1. * | Inside FinTech | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

What sort of property is a cryptoasset?

There is now an emerging consensus that cryptoassets are property – judges have so held in cases in England and other jurisdictions and it is the unanimous conclusion of independent reports on the topic.

2. 10 Things You Need to Know about Blockchain

It is Not Synonymous with Bitcoins

Bitcoin is a digital currency, and the technology that underlies and supports Bitcoin is

blockchain. However, blockchain technology has functionality beyond Bitcoin.

Digital currencies, such as Bitcoin, will soon be regulated under Canadian money

Canada is already home to several blockchain start-ups, and there are Bitcoin ATMs

3. 2018 Québec Budget: Sales Taxes & Digital Economy | McCarthy Tétrault

Miners Be Aware:  New GST/HST Measures Announced for Cryptoasset Mining

4. 2019 Benchmark Litigation 40 and Under Hot List | Gowling WLG

As head of Gowling WLG's Blockchain & Smart Contracts Group and also the firm's Securities, Compliance & Investigations Group, Sheikh leads an internationally recognized team that has been instrumental in several of Canada's most notable securities and blockchain litigation mandates. His clients include Canada's largest banks, stock exchanges, thirteen of the largest cryptocurrencies in the world, as well as several blockchain pioneers including co-founders of Ethereum. In 2018, Sheikh was named among the "Top 25 Most Influential Lawyers" by Canadian Lawyer.

5. 2019 Legal Year in Review

Cryptoassets

Emerging clarity on cryptoasset regulation

6. 2020 Holiday reading: Blockchain, AI and the Four Digital Titans | McCarthy Tétrault

The second book I read was an audiobook called Smart Contracts: The Essential Guide to Using Blockchain Smart Contracts for Cryptocurrency Exchange, written by Jeff Reed. This book was at such a high level as to be practically useless. Moreover, its legal analysis was simply wrong in some essential respects. The author, for example, categorically claimed that smart contracts were not legally binding or enforceable, calling their legal validity a “myth”, and claiming this was because there were no laws that specifically made them valid. This view of the law flies in the face of solid legal research such as the opinions expressed by Primavera De Filippi and Aaron Wright in Blockchain and the Law and the recently published UK Jurisdiction Task Force Legal Statement on the Status of Cryptoassets and Smart Contracts. As far as U.S. law is concerned, one would have thought that the author would have at least considered the common law and State laws based on the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (‘UETA’) and the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (‘ESIGN’) including relevant provisions dealing with contracts formed by electronic agents.

7. 2020 ITR Americas Tax Awards Shortlist | McCarthy Tétrault

Miners Be Aware:  New GST/HST Measures Announced for Cryptoasset Mining

8. 2021 Canadian Federal Budget Commentary - Tax Initiatives | McCarthy Tétrault

Miners Be Aware:  New GST/HST Measures Announced for Cryptoasset Mining

9. 25th Annual Regulatory Compliance for Financial Institutions | McCarthy

Cryptoasset

10. 25th Annual Regulatory Compliance for Financial Institutions | McCarthy Tétrault

Cryptoasset

11. 3iQ - Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt S.E.N.C.R.L./s.r.l.

3iQ et Bitcoin Fund dans le cadre de l’approbation de son programme visant à offrir le premier fonds d’investissement en bitcoin coté en bourse au monde

Le 30 octobre 2019, un panel de la Commission des valeurs mobilières de l’Ontario (CVMO) rendit une décision qui permettra à 3iQ Corp (3iQ), un gestionnaire de placement canadien, d’offrir le premier fonds d’investissement en bitcoin coté en bourse au monde.

Depuis la fin de l’année 2016, 3iQ avait développé Bitcoin Fund (le Fonds), un fonds d’investissement non remboursable qui investirait la quasi-totalité de ses actifs en bitcoin. Toutefois, en février 2019, le directeur de la Direction des fonds d’investissement et des produits structurés de la CVMO (IFSP) rendit une décision accueillant la recommandation du personnel de l’IFSP de ne pas émettre un reçu pour le prospectus provisoire du Fonds. Par conséquent, 3iQ exerça son droit de demander une audition et la révision de la décision du Directeur devant un panel de la CVMO.

En prenant sa décision, le panel de la CVMO considéra la preuve relative aux préoccupations d’intégrité du marché entourant les cryptoactifs, la garde et la protection des bitcoins, et l’audit des états financiers des émetteurs détenant des cryptoactifs. Le Panel de la CVMO fit référence aux décisions de U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) qui, à ce jour, a refusé les demandes d’inscription de fonds en bitcoin cotés en bourse (ETFs). En approuvant l’émission d’un reçu pour le prospectus du Fonds, le Panel réaffirma un principe fondamental des lois canadiennes sur les valeurs mobilières – à savoir, qu’il n’appartient pas aux organismes de règlementation en valeurs mobilières d’approuver ou de désapprouver les fondements des titres offerts au public.

Le 9 avril 2020, 3iQ annonça la clôture du premier appel public à l’épargne des unités de Bitcoin Fund et sa fusion avec 3iQ Bitcoin Trust pour un montant approximatif de 14 millions de dollars américains. Les unités de classe A sont négociées à la Bourse de Toronto sous le symbole QBTC.U. Aux mois de mai et juin 2020, Bitcoin Fund compléta deux placements d’unités pour un produit brut total de 48 millions de dollars américains et de 10 millions de dollars américains, respectivement.   

12. "3iQ Bitcoin Fund Proposal Denied By OSC, Application Filed For Hearing" by Addison Cameron-Huff

"3iQ Bitcoin Fund Proposal Denied By OSC, Application Filed For Hearing" by Addison Cameron-Huff

3iQ Bitcoin Fund Proposal Denied By OSC, Application Filed For Hearing

The Ontario Securities Commission (OSC) released its decision to refuse to issue a receipt for a proposed NRIF (see below) investment product called "The Bitcoin Fund" last month. The fund is being put forward by the tenacious team at 3iQ Corp., who on Friday filed an application requesting a hearing about the refusal. The application contains further details about their plans, including the role of Gemini Trust Company, a US trust company, that they intend to act as a sub-custodian to Cidel Trust Company, a Canadian trust company.

3iQ has been trying to establish this fund in Canada since at least 2016 (according to their application). For anyone interested in following in their footsteps, their 26 page filing is required reading. The investment managers (and their lawyers) have put a lot of thought into these issues, and they've included operational details in the application that are interesting notes about the state of the industry in Q1 2019. For example, paragraphs 38-49 discuss their proposed Bitcoin valuation methodology and why, in their view, it conforms to NI 81-106.

NRIFs may engage in certain investment strategies and invest in asset classes not typically permitted for mutual funds. There are not yet, however, any publicly offered (i.e., prospectus qualified) investment funds in Canada and the United States that invest substantially all of their assets in bitcoin. There are several funds that are not publicly offered in Canada that invest substantially all of their assets in bitcoin, including one managed by the Manager (the 3iQ Pooled Fund). The 3iQ Pooled Fund only offers its securities under exemptions from the prospectus requirement. The Manager has operated the 3iQ Pooled Fund since April 2018.

13. "9 Reasons Why You Should Care About Bitcoin" by Addison Cameron-Huff

"9 Reasons Why You Should Care About Bitcoin" by Addison Cameron-Huff

BLOG HOME CONTACT AUTHOR NEXT POST: HOW MUCH POWER DOES BITCOIN USE?”

9 Reasons Why You Should Care About Bitcoin

1. Every eight minutes someone receives ("mines") 25 Bitcoins (worth more than $10k)

2. The Bitcoin network is many times faster than the world's top 500 supercomputers put together

14. "A Canadian Crypto SRO" by Addison Cameron-Huff

The Canadian cryptocurrency industry should be one of the strongest in the world, being the birthplace of Ethereum, close to the US market, a good bridge from China/HK, generous tax credits for R&D work, and many other advantages. But the industry has been plagued by a poor understanding of regulatory issues, unusual viewpoints put forward to government, and repeated work that ought to be shared. These problems could be addressed through the creation of a Canadian self-regulatory organization (SRO).

15. Accident mortel d'un véhicule autonome d’Uber en Arizona : Un drame identique peut-il se produire au Québec et au Canada?

Le 11 mars dernier, la maison de vente Christie’s concluait une vente historique en proposant aux enchères une œuvre-cryptoactif de l’artiste Beeple, uniquement numérique, se concluant par une transaction de 69 millions de dollars en Ether, une cryptomonnaie1. Ce faisant, la célèbre maison d’enchères a mis sous les projecteurs les Non-Fungible Tokens (« NFT »), les jetons non fongibles pour franciser le tout, produits de la chaîne de blocs décentralisée. Si plusieurs soulignent les avantages de cette technologie des cryptoactifs, des risques importants y sont par ailleurs associés2, demandant une vigilance accrue pour tout investissement ou toute transaction impliquant des NFT. Qu’est-ce qu’un NFT ? La distinction entre biens fongibles et non fongibles n’est pas récente. Avant même l’invention de la chaîne de blocs, cette distinction servait déjà à départager ces biens dont la valeur dans l’économie est fondée soit, quant aux biens fongibles, sur leur grande disponibilité, soit, quant aux biens non fongibles, sur leur rareté. Ainsi, un bien fongible est facilement remplaçable par un équivalent ayant la même valeur marchande. Le meilleur exemple est celui de la monnaie, que ce soient les pièces, les billets, la monnaie scripturale ou la monnaie électronique, par exemple le Bitcoin. Au contraire, un bien non fongible est unique, irremplaçable. À ce titre, les œuvres d’art sont des biens non fongibles de par leur unicité ou leur très petit nombre d’exemplaires, de telle sorte que leur valeur est, entre autres, fonction de leur authenticité et de leur provenance. Les NFT sont des cryptoactifs associés à la chaîne de blocs qui reproduisent ce phénomène de rareté. À chaque NFT est associé un identifiant unique qui permet d’en assurer la traçabilité. En plus du marché de l’art, les NFT ont été associés sur le Web à la collecte d’objets virtuels, tels que des cartes de sports et d’autres souvenirs et objets de collection, incluant le premier tweet de l’histoire3. Les NFT peuvent aussi être associés à des biens réels et permettent dans ce cas d’assurer le suivi des échanges et des transactions afférents à ces biens. Déjà en 2019, Ernst & Young avait développé pour un client un système d’identifiants numériques uniques permettant d’assurer le suivi et la gestion de la collection de vins de grands crus de ce client4. Plusieurs projets s’appuient sur des cryptomonnaies, comme l’Ether, pour créer les NFT. Ce genre de cryptomonnaie est programmable et permet d’enchâsser des métadonnées par l’intermédiaire du code qui devient la clé assurant le suivi de biens tels des œuvres d’art ou d’autres biens de valeur. Quels sont les risques associés aux NFT ? Si plusieurs vantaient les avantages des NFT, notamment pour assurer une plus grande traçabilité quant à la provenance des biens échangés par transactions numériques, force est de constater que la bulle spéculative des dernières semaines a, contrairement aux attentes, engendré de nouvelles occasions de fraudes et des dérives quant aux droits associés aux œuvres échangées sur Internet. Un marché non réglementé? Même s’il n’existe pour l’instant aucun cadre législatif qui réglemente spécifiquement les transactions de cryptoactifs, les vendeurs et les acheteurs de NFT sont tout de même assujettis, notamment, aux lois et réglementations encadrant actuellement la distribution des produits et services financiers5, aux lois sur les valeurs mobilières6, à la Loi sur les entreprises de services monétaires7 et aux lois fiscales8. Un NFT, une valeur mobilière ? Dès janvier 2020, les Autorités canadiennes en valeurs mobilières (ACVM) ont identifié les « marchandises » cryptoactifs comme des biens pouvant être assujettis aux lois et aux règlements en valeurs mobilières. Ainsi, les plateformes qui gèrent et hébergent des NFT pour le compte de leurs utilisateurs exercent des activités encadrées par les lois applicables au commerce de valeurs mobilières, dans la mesure où elles conservent la possession ou le co[Truncated to 4000 Characters]

