to stand strongly behind the safety of Roundup, a position supported by four decades of extensive science and the assessments of leading health regulators worldwide that support its safe use,\" Bayer added in its statement on Tuesday.</p>\n<p>An initial verdict in 2019 drew attention after a California jury awarded more than $2 billion to Roundup users Alberta and Alva Pilliod. The trial judge later reduced the damages to $86 million.</p>\n<p>The setback for Bayer comes after a federal appeals court in May upheld a $25 million court verdict which ruled Roundup caused the non-Hodgkin's lymphoma of California resident Edwin Hardeman.</p>\n<p>About a year ago, Bayer failed to persuade a California appeals</p>\n<p>court to overturn a verdict favouring school groundskeeper Dewayne Johnson who claimed Roundup use caused his cancer.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Bayer loses third appeals case over glyphosate weedkiller</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBayer loses third appeals case over glyphosate weedkiller\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1036604489\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Reuters </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-08-10 17:30</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>FRANKFURT, Aug 10 (Reuters) - Bayer lost a third appeal against U.S. court verdicts that awarded damages to customers blaming their cancers on use of its glyphosate-based weedkillers, leaving the German drugs and pesticides group to pin hopes for legal relief on the U.S. Supreme Court.</p>\n<p>A California appeals court late on Monday upheld an $86 million verdict that found Bayer responsible for a couple's cancer after using Bayer's glyphosate-based Roundup against weeds.</p>\n<p>Bayer in February 2020 filed an appeal, saying the verdict could not be reconciled with sound science or with product clearance from the federal environment regulator.</p>\n<p>Roundup-related lawsuits have dogged the company since it acquired the brand as part of its $63 billion purchase of Monsanto in 2018.</p>\n<p>\"We respectfully disagree with the Court’s ruling as the verdict is not supported by the evidence at trial or the law. Monsanto will consider its legal options in this case,\" Bayer said in a statement.</p>\n<p>It reaffirmed plans to file a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court this month to review a similar Roundup case that went in favour of Roundup user Edwin Hardeman.</p>\n<p>Bayer struck a settlement deal in principle with plaintiffs last year but failed to win court approval for a separate agreement on how to handle future cases, as Bayer intended to keep the product on the market.</p>\n<p>Last month, it announced an additional litigation provision of $4.5 billion to brace for any unfavourable ruling by the top U.S. court. That came on top of $11.6 billion it previously set aside for settlements and litigation in the matter.</p>\n<p>Among measures to contain the legal damage, Bayer plans to replace glyphosate in weedkillers for the U.S. residential market with other active ingredients. It will continue to sell the herbicide to farmers, who rely on it heavily.</p>\n<p>\"We continue to stand strongly behind the safety of Roundup, a position supported by four decades of extensive science and the assessments of leading health regulators worldwide that support its safe use,\" Bayer added in its statement on Tuesday.</p>\n<p>An initial verdict in 2019 drew attention after a California jury awarded more than $2 billion to Roundup users Alberta and Alva Pilliod. The trial judge later reduced the damages to $86 million.</p>\n<p>The setback for Bayer comes after a federal appeals court in May upheld a $25 million court verdict which ruled Roundup caused the non-Hodgkin's lymphoma of California resident Edwin Hardeman.</p>\n<p>About a year ago, Bayer failed to persuade a California appeals</p>\n<p>court to overturn a verdict favouring school groundskeeper Dewayne Johnson who claimed Roundup use caused his cancer.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BAYRY":"Bayer A.G."},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2158947382","content_text":"FRANKFURT, Aug 10 (Reuters) - Bayer lost a third appeal against U.S. court verdicts that awarded damages to customers blaming their cancers on use of its glyphosate-based weedkillers, leaving the German drugs and pesticides group to pin hopes for legal relief on the U.S. Supreme Court.\nA California appeals court late on Monday upheld an $86 million verdict that found Bayer responsible for a couple's cancer after using Bayer's glyphosate-based Roundup against weeds.\nBayer in February 2020 filed an appeal, saying the verdict could not be reconciled with sound science or with product clearance from the federal environment regulator.\nRoundup-related lawsuits have dogged the company since it acquired the brand as part of its $63 billion purchase of Monsanto in 2018.\n\"We respectfully disagree with the Court’s ruling as the verdict is not supported by the evidence at trial or the law. Monsanto will consider its legal options in this case,\" Bayer said in a statement.\nIt reaffirmed plans to file a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court this month to review a similar Roundup case that went in favour of Roundup user Edwin Hardeman.