16. Actifs numériques | Préparer le terrain pour l’avenir | BLG

BLG a aussi fait partie de ceux qui ont prodigué des conseils réglementaires au premier courtier au Canada à proposer des contrats à terme en bitcoins dans le cadre de l’élaboration de ses politiques et procédures, en plus de participer à l’un des premiers dossiers portant sur la définition légale et le recouvrement de la cryptomonnaie à être entendu par les tribunaux canadiens.

Représentation du premier courtier en valeurs mobilières au Canada à proposer des contrats à terme en bitcoins (définition du cadre réglementaire et élaboration de politiques et procédures).

17. Adam Sanitt | Head of Disputes Knowledge, Innovation and Business Support, Europe, Middle East and Asia | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

Cryptoassets and sanctions: How easy is it to freeze cryptoassets?

18. Albert Weatherill | Counsel | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

Albert's diverse practice involves advising clients on regulatory compliance, regulatory change, governance, risk management, Brexit, market abuse, trading, clearing and settlement, lending, conduct, prudential regulation, client money and custody. In particular, he focuses on the design, development and regulation of innovative financial services and products, particularly across mobile and digital payments, digital assets issuance and trading, cryptoassets market infrastructure, banking as a service, consumer and corporate lending, blockchain and distributed ledger technology. He authored the UK chapter of Global Legal Insight's Blockchain & Regulation 2019, is a member of the Tech London Advocates Blockchain Legal and Regulatory Working Group, and regularly contributes to publications on FinTech matters.

Cryptoasset providers: Impact of the amendments to the MLRs 2017

19. Ana Badour

AG for C$4M to finance bitcoin mining equipment

20. Ana Badour | McCarthy

SATO Technologies Corp. signs a loan agreement with Sygnum Bank AG for C$4M to finance bitcoin mining equipment

21. Andrew Hodhod | Banking & Financial Services Lawyer Montréal | BLG

"Bitcoin: Introducing the Future of Money," BLG Financial Services Group Annual Symposium

22. Andrew Hodhod | Services bancaires et financiers Avocat Montréal | BLG

"Bitcoin: Introducing the Future of Money," BLG Financial Services Group Annual Symposium

23. Andrew W. Aziz

3iQ et Bitcoin Fund dans le cadre de l’approbation de son programme

visant à offrir le premier fonds d’investissement en bitcoin coté en

24. Are we putting too much trust in blockchain? – CBA National

In a recent feature in CBA National, the regular publication of the Canadian Bar Association, Agnese Smith examines the rising popularity of blockchain technology and explores the likelihood of the platform being truly adopted in the mainstream – which would require eliminating trusted third parties and intermediaries, including bankers, governments and social networks. Currently, blockchain is facing a number of significant technical challenges, such as scalability, that threaten its widespread adoption. Smith discusses the potential of permission-less or public blockchain which she describes as a “way to store data on a global ledger,” with unrelated computers validating it with the goal of creating a “secure, verifiable and permanent record” of transactions. Currently, the most common example of permission-less blockchain is Bitcoin. In the article, Wendy Gross, Co-Chair of the Technology Group in Osler’s Toronto office, weighs in on the future of public blockchain.

25. Ariel Laver | Associé en Technologies émergentes à Vancouver | Équipe | Fasken

Bitfury Group et Hut 8 sur le point de fonder le plus important ensemble de centres de données de bitcoins de l’Amérique du Nord

26. Ariel Laver | Emerging Technology Lawyer in Vancouver | People | Fasken

The Bitfury Group partners with Hut 8 to establish North America's largest bitcoin datacenters

27. Ars Ex Machina : l’intelligence artificielle, cette artiste

Le 11 mars dernier, la maison de vente Christie’s concluait une vente historique en proposant aux enchères une œuvre-cryptoactif de l’artiste Beeple, uniquement numérique, se concluant par une transaction de 69 millions de dollars en Ether, une cryptomonnaie1. Ce faisant, la célèbre maison d’enchères a mis sous les projecteurs les Non-Fungible Tokens (« NFT »), les jetons non fongibles pour franciser le tout, produits de la chaîne de blocs décentralisée. Si plusieurs soulignent les avantages de cette technologie des cryptoactifs, des risques importants y sont par ailleurs associés2, demandant une vigilance accrue pour tout investissement ou toute transaction impliquant des NFT. Qu’est-ce qu’un NFT ? La distinction entre biens fongibles et non fongibles n’est pas récente. Avant même l’invention de la chaîne de blocs, cette distinction servait déjà à départager ces biens dont la valeur dans l’économie est fondée soit, quant aux biens fongibles, sur leur grande disponibilité, soit, quant aux biens non fongibles, sur leur rareté. Ainsi, un bien fongible est facilement remplaçable par un équivalent ayant la même valeur marchande. Le meilleur exemple est celui de la monnaie, que ce soient les pièces, les billets, la monnaie scripturale ou la monnaie électronique, par exemple le Bitcoin. Au contraire, un bien non fongible est unique, irremplaçable. À ce titre, les œuvres d’art sont des biens non fongibles de par leur unicité ou leur très petit nombre d’exemplaires, de telle sorte que leur valeur est, entre autres, fonction de leur authenticité et de leur provenance. Les NFT sont des cryptoactifs associés à la chaîne de blocs qui reproduisent ce phénomène de rareté. À chaque NFT est associé un identifiant unique qui permet d’en assurer la traçabilité. En plus du marché de l’art, les NFT ont été associés sur le Web à la collecte d’objets virtuels, tels que des cartes de sports et d’autres souvenirs et objets de collection, incluant le premier tweet de l’histoire3. Les NFT peuvent aussi être associés à des biens réels et permettent dans ce cas d’assurer le suivi des échanges et des transactions afférents à ces biens. Déjà en 2019, Ernst & Young avait développé pour un client un système d’identifiants numériques uniques permettant d’assurer le suivi et la gestion de la collection de vins de grands crus de ce client4. Plusieurs projets s’appuient sur des cryptomonnaies, comme l’Ether, pour créer les NFT. Ce genre de cryptomonnaie est programmable et permet d’enchâsser des métadonnées par l’intermédiaire du code qui devient la clé assurant le suivi de biens tels des œuvres d’art ou d’autres biens de valeur. Quels sont les risques associés aux NFT ? Si plusieurs vantaient les avantages des NFT, notamment pour assurer une plus grande traçabilité quant à la provenance des biens échangés par transactions numériques, force est de constater que la bulle spéculative des dernières semaines a, contrairement aux attentes, engendré de nouvelles occasions de fraudes et des dérives quant aux droits associés aux œuvres échangées sur Internet. Un marché non réglementé? Même s’il n’existe pour l’instant aucun cadre législatif qui réglemente spécifiquement les transactions de cryptoactifs, les vendeurs et les acheteurs de NFT sont tout de même assujettis, notamment, aux lois et réglementations encadrant actuellement la distribution des produits et services financiers5, aux lois sur les valeurs mobilières6, à la Loi sur les entreprises de services monétaires7 et aux lois fiscales8. Un NFT, une valeur mobilière ? Dès janvier 2020, les Autorités canadiennes en valeurs mobilières (ACVM) ont identifié les « marchandises » cryptoactifs comme des biens pouvant être assujettis aux lois et aux règlements en valeurs mobilières. Ainsi, les plateformes qui gèrent et hébergent des NFT pour le compte de leurs utilisateurs exercent des activités encadrées par les lois applicables au commerce de valeurs mobilières, dans la mesure où elles conservent la possession ou le co[Truncated to 4000 Characters]

28. Ars Ex Machina: Artificial Intelligence, the artist

On March 11, 2021, Christie’s auction house made a landmark sale by auctioning off an entirely digital artwork by the artist Beeple, a $69 million transaction in Ether, a cryptocurrency.1 In doing so, the famous auction house put non-fungible tokens (“NFT”), the product of a decentralized blockchain, in the spotlight. While many extol the benefits of such crypto asset technology, there are also significant risks associated with it,2 requiring greater vigilance when dealing with any investment or transaction involving NFTs. What is an NFT? The distinction between fungible and non-fungible assets is not new. Prior to the invention of blockchain, the distinction was used to differentiate assets based on their availability, fungible assets being highly available and non-fungible assets, scarce. Thus, a fungible asset can easily be replaced by an equivalent asset with the same market value. The best example is money, whether it be coins, notes, deposit money or digital money, such as Bitcoin. On the contrary, a non-fungible asset is unique and irreplaceable. As such, works of art are non-fungible assets in that they are either unique or very few copies of them exist. Their value is a result of their authenticity and provenance, among other things. NFTs are crypto assets associated with blockchain technology that replicate the phenomenon of scarcity. Each NFT is associated with a unique identifier to ensure traceability. In addition to the art market, online, NFTs have been associated with the collection of virtual items, such as sports cards and other memorabilia and collectibles, including the first tweet ever written.3 NFTs can also be associated with tangible goods, in which case they can be used to track exchanges and transactions related to such goods. In 2019, Ernst & Young developed a system of unique digital identifiers for a client to track and manage its collection of fine wines.4 Many projects rely on cryptocurrencies, such as Ether, to create NFTs. This type of cryptocurrency is programmable and allows for metadata to be embedded through a code that becomes the key to tracking assets, such as works of art or other valuables. What are the risks associated with NFTs? Although many praise the benefits of NFTs, in particular the increased traceability of the origin of goods exchanged through digital transactions, it has become clear that the speculative bubble of the past few weeks has, contrary to expectations, resulted in new opportunities for fraud and abuse of the rights associated with works exchanged online. An unregulated market? While there is currently no legislative framework that specifically regulates crypto asset transactions, NFT buyers and sellers are still subject to the laws and regulations currently governing the distribution of financial products and services5, the securities laws6, the Money-Services Business Act7 and the tax laws8. Is an NFT a security? In January 2020, the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) identified crypto asset “commodities” as assets that may be subject to securities laws and regulations. Thus, platforms that manage and host NFTs on behalf of their users engage in activities that are governed by the laws that apply to securities trading, as long as they retain possession or control of NFTs. On the contrary, a platform will not be subject to regulatory oversight if: “the underlying crypto asset itself is not a security or derivative; and the contract or instrument for the purchase, sale or delivery of a crypto asset results in an obligation to make immediate delivery of the crypto asset, and is settled by the immediate delivery of the crypto asset to the Platform’s user according to the Platform’s typical commercial practice.”9 Fraud10 NFTs don’t protect collectors and investors from fraud and theft. Among the documented risks, there are fake websites robbing investors of their cryptocurrencies, thefts and/or disappearances of NFTs hosted on platforms, and copyright and tradem[Truncated to 4000 Characters]

29. Artificial Intelligence and blockchains are vulnerable to cyberattacks

Signature methods used by Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies

According to the NIST, elliptic curve cryptography will become ineffective. Worryingly, we are talking about the method used for the signature of cryptocurrencies, including the famous Bitcoin. Recent studies indicate that this method is highly vulnerable to attack by quantum computers, which, in a few years’ time, could crack these codes in under 10 minutes.3

Aggarwal, Divesh, et al. “Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them.” arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.10377(2017).

On March 11, 2021, Christie’s auction house made a landmark sale by auctioning off an entirely digital artwork by the artist Beeple, a $69 million transaction in Ether, a cryptocurrency.1 In doing so, the famous auction house put non-fungible tokens (“NFT”), the product of a decentralized blockchain, in the spotlight. While many extol the benefits of such crypto asset technology, there are also significant risks associated with it,2 requiring greater vigilance when dealing with any investment or transaction involving NFTs. What is an NFT? The distinction between fungible and non-fungible assets is not new. Prior to the invention of blockchain, the distinction was used to differentiate assets based on their availability, fungible assets being highly available and non-fungible assets, scarce. Thus, a fungible asset can easily be replaced by an equivalent asset with the same market value. The best example is money, whether it be coins, notes, deposit money or digital money, such as Bitcoin. On the contrary, a non-fungible asset is unique and irreplaceable. As such, works of art are non-fungible assets in that they are either unique or very few copies of them exist. Their value is a result of their authenticity and provenance, among other things. NFTs are crypto assets associated with blockchain technology that replicate the phenomenon of scarcity. Each NFT is associated with a unique identifier to ensure traceability. In addition to the art market, online, NFTs have been associated with the collection of virtual items, such as sports cards and other memorabilia and collectibles, including the first tweet ever written.3 NFTs can also be associated with tangible goods, in which case they can be used to track exchanges and transactions related to such goods. In 2019, Ernst & Young developed a system of unique digital identifiers for a client to track and manage its collection of fine wines.4 Many projects rely on cryptocurrencies, such as Ether, to create NFTs. This type of cryptocurrency is programmable and allows for metadata to be embedded through a code that becomes the key to tracking assets, such as works of art or other valuables. What are the risks associated with NFTs? Although many praise the benefits of NFTs, in particular the increased traceability of the origin of goods exchanged through digital transactions, it has become clear that the speculative bubble of the past few weeks has, contrary to expectations, resulted in new opportunities for fraud and abuse of the rights associated with works exchanged online. An unregulated market? While there is currently no legislative framework that specifically regulates crypto asset transactions, NFT buyers and sellers are still subject to the laws and regulations currently governing the distribution of financial products and services5, the securities laws6, the Money-Services Business Act7 and the tax laws8. Is an NFT a security? In January 2020, the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) identified crypto asset “commodities” as assets that may be subject to securities laws and regulations. Thus, platforms that manage and host NFTs on behalf of their users engage in activities that are governed by the laws that apply to securities trading, as long as they retain possession or control of NFTs. On the contrary, a platform will not be subject to regulatory oversight if: “the underlying crypto asset itself is not a security or derivative; and the contract or instrument for the purchase, sale or delivery of a crypto asset results in an obligation to make immediate delivery of the crypto asset, and is settled by the immediate delivery of the crypto asset to the Platform’s user according to the Platform’s typical commercial practice.”9 Fraud10 NFTs don’t protect collectors and investors from fraud and theft. Among the documented risks, there are fake websites robbing investors of their cryptocurrencies, thefts and/or disappearances of NFTs hosted on platforms, and copyright and tradem[Truncated to 4000 Characters]

30. Asad Akhtar

Decoding crypto – Providing regulatory clarity to cryptoasset businesses

31. Australian Government Moves to Regulate Digital Currency Exchanges - Is Canada Next?

the growth of Bitcoin, arguably the most popular digital to date.4 In China, the People’s Bank of China

announced that it would be initiating an investigation of Bitcoin and met with a number of digital currency

Taking a different approach, the Japanese government declared Bitcoin to be a legal currency, and

therefore required exchanges facilitating the trading of Bitcoin to comply with regulatory requirements. While

5 https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/17/bitcoin-faces-regulations-crackdown-by-asia-pacific-country.html

32. Australian Government Moves to Regulate Digital Currency Exchanges - Is Canada Next? | Cassels.com

While many lament the regulation of digital currencies, recent similar decisions of the governments of China and Japan, respectively, have resulted in further security for market participants, and have even bolstered the growth of Bitcoin, arguably the most popular digital to date.4 In China, the People’s Bank of China announced that it would be initiating an investigation of Bitcoin and met with a number of digital currency exchanges, warning them that they would be shut down if they violated anti-money laundering regulations. This prompted several exchanges to improve their systems in order to ensure that they remained compliant. Taking a different approach, the Japanese government declared Bitcoin to be a legal currency, and therefore required exchanges facilitating the trading of Bitcoin to comply with regulatory requirements. While imposing regulatory restrictions, this decision actually lead to a surge in demand for the currency as retailers began accepting it as payment for goods and services.5

5 https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/17/bitcoin-faces-regulations-crackdown-by-asia-pacific-country.html

33. BC Extends its PST Registration Obligations to Online Marketplace Facilitators | McCarthy

Miners Be Aware:  New GST/HST Measures Announced for Cryptoasset Mining

34. BLG - BLG Represents First Bitcoin Market Participant To Be Approved By Canadian Securities Administrators

BLG - BLG Represents First Bitcoin Market Participant To Be Approved By Canadian Securities Administrators

BLG Represents First Bitcoin Market Participant

35. BLG - Bitcoin Futures Expected to Begin Trading on Two Major U S Exchanges this Month

BLG - Bitcoin Futures Expected to Begin Trading on Two Major U S Exchanges this Month

Bitcoin Futures Expected to Begin Trading on

Amid a surging price for bitcoin, the CBOE Futures Exchange ("CBOE") has announced

that it will list bitcoin futures for trading starting on Sunday, December 10, 2017, making

it the first regulated U.S. exchange to support the trading of bitcoin futures (or any other

36. BLG - Brooks-Jason

and an exempt market dealer in order to operate a bitcoin investment fund. This was the first registration

the team that acted in connection with the direct and syndicated private placement of units of the bitcoin

 BLG Represents First Bitcoin Market Participant to be Approved by Canadian Securities Administrators

37. BLG - CSA Increases Regulatory Clarity in the Cryptic World of Digital Currencies

Over the past decade, Bitcoin, Ether and other cryptocurrencies have become

38. BLG - Digital Assets

Canada’s first investment dealer to offer bitcoin futures and was counsel in one of the first cases in Canada

 Acted for the first investment dealer in Canada to offer bitcoin futures, providing a regulatory

39. BLG - FinTech

From regulatory compliance, to cryptocurrency offerings and to Bitcoin regulations and

40. BLG - Fuller-Kathryn

 BLG Represents First Bitcoin Market Participant to be Approved by Canadian Securities Administrators

41. BLG - Gomez-Inaki

market dealer in order to operate a bitcoin investment fund (the first registration of an investment fund

 BLG Represents First Bitcoin Market Participant to be Approved by Canadian Securities Administrators

42. BLG - Hodhod-Andrew

 "Bitcoin: Introducing the Future of Money," BLG Financial Services Group Annual Symposium

43. BLG - Johnstone-MaryGrace

 Author, “Catch Me If You Can: Resolving Bitcoin Disputes with Class Actions,” Canadian Class Action

 Researcher, "Crypto‐claimants and bitcoin bankruptcy: Challenges for recognition and realization,"

44. BLG - Mansi-Julie

Bitcoin Futures Expected to Begin Trading On Two Major U.S. Exchanges This Month

45. BLG - McGowan-Ross

 Presenter, "Blockchain Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency: Evolution of a Revolution," BLG, May 2019.