\nBayer struck a settlement deal in principle with plaintiffs last year but failed to win court approval for a separate agreement on how to handle future cases, as Bayer intended to keep the product on the market.\nLast month, it announced an additional litigation provision of $4.5 billion to brace for any unfavourable ruling by the top U.S. court. That came on top of $11.6 billion it previously set aside for settlements and litigation in the matter.\nAmong measures to contain the legal damage, Bayer plans to replace glyphosate in weedkillers for the U.S. residential market with other active ingredients. It will continue to sell the herbicide to farmers, who rely on it heavily.\n\"We continue to stand strongly behind the safety of Roundup, a position supported by four decades of extensive science and the assessments of leading health regulators worldwide that support its safe use,\" Bayer added in its statement on Tuesday.\nAn initial verdict in 2019 drew attention after a California jury awarded more than $2 billion to Roundup users Alberta and Alva Pilliod. The trial judge later reduced the damages to $86 million.\nThe setback for Bayer comes after a federal appeals court in May upheld a $25 million court verdict which ruled Roundup caused the non-Hodgkin's lymphoma of California resident Edwin Hardeman.\nAbout a year ago, Bayer failed to persuade a California appeals\ncourt to overturn a verdict favouring school groundskeeper Dewayne Johnson who claimed Roundup use caused his cancer.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":382,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":891763877,"gmtCreate":1628430896699,"gmtModify":1633747180565,"author":{"id":"3583729529212261","authorId":"3583729529212261","authorIdStr":"3583729529212261","name":"sc72","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/aa32dee5a1f0a5dc743d33ec555b17ac","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3583729529212261"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Ok[财迷]&nbsp;","listText":"Ok[财迷]&nbsp;","text":"Ok[财迷]","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/891763877","repostId":"1180529438","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1180529438","pubTimestamp":1628386129,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1180529438?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-08 09:28","market":"us","language":"en","title":"SEC Moves First DeFi Unregistered Securities Lawsuit","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1180529438","media":"Benzinga","summary":"The United States Securities and Exchange Commission  sued the organization responsible for the development of a decentralized finance  protocol over activities involved with the project for the first time.What Happened: According to a Friday SEC announcement, the agency has sued Cayman Islands-based Blockchain Credit Partners and two of its top executives over allegedly selling unregistered securities through its DeFi Money Market platform from February 2020 to February 2021. The firm purported","content":"<p>The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) sued the organization responsible for the development of a decentralized finance (DeFi) protocol over activities involved with the project for the first time.</p>\n<p><b>What Happened:</b>&nbsp;According to a Friday SEC&nbsp;announcement, the agency has sued Cayman Islands-based Blockchain Credit Partners and two of its top executives over allegedly selling unregistered securities through its DeFi Money Market platform from February 2020 to February 2021. The firm purportedly sold over $30 million worth of two types of tokens that the SEC deemed to be securities that should have been registered as such.</p>\n<p>The SEC notes that Blockchain Credit Partners&nbsp;founders Gregory Keough and Derek Acree will have to pay fines of $125,000 while the company itself also agreed to pay $12.8 million in disgorgement. The settlement does not indicate an admition or denial&nbsp;the accusations.</p>\n<p><b>New Game, Old Rules?</b></p>\n<p>SEC Enforcement Director Gurbir Grewal explained that \"full and honest disclosure remains the cornerstone of our securities laws — no matter what technologies are used to offer and sell those securities.\" This comment makes it very clear that slapping the DeFi label on a project and hoping to avoid regulation this way works no better than calling it a \"utility token\" prevented falling under the SEC's scrutiny during 2017's initial coin offering craze.</p>\n<p>The SEC is trying to send the clear rule that the new kind of financial organizations that operate on blockchains have to still play by the old rules that govern traditional finance. At the same time, market onlookers are not sure if the regulator is actually right.</p>\n<p>In a way, it is a tour de force where the regulator wins every time it has a way to take enforcement action, but these new organizations potentially have a very real way to make enforcement impossible — or at the very least impractical. The only protection against enforcement by the SEC and other regulators is decentralization and the only reason why the SEC was able to act in this case is that a centralized organization such as Blockchain Credit Partners exists.