46. BLG - OSC Refuses Prospectus Receipt for Bitcoin Fund

BLG - OSC Refuses Prospectus Receipt for Bitcoin Fund

OSC Refuses Prospectus Receipt for Bitcoin

(Manager) for a preliminary prospectus in respect of The Bitcoin Fund (Fund). This filing

substantially all of its assets in bitcoin should be offered to retail investors. The OSC

refused to issue a receipt, citing the lack of established regulation for the bitcoin market,

47. BLG - OSC-Clears-Pathway-for-the-First-Publicly-Offered-Bitcoin-Fund

BLG - OSC-Clears-Pathway-for-the-First-Publicly-Offered-Bitcoin-Fund

Offered Bitcoin Fund

publicly offered bitcoin fund in Canada. The OSC Panel ordered that the Director issue a

receipt for a final prospectus of The Bitcoin Fund (the Fund), setting aside an earlier

The OSC Panel explained that although the concerns about bitcoin expressed by the

48. BLG - SEC Settlement Decision Disrupts The Rise Of Free Tokens And Bounty Programs

by piggybacking off another existing and more popular blockchain, such as Bitcoin. This

49. BLG - Seddon-Elly

 Speaker, "Bitcoins: What Are They and What Are the Legal Implications of Using Them?" BLG U, May

50. BLG - The Regulation Of Virtual Currencies In Canada

As decentralized, math based virtual currencies, particularly Bitcoin, have garnered

Currently, FINTRAC is of the view that Bitcoin exchanges are not considered to be

money service businesses since Bitcoin exchanges do not remit or transfer funds as a

Beyond the issues noted above, there is also the question of whether Bitcoin, or other

personal property security legislation, it would appear that Bitcoin would be considered

51. BLG - UK-Financial-Conduct-Authority-Releases-Final-Guidance-on-Cryptoassets

BLG - UK-Financial-Conduct-Authority-Releases-Final-Guidance-on-Cryptoassets

Guidance on Cryptoassets

the regulations applicable to cryptoassets (the Policy Statement) under the U.K.

how the FCA determines whether a particular cryptoasset is a “security”, the scope of

with carrying out regulated activities in relation to cryptoassets that are considered to be

52. BLG - Wakeling-Whitney

 Fidelity Investments Canada ULC: Advising Fidelity in relation to the launch of bitcoin funds in Canada

 BLG Represents First Bitcoin Market Participant to be Approved by Canadian Securities Administrators

53. BLG - Wallis-Robert

an investment fund manager and an exempt market dealer in order to operate a bitcoin investment fund,

bitcoin fund to investors in Canada and abroad.

54. BLG - Will the Coffey Class Action have a Ripple Effect

spectrum has cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, which are used mainly to store and transfer

55. BLG - blg-represents-fidelity-in-launch-of-its-crypto-business-and-bitcoin-funds-in-canada

BLG - blg-represents-fidelity-in-launch-of-its-crypto-business-and-bitcoin-funds-in-canada

business and bitcoin funds in Canada

represents Fidelity Investments Canada ULC (Fidelity Investments) in the launch of Fidelity Advantage Bitcoin

ETFTM (the ETF), which invests directly in bitcoin and leverages Fidelity Clearing’s bitcoin trading and custody

solution to purchase and store bitcoin. The ETF began trading on the Toronto Stock Exchange on Dec. 2, 2021.

56. BLG - crypto-asset-issuer-guidance-from-the-CSA

cryptocurrencies (i.e., Bitcoin or Ether) versus other crypto assets, such as digital

57. BLG - federal-financial-institutions-legislative-and-regulatory-reporter-february-2022

assets (such as Bitcoin);

58. BLG - federal-financial-institutions-legislative-and-regulatory-reporter-may-2022

on specifying cryptoassets'

cryptoassets and issuing

59. BLG Represents First Bitcoin Market Participant To Be Approved By Canadian Securities Administrators | BLG

BLG Represents First Bitcoin Market Participant To Be Approved By Canadian Securities Administrators | BLG

Insights BLG Represents First Bitcoin Market Participant To...

BLG Represents First Bitcoin Market Participant To Be Approved By Canadian Securities Administrators

On September 6, 2017, the British Columbia Securities Commission (the “BCSC”) announced the first registration of an investment fund manager focused on cryptocurrency investments. First Block Capital Inc. (“First Block”), an investment fund manager based in Vancouver, British Columbia, was granted registration pursuant to National Instrument 31-103 — Registration Requirements, Exemptions and Ongoing Registrant Obligations in the categories of “investment fund manager” and “exempt market dealer” in British Columbia and Ontario, with the BCSC acting as the principal regulator. The registrations were granted to allow First Block to operate an investment fund that will invest exclusively in bitcoin.

BLG represented First Block with a team led by Jason Brooks that included Rob Wallis in relation to the registration application, and Carol Derk, Craig Webster (Tax), Grace Pereira (Tax), Whitney Bell and Inaki Gomezin relation to First Block's bitcoin investment fund.

60. BLG represents Fidelity in launch of its crypto business and bitcoin funds in Canada | News | BLG

BLG represents Fidelity in launch of its crypto business and bitcoin funds in Canada | News | BLG

BLG represents Fidelity in launch of its crypto business and bitcoin funds in Canada

Toronto (December 2, 2021) – BLG is proud to represent Fidelity Clearing Canada ULC (Fidelity Clearing) as the first IIROC dealer that can trade and custody crypto assets for institutional investors in Canada. BLG also represents Fidelity Investments Canada ULC (Fidelity Investments) in the launch of Fidelity Advantage Bitcoin ETFTM (the ETF), which invests directly in bitcoin and leverages Fidelity Clearing’s bitcoin trading and custody solution to purchase and store bitcoin. The ETF began trading on the Toronto Stock Exchange on Dec. 2, 2021.

At the same time, Fidelity Investments developed the ETF, as well as a mutual fund that invests in the ETF. In this connection, BLG assisted Fidelity Investments with obtaining several novel securities regulatory exemptions that allow Fidelity Investments to offer these investment funds in a manner that can fully leverage Fidelity’s global bitcoin trading and custody solution. This relief included:

The ability of the ETF to accept digital assets as subscription proceeds for creation units of the ETF. This makes the ETF the first bitcoin ETF in Canada to offer this in-kind subscription mechanism to its designated broker and dealers.

61. "Bank of Canada Working Paper Says "Digital Currencies Will Be Counterfeited" - Why They're Wrong" by Addison Cameron-Huff

The Bank of Canada released a working paper this month that contains a bold claim: Lesson 1: Digital currencies will be counterfeited. The paper is on the lessons that private bank notes from many decades ago hold for digital currencies today. Much of the paper consists of an excellent history of bank notes. But the paper also contains claims about digital currencies, specifically, private, non-Central Bank affiliated digital currencies like Bitcoin. This blog post explains why the working paper's Lesson 1 claim about digital currency counterfeiting is not correct.

But why is the paper wrong? Can Bitcoin be counterfeited?

There has never been a counterfeit bitcoin. Distributed, decentralized digital currencies offer a new paradigm of money that can finally be free of counterfeiting by relying on cryptography and massive computer networks. After almost a decade of experience with this technology and no examples of counterfeiting, I don't think it's fair to say that counterfeiting is inevitable.

In the 8 years that Bitcoin has been operating there has never been a single instance of a "counterfeit" bitcoin. No one can create bitcoins other than as part of mining, which is built into the software and secured by the largest network of computing power that the world has ever built. Despite many years of operating as a public network, with the source code completely known to every participant in the system, and billions of dollars at stake, no one has counterfeited a bitcoin.

Why has a "counterfeit" bitcoin not been created? Because there is a network of devices around the world that do approximately 3 million trillion checks per second as part of the "mining" system, and tens of thousands of computers that verify the authenticity of transactions by ensuring that the inputs of one transaction are the result of outputs of a previous transaction.

62. Banking & Finance | Practices | Fasken

Crypto finance company closes bitcoin mining equipment finance deal

63. Banking & Financial Services | McCarthy

SATO Technologies Corp. signs a loan agreement with Sygnum Bank AG for C$4M to finance bitcoin mining equipment

64. "Becoming a Contract Programmer in Canada" by Addison Cameron-Huff

BLOG HOME CONTACT AUTHOR NEXT POST: WHAT DOES A BITCOIN LAWYER DO?

NEXT: WHAT DOES A BITCOIN LAWYER DO? ►

65. "Being a Lawyer Who Accepts Bitcoin" by Addison Cameron-Huff

"Being a Lawyer Who Accepts Bitcoin" by Addison Cameron-Huff

Being a Lawyer Who Accepts Bitcoin

According to coinmap.org I'm the only lawyer in Toronto who accepts bitcoin.

I received my first payment from a client a few weeks ago and it was a very convenient process. I invoiced in Canadian dollars and sent them my "address". They looked up the price on the main Canadian exchange and he sent me that amount of bitcoins to settle the bill.

It's early days for Bitcoin. My fiance noted about accepting bitcoin that "it's like when credit cards first started".

66. "BitPay (Stripe for Bitcoin): $1m+ Daily Volume" by Addison Cameron-Huff

"BitPay (Stripe for Bitcoin): $1m+ Daily Volume" by Addison Cameron-Huff

BitPay (Stripe for Bitcoin): $1m+ Daily Volume

BitPay (a less feature-rich Stripe for Bitcoin) claims to be processing more than $1 million USD in transactions per day.

It's hard to get a sense of how large the world of Bitcoin is, and especially hard to get a handle on the amount used for commerce vs. speculation. BitPay is one of the main merchant processing companies so this statistic is one worth paying attention to.

67. "Bitcoin Arbitration System" by Addison Cameron-Huff

"Bitcoin Arbitration System" by Addison Cameron-Huff

Bitcoin Arbitration System

Arbitration clauses are a common feature of commercial contracts*. As Bitcoin becomes a more common way of transacting business I can imagine there being two-of-three multisig used with an arbitration company.

How the scheme would work is that one key is held by the buyer, one by the seller and the third by a mutually agreed upon arbitration agent. The agent would do whatever is ordered by the arbitration that is triggered by a dispute between the parties. This would allow for arbitration orders to be both binding in law and in practice (becomes the bitcoins would be sent immediately).

After writing this note I saw that there's a similar idea expressed in the "Contracts" section of Bitcoin.org.

68. Bitcoin Futures Expected to Begin Trading on Two Major U.S. Exchanges this Month | BLG

Bitcoin Futures Expected to Begin Trading on Two Major U.S. Exchanges this Month | BLG

Perspectives Bitcoin Futures Expected to Begin Trading on Two M...

Bitcoin Futures Expected to Begin Trading on Two Major U.S. Exchanges this Month

Amid a surging price for bitcoin, the CBOE Futures Exchange ("CBOE") has announced that it will list bitcoin futures for trading starting on Sunday, December 10, 2017, making it the first regulated U.S. exchange to support the trading of bitcoin futures (or any other cryptocurrency-derived futures product). According to CBOE, the bitcoin futures will trade under the ticker symbol ‘XBT’ and will be cash-settled contracts based on Gemini Trust Company, LLC’s U.S. dollar auction price for bitcoin. The Chicago Mercantile Exchange ("CME") will also be listing bitcoin futures for trading, beginning on Monday, December 18, 2017. The CME’s bitcoin futures will also be cash-settled, based on the CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate ("BRR"), which serves as a once-a-day reference rate of the U.S. dollar price of bitcoin and relies on the global average price of bitcoin based on four cryptocurrency exchanges.

These developments are seen by many as “legitimizing” bitcoin — moving it from a virtually unregulated environment to a regulated one, and bringing more oversight and safeguards to the developing digital currency market.

69. "Bitcoin Lawyers of Canada" by Addison Cameron-Huff

"Bitcoin Lawyers of Canada" by Addison Cameron-Huff

BLOG HOME CONTACT AUTHOR NEXT POST: TWO GOOD ARTICLES ON HOW BITCOIN WORKS”

Bitcoin Lawyers of Canada

I think it might be useful to form a group for lawyers who have particular expertise in the area of Bitcoin. Maybe "Canadian Bitcoin Lawyers" or maybe the "North American Bitcoin Lawyers Group".

NEXT: TWO GOOD ARTICLES ON HOW BITCOIN WORKS ►

70. "Bitcoin Magazine Article on Tokenization of Real World Assets" by Addison Cameron-Huff

"Bitcoin Magazine Article on Tokenization of Real World Assets" by Addison Cameron-Huff

Bitcoin Magazine Article on Tokenization of Real World Assets

My article on tokenization of real world assets was published by Bitcoin Magazine on Friday.

Tokenization is the process of converting rights to an asset into a digital token on a blockchain. There is great interest by financial intermediaries and technologists around the world in figuring out how to move real-world assets onto blockchains to gain the advantages of Bitcoin while keeping the characteristics of the asset.

71. "Bitcoin May Replace Wire Transfers" by Addison Cameron-Huff

"Bitcoin May Replace Wire Transfers" by Addison Cameron-Huff

Bitcoin May Replace Wire Transfers

A few weeks ago I spoke with someone who buys a lot of Bitcoin. They buy it and then immediately send it to a supplier in China who then ships them manufactured goods. They used to use wire transfers but said it took about four days to clear and the Chinese company wouldn't ship the goods until they got the money. With Bitcoin they get the money immediately and he gets his goods four days sooner. The buyer also saved a bit on wire transfer/currency conversion fees.

Bitcoin would be a great way for banks to settle transactions between themselves without using intermediate banks/payment networks because it's instantaneous and irreversible. This could enable banks to offer wire transfer-like products that settle in minutes instead of days (or weeks).

72. "Bitcoin Meets the Stock Market: Legal Issues" by Addison Cameron-Huff

"Bitcoin Meets the Stock Market: Legal Issues" by Addison Cameron-Huff

BLOG HOME CONTACT AUTHOR NEXT POST: WORLD'S FIRST PUBLICLY TRADED BITCOIN EXCHANGE:...”

Bitcoin Meets the Stock Market: Legal Issues

Bitcoin is changing perspectives on how we manage assets. If money can be moved around instantaneously without friction then why not shares too? In 2015 shares are often digital abstractions traded through all-electronic stock exchanges. Bitcoin enthusiasts look forward to a world where banking, investment and securities companies are disintermediated and the world's savers can invest around the world without friction. But how does this new model for issuing stock fit within securities laws?

Many companies around the world have sold stock to the public in exchange for Bitcoin. Some of these companies are even listed on unregulated "stock exchanges" (e.g. Havelock Investments). These companies tend to be Bitcoin-related including CAVirtEx (formerly the largest Bitcoin-CAD exchange in Canada) that went down this road (and later delisted).

73. "Bitcoin Scripts" by Addison Cameron-Huff

"Bitcoin Scripts" by Addison Cameron-Huff

Bitcoin Scripts

Interesting blog post on how to use the Bitcoin scripting language to build complex applications: https://curiosity-driven.org/bitcoin-contracts.

The examples they give are Kickstarter-type campaigns, escrow and gambling. I didn't know these sorts of applications could be built (trustlessly) on top of the Bitcoin scripting language.

74. "Bitcoin Speeches in House & Senate" by Addison Cameron-Huff

"Bitcoin Speeches in House & Senate" by Addison Cameron-Huff

Bitcoin Speeches in House & Senate

There have been four speeches made in 2014 about Bitcoin in the House & Senate.

"However, it is important to continually improve Canada's regime to address emerging risks, including virtual currencies, such as Bitcoin, to strengthen Canada's international leadership in the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing."

"Good luck to you in this study. Bitcoins and their cousins are subjects that I simply cannot grasp — sort of like the theory of relativity."

75. Bitcoin could be hampering future of blockchain | Gowling WLG

Bitcoin could be hampering future of blockchain | Gowling WLG

FINANCE EXPERTS WARN THAT BITCOIN COULD BE HAMPERING THE FUTURE OF BLOCKCHAIN

Negativity surrounding Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies could be obstructing blockchain's full potential

Insight gathered in a report by international law firm Gowling WLG reveals that financial services experts are fearful that if the negative headlines surrounding the likes of Bitcoin impact industry opinion about blockchain software, it will perpetuate the common confusion between the two.

The report, entitled 'The ultimate disruptor - how blockchain is transforming financial services', states that an estimated US$2.1 billion will be spent on blockchain solutions[1] during 2018 and, by 2021, levels are expected to reach US$9.2 billion. In order for the system to reach these levels of growth and its benefits to be realised, it's essential for businesses to understand the capabilities of blockchain and other distributed ledger technology (DLT) beyond Bitcoin.

76. Bitcoin dispute gives insight into English court | Gowling WLG

Bitcoin dispute gives insight into English court | Gowling WLG

BITCOIN DISPUTE GIVES

77. "Bitcoin: Canadian Regulatory Landscape" by Addison Cameron-Huff

"Bitcoin: Canadian Regulatory Landscape" by Addison Cameron-Huff

Bitcoin: Canadian Regulatory Landscape

I've written a series of blog posts that will be published on the Decentral blog over the coming weeks. The first one is "Bitcoin: The Canadian Regulatory Landscape". It provides an overview of the laws that Bitcoin businesses should be interested in.

Coming up tomorrow will be a post about the steps for setting up a Bitcoin business in Canada.

78. Bitfury Group et Hut 8 sur le point de fonder le plus important ensemble de centres de données de bitcoins de l’Amérique du Nord | Mandats représentatifs | Fasken

Bitfury Group et Hut 8 sur le point de fonder le plus important ensemble de centres de données de bitcoins de l’Amérique du Nord | Mandats représentatifs | Fasken

Bitfury Group et Hut 8 sur le point de fonder le plus important ensemble de centres de données de bitcoins de l’Amérique du Nord

RETOUR ACCUEIL SOLUTIONS MANDATS REPRÉSENTATIFS BITFURY GROUP ET HUT 8 SUR LE POINT DE FONDER LE PLUS IMPORTANT ENSEMBLE DE CENTRES DE DONNÉES DE BITCOINS DE L’AMÉRIQUE DU NORD

Nous avons conseillé le Bitfury Group (Bitfury) dans le cadre de son partenariat avec Hut 8 Mining Corp. (Hut 8) en vue de faire l’acquisition, l’installation, l’entretien et l’exploitation des plus grands centres de données de bitcoins en Amérique du Nord.

Bitfury, chef de file mondial offrant des services complets liés aux chaînes de bloc et l’un des plus importants fournisseurs privés d’infrastructure de l’écosystème des chaînes de bloc, fournira à Hut 8 exclusivement des solutions minières de bitcoin comprenant du matériel et des logiciels propriétaires, des installations et des services d’exploitation.

79. Blanchiment d'argent au Canada : Modifications proposées

Cette définition engloberait les célèbres cryptomonnaies comme le bitcoin et l’ether et est éventuellement suffisamment large pour comprendre une myriade d’autres jetons, pièces et cryptoactifs qui peuvent être échangés contre des fonds, soit directement soit par voie d’un échange intermédiaire.

80. "Blockchain Governance and the Public Interest Standard" by Addison Cameron-Huff

Many concepts sound great in theory but become thorny in practice. One of those concepts is the idea of the "public interest". The term has existed as a principle for good government, in various forms, for thousands of years and it's widely used in law. In a recent blog post, a well-known Ethereum developer implicitly put forward the idea that public blockchains ought to be run in the "public interest". But what does the term mean and is that a standard that ought to be at the heart of Ethereum, or any other public blockchain? It's a concept that's widely used in law. Why not for Ethereum?

The term "public interest" appears in ethical guides, statutes, and administrative law textbooks all over the world. But this simple term hides a complicated reality. Few people agree on what the "public interest" is, how to identfiy it, or how to know when something isn't in the public interest. This is a standard that opens the door to debate, rather than providing a standard in the sense of Ethereum's ERC-20, technical standards, or really anything that programmers would say is a "standard". What lawyers and regulators call a "standard" might surprise people who are not familiar with the thousands of pages of scholarship on various sorts of "standards" in law (e.g. Canadian administrative law).