</p>\n<p><b>What's Next:</b>If no company exists and all that there is to a DeFi protocol is a set of smart contracts deployed on a blockchain by a group of anonymous developers scattered around the world there is very little that the SEC can do short of attacking the blockchain itself. This is where the decentralization of the underlying blockchain comes into play: will the regulators for instance be able to force&nbsp;<b>Ethereum's</b>&nbsp;(CRYPTO: ETH) core development team to write an update stopping such a project?</p>\n<p>If the regulators would actually be able to force the blockchain's developers to write such an update, would node operators and miners or stakers adopt this software or would they refuse to? Such situations will be the real test of the decentralization and reliability of any blockchain that many are waiting to happen. Regulators are seeing power slipping away&nbsp;between their fingers like sand, and they are going to try to grab it.</p>","source":"lsy1606299360108","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>SEC Moves First DeFi Unregistered Securities Lawsuit</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nSEC Moves First DeFi Unregistered Securities Lawsuit\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-08 09:28 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.benzinga.com/markets/cryptocurrency/21/08/22378359/sec-moves-first-defi-unregistered-securities-lawsuit><strong>Benzinga</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) sued the organization responsible for the development of a decentralized finance (DeFi) protocol over activities involved with the project ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.benzinga.com/markets/cryptocurrency/21/08/22378359/sec-moves-first-defi-unregistered-securities-lawsuit\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"COIN":"Coinbase Global, Inc."},"source_url":"https://www.benzinga.com/markets/cryptocurrency/21/08/22378359/sec-moves-first-defi-unregistered-securities-lawsuit","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1180529438","content_text":"The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) sued the organization responsible for the development of a decentralized finance (DeFi) protocol over activities involved with the project for the first time.\nWhat Happened: According to a Friday SEC announcement, the agency has sued Cayman Islands-based Blockchain Credit Partners and two of its top executives over allegedly selling unregistered securities through its DeFi Money Market platform from February 2020 to February 2021. The firm purportedly sold over $30 million worth of two types of tokens that the SEC deemed to be securities that should have been registered as such.\nThe SEC notes that Blockchain Credit Partners founders Gregory Keough and Derek Acree will have to pay fines of $125,000 while the company itself also agreed to pay $12.8 million in disgorgement. The settlement does not indicate an admition or denial the accusations.\nNew Game, Old Rules?\nSEC Enforcement Director Gurbir Grewal explained that \"full and honest disclosure remains the cornerstone of our securities laws — no matter what technologies are used to offer and sell those securities.\" This comment makes it very clear that slapping the DeFi label on a project and hoping to avoid regulation this way works no better than calling it a \"utility token\" prevented falling under the SEC's scrutiny during 2017's initial coin offering craze.\nThe SEC is trying to send the clear rule that the new kind of financial organizations that operate on blockchains have to still play by the old rules that govern traditional finance. At the same time, market onlookers are not sure if the regulator is actually right.\nIn a way, it is a tour de force where the regulator wins every time it has a way to take enforcement action, but these new organizations potentially have a very real way to make enforcement impossible — or at the very least impractical. The only protection against enforcement by the SEC and other regulators is decentralization and the only reason why the SEC was able to act in this case is that a centralized organization such as Blockchain Credit Partners exists.\nWhat's Next:If no company exists and all that there is to a DeFi protocol is a set of smart contracts deployed on a blockchain by a group of anonymous developers scattered around the world there is very little that the SEC can do short of attacking the blockchain itself. This is where the decentralization of the underlying blockchain comes into play: will the regulators for instance be able to force Ethereum's (CRYPTO: ETH) core development team to write an update stopping such a project?\nIf the regulators would actually be able to force the blockchain's developers to write such an update, would node operators and miners or stakers adopt this software or would they refuse to? Such situations will be the real test of the decentralization and reliability of any blockchain that many are waiting to happen. Regulators are seeing power slipping away between their fingers like sand, and they are going to try to grab it.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":497,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0}],"defaultTab":"followers","isTTM":false}