81. Blockchain IPOs: Capital Raising in a Crypto-World | Knowledge | Fasken

A particularly high profile hack catapulted ICOs into the regulatory spotlight and resulted in an important directive from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in the United States of America. In 2016, the Decentralised Autonomous Organisation (DAO), an entity  which is essentially a very complex smart contract which provides a secure digital ledger to track financial transactions and is built on the ethereum network launched a US$150 million ICO. The ICO was immediately hacked and DAO and investors lost US$50 million.  This triggered an investigation by the SEC into the DAO ICO and resulted in a finding that certain digital tokens constituted “securities” for the purpose of federal law. In the SEC press release on the issue, offerors are cautioned that:

82. Blockchain Technologies Are Being Patented in Canada – What does this Mean for Future Blockchain Patents? | Ridout & Maybee LLP

1 https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

83. Blockchain for tomatoes | Gowling WLG

At the recent ANA/Brand Activation conference in Chicago, we advertising lawyers were inundated with all things blockchain. At that point, it became evident that this technology was not just going to apply to Bitcoin, gaming, and finance, but the concept of the blockchain will undoubtedly have applications across a multitude of sectors, including agriculture and the entire Food & Beverage sector.

84. Blockchain law: A little less privacy: Cryptocurrency transactions under the Fourth Amendment | United States | Knowledge | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

In this month's Blockchain Law column, we discuss the appeal of using cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and its perception that they may offer greater privacy protections for financial transactions. But a recent federal appellate ruling in a Fourth Amendment case suggests this perception may not align with current legal reality.

85. "Blockchain-Based Companies: How Rwanda Could Out-Compete Delaware" by Addison Cameron-Huff

Countries have historically focussed on creating corporate structures for companies that operate within their borders. As blockchain technology and IT infrastructure more broadly bring the world's entrepreneurs closer together there is a unique opportunity for a forward-thinking jurisdiction to create a legal-technical framework for online corporations. A more trusted, transparent corporate registry could be created based on the same technology that powers Bitcoin. Corporate voting could be handled on a blockchain. Most importantly, shares could be distributed to the public through the Rwanda Stock Exchange (RSE): http://www.rse.rw/, or a new venture exchange created for blockchain-based companies.

86. Blockchain: Just Because It’s a Buzzword Doesn’t Mean It’s Not the Future of the Supply Chain | McCarthy Tétrault

Blockchain can serve in many different industries, the best-known of which are being cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin. While an example of blockchain technology, Bitcoin is, however, far from being its sole application. For example, smart contracts are an emerging use case for blockchain and can be utilized in the transport industry – this will be our focus in next week’s article. In fact, the principles of decentralization, incorruptibility and transparency make blockchain an attractive solution to many of the challenges that face the transportation and logistics industry.

87. Blockstream - Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP

On August 24, 2021, Blockstream completed the first close of its US$210 million Series B financing round, bringing the company to a US$3.2 billion valuation and achieving unicorn status. The round was led by Ballie Gifford, with participation from iFinex and other undisclosed investors. Blockstream will use the funding to fuel the next stage of its growth including the expansion of its mining operations and facilities, and launch of Bitcoin financial products.

Blockstream is a Victoria-based software firm specializing in building crypto-financial infrastructure based on Bitcoin.

88. Blockstream - Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt S.E.N.C.R.L./s.r.l.

Le 24 août 2021, Blockstream a conclu son premier tour de financement de série B de 210 M$ US, lequel a porté la valeur de cette société à 3,2 G$ US et lui a conféré le statut de « licorne ». Cette ronde a été dirigée par Ballie Gifford, avec la participation d’iFinex et d’autres investisseurs dont l’identité n’a pas été révélée. Blockstream affectera ce financement à la prochaine étape de sa croissance, laquelle prévoit notamment l’expansion de ses activités et de ses installations d’exploitation minière ainsi que le lancement de produits financiers basés sur le Bitcoin.

Blockstream est une société de logiciels de Victoria spécialisée dans la conception d’infrastructures de cryptomonnaies basées sur le Bitcoin.

89. Blog | Inside Disputes | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

Cryptoassets

90. Blog | Inside FinTech | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

FCA updates webpages: cryptoassets

Requirements for a change in control– The webpage now provides that, an FCA registered cryptoasset firm (i.e. a cryptoasset exchange provider and/or a custodian wallet provider) is subject to the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 (the MLRs). It is not subject to the regime under Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA). The Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Amendment) (No.2) Regulations 2022 bring elements of the FSMA change in control provisions within the scope of MLRs.

91. Brid Holden | Gowling WLG

Acting in conjunction with City of London Police in coordinating and running a Pilot Civil Asset Recovery Programme. The pilot case involved advising an elderly victim (with dementia) of a bitcoin fraud where in excess of £2 million had been invested in an international bitcoin scam. Secured a recovery for the benefit of the victim.

92. CCU closes private placement with total proceeds of C$3.2M | McCarthy

CCU is a bitcoin mining company based in Joliette, Québec, created in 2017 and listed on the TSXV since 2021. CCU uses hydropower to mine Bitcoin, Ether and other cryptocurrencies.

93. CFTC Staff Issues Advisory for Virtual Currency Products

currency markets. All such efforts are described in detail on the CFTC’s dedicated Bitcoin website.

94. CFTC Staff Issues Advisory for Virtual Currency Products | Cassels.com

This recent staff notice highlights one of the CFTC’s many efforts to ensure appropriate oversight of virtual currency markets. All such efforts are described in detail on the CFTC’s dedicated Bitcoin website.

95. CSA Amendments to Simplify Reports of Exempt Distribution | McCarthy Tétrault

Cryptoassets

Currently, the CSA cannot identify distributions of securities involving digital coins or tokens. The Amendments would allow the CSA to monitor issuers that invest in cryptoassets as follows:

96. CSA Increases Regulatory Clarity In The Cryptic World Of Digital Currencies | BLG

Over the past decade, Bitcoin, Ether and other cryptocurrencies have become increasingly commonplace. Cryptocurrencies are often used in conjunction with distributed ledger technologies, such as blockchain, to conduct fund raising transactions. The market has witnessed a number of entities issuing cryptocurrencies, which may be purchased using either another cryptocurrency or a fiat currency (for example, Canadian or US dollars). When such cryptocurrencies are offered for the first time they are often referred to as an initial coin offering ("ICO") or an initial token offering ("ITO"). Structurally, they may be compared to a traditional initial public offering ("IPO").

97. CSA Members Set Terms and Conditions for Crypto-Based Investment Fund Managers

portfolio. Presently, the only cryptocurrencies that the Funds are targeting are one or more of Bitcoin, Ether

cryptocurrency” refers to Bitcoin, Ether and anything commonly considered to be a cryptocurrency or a

98. CSA Members Set Terms and Conditions for Crypto-Based Investment Fund Managers | Cassels.com

Under the Terms, each Fund is limited to investing in those cryptocurrencies that will form part of its initial portfolio. Presently, the only cryptocurrencies that the Funds are targeting are one or more of Bitcoin, Ether and Litecoin, all of which are arguably in the nature of a currency/commodity and not a security. If a Manager desires to invest the Fund it manages in a “specified cryptocurrency” in addition to those in its initial portfolio, the Manager will be required to obtain permission of the regulator. A “specified cryptocurrency” refers to Bitcoin, Ether and anything commonly considered to be a cryptocurrency or a digital or virtual currency or digital or virtual token.

99. CSA issues guidance that securities legislation likely applies to custodial cryptoasset trading platforms

CSA issues guidance that securities legislation likely applies to custodial cryptoasset trading platforms

On January 16, 2020, the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) released CSA Staff Notice 21-327 Guidance on the Application of Securities Legislation to Entities Facilitating the Trading of Crypto Assets  [PDF] (the Staff Notice). This guidance has significant implications for Canadian and foreign cryptoasset trading platforms that maintain custody of a customer’s cryptoassets following a purchase by the customer. The CSA suggests that platforms which do not immediately transfer ownership, possession and control of all cryptoassets purchased by  customers are likely dealing in derivatives or securities, and are therefore subject to regulation as dealers or marketplaces under applicable securities laws.

For more information, read our Osler Update entitled "CSA issues guidance that securities legislation likely applies to custodial cryptoasset trading platforms." 

Tags: Canadian Securities AdministratorscryptoassetsIIROCregulations

100. CSA issues key guidance on cryptocurrency related platforms | BLG

the Platform offers services for users to buy or sell Bitcoin and does not offer margin or leveraged trading;

users send money to the Platform to purchase Bitcoin at a given price;

the terms of the transaction require that the entire quantity of Bitcoin purchased from the Platform or counterparty seller be immediately transferred to a wallet that is in the sole control of the user, and the transfer is immediately reflected on the Bitcoin blockchain;

there is no agreement, arrangement or understanding between the parties that allows the transaction to be settled other than by immediate transfer of Bitcoin;

the Platform’s typical commercial practice is to make immediate delivery in accordance with the terms of the transaction, and for the Platform or its affiliates not to have ownership, possession or control of the user’s Bitcoin at any point following the transaction;

101. Cam Mingay Discusses Possible Marijuana Shortage & Regulatory Realities with Bloomberg Politics | Cassels.com

Cam Mingay and Jonathan Sherman on How Bitcoin's Boom Created an Obstacle for Marijuana Companies Going Public

102. Cam Mingay and Jonathan Sherman on How Bitcoin's Boom Created an Obstacle for Marijuana Companies Going Public | Cassels.com

Cam Mingay and Jonathan Sherman on How Bitcoin's Boom Created an Obstacle for Marijuana Companies Going Public | Cassels.com

home » the latest » cam mingay and jonathan sherman on how bitcoin’s boom created an obstacle for marijuana companies going public

CAM MINGAY AND JONATHAN SHERMAN ON HOW BITCOIN’S BOOM CREATED AN OBSTACLE FOR MARIJUANA COMPANIES GOING PUBLIC

Cam Mingay and Jonathan Sherman have been quoted in the article “How Bitcoin’s Boom Created This Obstacle for Marijuana Companies Going Public,” published on investors.com.

103. Cam Mingay and Rowan Groenewald on Why and How US Cannabis Companies Should Consider Going Public in Canada | Cassels.com

Cam Mingay and Jonathan Sherman on How Bitcoin's Boom Created an Obstacle for Marijuana Companies Going Public

104. Canada Computational Unlimited Inc. is acquired by Capricorn Business Acquisitions Inc. for C$32M through a reverse takeover | McCarthy

Canada Computational Unlimited Inc. is a bitcoin mining company based in Joliette, Québec, and created in 2017. Canada Computational Unlimited Inc. uses hydropower to mine Bitcoin, Ether and other cryptocurrencies.

105. "Canada Stablecorp Launches Canadian Dollar Stablecoin: QCAD" by Addison Cameron-Huff

Today was the launch of Canada Stablecorp's "QCAD" product, a Canadian Dollar stablecoin available on the Ethereum network. The launch was covered by Coindesk and the press release is live here. There's also a short FAQ at stablecorp.ca/faqs.

106. Canadian

couple of years. Bitcoin, considered by many to be the marquee crypto

107. Canadian AML Updates for Dealers in Virtual Currency | McCarthy Tétrault

Cryptoasset

108. Canadian Fintech Review | Insights | Torys LLP

Fintech businesses have been encouraged to engage with staff of the Canadian securities regulators through a “regulatory sandbox” to discuss novel products and services, the anticipated treatment under applicable securities laws, and to obtain any required approvals and/or exemptive relief to operate in Canada. Areas where new business models have obtained securities regulatory clearances include peer-to-peer lending platforms, startup and venture introduction and capital raising platforms, and online advisory services. Notably, the Canadian securities regulators have also permitted the establishment of exchange-traded funds that invest in bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, while adopting a restrictive approach to retail distribution of more speculative tokens or initial coin offerings (where compliance with prospectus and dealer/advisor registration requirements is mandated on the basis that these instruments are properly characterized as securities).

109. Canadian M&A in Q2 2022: Forging Ahead Through Choppy Seas | Bennett Jones

The precipitous decline in digital assets in mid-May and June added to the general market instability in Q2. Hundreds of billions of dollars were lost in crypto holdings as major tokens collapsed and various crypto lenders and exchanges froze or limited user withdrawals. Bloomberg reported that Bitcoin lost 60 percent of its value in the second quarter of 2022, its worst quarterly performance since 2011. The price of Bitcoin fell from over $45,000 at the start of Q2 to under $20,000 on June 30.

110. Canadian Power

the AUC within the context of an Alberta bitcoin mine.

111. Canadian Securities Administrators Provide Further Guidance on the Securities Law Implications of Token Offerings | McCarthy Tétrault

Even though the proposed function of a token may be utility, there may be some purchasers who purchase tokens with the intention of selling them on a cryptoasset trading platform or in a secondary market. This fact may indicate an expectation of profit under the “investment contract” criteria.

112. Canadian crypto update – undertakings required for crypto asset platforms seeking registration in Canada

As we have previously written, financial regulators throughout the world continue to grapple with issues surrounding crypto assets and how best to regulate their distribution to investors. While the establishment of a comprehensive framework remains elusive, regulators continue to address the void through a series of pragmatic, if not piecemeal, initiatives, as well as enforcement activities (see our prior posts and updates Three week countdown for Canadian digital asset trading platforms, CSA/IIROC issue marketing and social media guidelines for crypto trading platforms, Decoding crypto – Providing regulatory clarity to cryptoasset businesses, and Canadian crypto update – Ontario enforcement up, regulatory stance hardens).

113. Canadian private placement trade reporting process: Changes for 2018

There are also a number of other changes introduced by the Amendments, including new securities designations for reporting sales of digital coins and tokens as well as other specific types of securities, and new requirements to identify whether or not an issuer’s primary business or investments involve cryptoassets.  The Amendments also codify guidance provided by the CSA since June 2016 regarding the reporting requirements, and make a number of other technical changes.

114. Canadian regulators propose new rules to govern cryptocurrency exchanges, protect users — The Globe

“While some level of regulation, not necessarily by securities regulators, is likely appropriate, the cost, time and other practical difficulties of complying with many of the regulatory requirements contemplated by the paper would effectively shut out many innovative cryptoasset trading platforms from the Canadian market,” Evan tells The Globe and Mail.

115. Carol Derk | Derivatives Lawyer Toronto | BLG

Fidelity Investments Canada ULC in connection with the launch of its bitcoin investment funds.

OSC Clears Pathway for the First Publicly Offered Bitcoin Fund

116. Catherine Pluck | Senior Knowledge Lawyer / Senior Associate | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

Cryptoasset providers: Impact of the amendments to the MLRs 2017

117. Central Bank Digital Currencies: The New Era of Modern-Day Banking | Insights | Torys LLP

Money we use primarily consists of banknotes issued by the Bank of Canada and deposit (or credit) balances available to customers in accounts with commercial banks. In principle, such account balances are convertible upon demand to Bank of Canada banknotes. For their part, reserves at the Bank of Canada are available as money for interbank payments. With the advent of Bitcoin, other forms of private digital currencies, and blockchains as innovative digital ledger technologies, central banks around the world—including the Bank of Canada—consider the option of issuing digital currencies of their own as a new form of money, Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC).

118. "Cheat Sheet: Ontario Tax Credits & Deductions for Tech Companies" by Addison Cameron-Huff

BLOG HOME CONTACT AUTHOR NEXT POST: DECENTRALIZED BITCOIN EXCHANGES”

NEXT: DECENTRALIZED BITCOIN EXCHANGES ►

119. Christopher Naudie

bitcoin investment fund in the world

120. Collapse of another algorithmic stablecoin highlights litigation risks for investors | Inside Disputes | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

Cryptoassets

121. Colored Coins Archives - The Angle | Fasken IP

bitcoin, Colored Coins, Digital Art Marketplace, Intellectual Property, NFT

122. "Come Learn About Bitcoin: Every Wednesday at 7pm" by Addison Cameron-Huff

"Come Learn About Bitcoin: Every Wednesday at 7pm" by Addison Cameron-Huff

Come Learn About Bitcoin: Every Wednesday at 7pm

Come learn about Bitcoin every Wednesday night at 7pm: 64 Spadina Ave, Toronto.

The event is held at Bitcoin Decentral, the main space in Toronto for this growing industry.

123. Consulting | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

Joint statement from UK financial regulatory authorities on sanctions and the cryptoasset sector

124. Consulting | Singapore | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

Welcome to the first episode of FinTech Pulse. This month we’re joined by Philippa Martinelli, FinTech advisor to the UK Department for International Trade to discuss the Kalifa review, and Don Tapscott, CEO of the US Blockchain Research Institute to talk about the report he co-authored making recommendations on the future digital strategy of the US for the Biden-Harris administration. We’ll also be exploring regulatory trends relating to registering cryptoasset businesses, and the future of cryptocurrencies and Central Bank Digital Currencies in China.

125. Controlling the Crypto Craze

Since the creation of Bitcoin in 2008, there has been a growing interest in crypto assets, with significant

subsequently deposit their crypto assets (e.g., Bitcoin or Ether) and can also use fiat currency (including

126. Controlling the Crypto Craze: The OSC’s Response to the Growing Crypto Market | Cassels.com

Since the creation of Bitcoin in 2008, there has been a growing interest in crypto assets, with significant acceleration in the last few months. In particular, between January and April 2021, the global crypto asset market capitalization doubled from $1 trillion to $2 trillion (USD).1 In turn, there has been a proliferation of crypto asset trading platforms (CTPs or platforms) that allow investors to trade these crypto assets.

The OSC alleges that these CTPs engaged in, or held themselves out as engaging in, the business of trading in securities without the necessary registration or applicable exemptions. In particular, the OSC alleges that investors access the relevant platforms by creating an account, into which they can subsequently deposit their crypto assets (e.g., Bitcoin or Ether) and can also use fiat currency (including CAD) to purchase crypto assets, which are then credited to their account. This account or “wallet” is controlled by the CTP. In order to take possession of the crypto assets reflected in their account balance, an investor must request a withdrawal from the CTP. As a result, the investor is dependent on the CTP to satisfy their withdrawal request by delivering crypto assets to an investor-controlled wallet.

127. Coronavirus (COVID-19) Investment Scams | CSA Warning

Other regulatory agencies have similarly issued warnings about fraudsters using global events and breaking news to lure victims into their schemes. In February, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) similarly issued an alert to warn investors about investment frauds involving claims that a company’s products or services would be used to help stop the coronavirus outbreak. The U.K.’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) released guidance this month advising consumers to watch out for scams related to COVID-19, including investments in cryptoassets.

128. Corporate Finance in Canada | USA Expertise | Fasken

Crypto finance company closes bitcoin mining equipment finance deal

129. "Correcting Errors in Wilkins' Bank of Canada Bitcoin Speech" by Addison Cameron-Huff

"Correcting Errors in Wilkins' Bank of Canada Bitcoin Speech" by Addison Cameron-Huff

Correcting Errors in Wilkins' Bank of Canada Bitcoin Speech

The Senior Deputy Governor of the Bank of Canada, Carolyn Wilkins, gave a speech yesterday about Bitcoin that outlines some of the Bank's thinking. Ms. Wilkins seems quite knowledgeable about digital currencies (she mentions Ripple and Litecoin in the speech) but she makes a few errors. These errors are completely understandable because digital currencies are complicated but it's worth correcting these mistakes because the Bank of Canada needs to thoroughly understand these new money-like technologies. As a lawyer who works in the cryptocurrency space and computer programmer, here are my views on Ms. Wilkins' speech.

Bank of Canada Claim #1: Bitcoin is high-risk because there's no deposit insurance or user protection.

Truth: Bitcoin does not require the user of third party company services so there's no counterparty risk that would require deposit insurance. If someone wants to use a third party service they could find one that's insured or buy their own insurance.

130. Court hands down judgment, after parties have settled | Inside Disputes | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

Cryptoassets

131. "Creative Destruction Lab's Blockchain Incubator: Starts July 22nd" by Addison Cameron-Huff

BLOG HOME CONTACT AUTHOR NEXT POST: 3IQ BITCOIN FUND PROPOSAL DENIED BY OSC, APPLIC...”

NEXT: 3IQ BITCOIN FUND PROPOSAL DENIED BY OSC, APPLIC... ►

132. Cristian O. Blidariu | McCarthy

Gemini Trust Company acts as sub-custodian in respect of The Bitcoin Fund

133. Crown priority under section 222(3) of the Excise Tax Act | McCarthy Tétrault

Miners Be Aware:  New GST/HST Measures Announced for Cryptoasset Mining

134. Crypto asset works of art and non-fungible token (NFT) investments: Be careful!

The distinction between fungible and non-fungible assets is not new. Prior to the invention of blockchain, the distinction was used to differentiate assets based on their availability, fungible assets being highly available and non-fungible assets, scarce. Thus, a fungible asset can easily be replaced by an equivalent asset with the same market value. The best example is money, whether it be coins, notes, deposit money or digital money, such as Bitcoin. On the contrary, a non-fungible asset is unique and irreplaceable. As such, works of art are non-fungible assets in that they are either unique or very few copies of them exist. Their value is a result of their authenticity and provenance, among other things.

135. Crypto asset; update from CSA as of March 2021 | BLG

Additionally, issuers should consider the difference in holding established cryptocurrencies (i.e., Bitcoin or Ether) versus other crypto assets, such as digital tokens, and the risks associated with that.

136. Crypto assets reporting issuers: Disclosure guidance | Canada

Description de l’activité et facteurs de risque : L’Avis du personnel énonce également les attentes des ACVM relatives aux sujets qui devraient être traités dans la description de l’activité et l’information sur les facteurs de risque exigées des émetteurs du secteur des cryptoactifs étant donné la nouveauté relative du secteur des cryptoactifs. L’Avis du personnel indique que les risques associés à la détention de cryptomonnaies établies, comme le bitcoin ou l’ether, peuvent différer grandement de ceux liés à un placement dans d’autres actifs numériques.

137. Crypto consulting services should consider registering as a dealer

creating and deploying the tokens on the Ethereum blockchain;

138. Crypto contract breach damages clarified by Delaware Court | United States | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

The ruling in Diamond Fortress provides a clear detailed analysis of how judgment amounts denominated in US dollars should be calculated for the breach of a contract to deliver or make a payment in a cryptocurrency, at least where that cryptocurrency meets the definition of a "security" under federal law. It remains to be seen whether the same or a similar analysis would be applied in calculating damages in relation to crypto and other blockchain tokens in contexts where their status as "securities" is less clear or is disputed, as has been the case for Bitcoin and certain other early cryptocurrencies, or when claimed "utility tokens" are involved.

139. Crypto finance company closes bitcoin mining equipment finance deal | Client Work | Fasken

Crypto finance company closes bitcoin mining equipment finance deal | Client Work | Fasken

Crypto finance company closes bitcoin mining equipment finance deal

BACK HOME SOLUTIONS CLIENT WORK CRYPTO FINANCE COMPANY CLOSES BITCOIN MINING EQUIPMENT FINANCE DEAL

NYDIG is a bitcoin company that is fusing high tech with institutional-grade finance to usher in a new era of financial products.

140. Crypto trading platforms: Legal developments | Gowling WLG

Crypto asset trading platforms, also known as "cryptocurrency exchanges," are popular ways for investors to buy and sell various crypto assets, such as bitcoin and ether. This panel discussion focused on several key legal and regulatory developments, both in Canada and around the world, relating to such platforms.

141. Crypto-assets | Uncovering regulatory issues locally, to help financial services firms globally | Hong Kong SAR | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

China - Following the prohibition of various bitcoin-related activities since 2013, the most stringent crypto-crackdowns commenced in September 2021, while China was simultaneously at the forefront of developing a central bank digital currency.

142. Crypto-assets | Uncovering regulatory issues locally, to help financial services firms globally | Japan | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

China - Following the prohibition of various bitcoin-related activities since 2013, the most stringent crypto-crackdowns commenced in September 2021, while China was simultaneously at the forefront of developing a central bank digital currency.

143. Crypto-assets | Uncovering regulatory issues locally, to help financial services firms globally | Singapore | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

China - Following the prohibition of various bitcoin-related activities since 2013, the most stringent crypto-crackdowns commenced in September 2021, while China was simultaneously at the forefront of developing a central bank digital currency.

144. Crypto-assets | Uncovering regulatory issues locally, to help financial services firms globally | Thailand | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

China - Following the prohibition of various bitcoin-related activities since 2013, the most stringent crypto-crackdowns commenced in September 2021, while China was simultaneously at the forefront of developing a central bank digital currency.

145. Cryptocurrency consulting firm CoinLaunch Corp. agrees to settlement with OSC — The Globe and Mail

He says that as a result, “the lack of similar cases seems to have helped CoinLaunch in terms of reducing the penalty. As the reasons note, ‘We find that the administrative penalty is within a reasonable range in light of the limited history of penalties for non-registration cases involving cryptoassets.”

146. Cryptocurrency disclosures in the face of recent attacks | United States | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

Bitcoin is evil.” “Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme.” “Bitcoin is worthless.” These are just some of the comments that have been levied against cryptocurrency generally and Bitcoin specifically. Most recently, one of the most prominent bankers in the US characterized Bitcoin as a “fraud” and compared it to tulip mania. Earlier this summer, a prominent investor denounced digital currencies as a “pyramid scheme.”  At the same time, however, many well-respected individuals and companies are investing in cryptocurrency, are creating their own tokens, or are attracting investors via initial coin offerings (ICOs). For this group of people, Bitcoin is seen as an attractive investment. Indeed, at the time of this alert, Bitcoin was trading at just under USD $4,000 per coin.

147. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Australia | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

148. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Belgium | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

149. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Brazil | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

150. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Burundi | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

151. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Canada | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

152. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | China | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

153. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Deutschland | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

154. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | France | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

155. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Germany | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

156. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Greece | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

157. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Hong Kong SAR | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

158. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | India | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

159. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Indonesia | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

160. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Israel | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

161. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Italy | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

162. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Japan | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

163. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Kenya | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

164. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Korea | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

165. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Luxembourg | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

166. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Marshall Islands | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

167. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Mexico | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

168. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Monaco | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

169. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Morocco | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

170. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Netherlands | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

171. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Nordic Region | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

172. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Pakistan | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

173. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Poland | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

174. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Singapore | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

175. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | South Africa | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

176. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Thailand | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

177. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Turkey | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

178. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Uganda | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

179. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | United Kingdom | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

180. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | United States | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

181. Cryptocurrency disputes: multi-jurisdictional lines and global reach | S2 EP1 | Zimbabwe | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

So we talked at the outset about blockchain and cryptocurrency as terms and I think most people out there are going to appreciate that Bitcoin is probably the best known example of a cryptocurrency. But of course, cryptocurrencies aren't the only sorts of things being recorded on the blockchain. And you started Bob, by saying, I think quite helpfully that, you know, this is just a different way of recording information. So can you give us a sense of what some of the applications are for the technology, as we currently understand them, beyond the Bitcoin example?

Sure, you know, the-- basically a lot of times what the individual blocks on the-- on the chain, which are also sometimes referred to as a token, because essentially you pass the token from one block to the next along the chain, they are an electronic representation of an asset of some kind or the rights to the ownership of an asset. And it could be an asset which is intended to be a-- function as a currency, or it could be an asset that's intended to function as something else. Among the ones that are intended to function as currencies, like cryptocurrencies or like Bitcoin, you have sort of, I guess, two-- two main groups. The ones that people are most familiar with, like Bitcoin, the assets are volatile, their-- their asset-- their value is not necessarily fixed, they can go up or down. That's why you always-- people say, you know, yeah but what is Bitcoin worth today? There are another group of essentially currency-like assets which are referred to as stable coins, and somewhat like a money market mutual fund, their value is intended to be stable at all times. And that can actually be, you know, very useful in payment situations because if you have a coin or a cryptocurrency which is going to go up or go down dramatically in value tomorrow, the holder may not want to spend it or the-- the seller, who's selling something, may not want to take it, if its value is gonna, depending on which way its value is going to go. Whereas a stable coin, much like say a $1 bill, it'll be $1 today, it'll be $1 tomorrow, so that may have a-- more application in situations where people are not looking to sort of speculate on the value of the assets going up or down. Sometimes, people have used tokens to essentially function kind of like securities, where people are raising money to develop a project or develop a company or-- or something along those lines. And sometimes it’s not always clear if the token is-- whether if it's supposed to be a currency or a security, and sometimes the line legally may not be clear. Sometimes you have things called utility tokens which are kind of like, you know, if you go into a casino and you buy chips, you know, I can't take a casino chip out in the real world and spend it. But, in the world of a casino, it has value and I can use it, to you know, to play games. And so, that's another type of application that you can-- you can use it for. And also, conceivably, you could use it for things which are really just really mundane such as, for example, if you maintain a registry of who owns title to a property or who owns a particular share of stock. The token could be nothing more than simply the ownership rights to a plot of land or, you know, 1,000 shares of XYZ Corporation.

One of the, I guess, the-- certainly the biggest issue in the last two years has been the-- the issue of whether these things are-- are securities. In the US, there's a legal test that comes from nearly 80 years ago at this point. You basically look at say, if you are asking a group of people to give you money and say, I'm going to take all your money, I'm going to pool it together, I'm going to do something wonderful with it, and you all will earn a profit. That's basically-- that makes you a security. And it seems like for many of the cryptocurrencies that have been issued in one way or another, they are kind of telling that story. You're telling people is that, you know, you give me your money, and I'll make you a profit. And that usually is a hallmark that gets you into the camp of being a security. This is a very-- still developing area, but a lot of the regulators believe that a lot of judges who have heard cases believe that most of the time these facts make things out to be a security. This is not a totally resolved issue. Even if it's not a security, it's still like anything else that has value, it's likely considered to be a commodity under the federal commodity laws in the US. Just the same way you could speculate on the value of pork bellies, or wheat or oil, you could speculate on the value of what Bitcoin will be. Will it go up or down? You know, are you going to go long, or are you gonna go short? So even if you're not a security, you could be a commodity. And some people have suggested there are times when it could be both. And these are issues that the legal system in the US is grappling with constantly right now.

I think it's-- and also common law as well, the potential for state common laws to be applied extraterritorially too, I think, is really interesting and important. And just on that point, very briefly on the common law point, I’m just thinking about the nature of the relationship between all the actors that are involved in blockchain and-- and these types of products. And so, for example, whether that's the investors, those that are operating the platform, or between Bitcoin miners themselves, for example, what is the nature of the relationship between those actors? And does it-- what common law duties, if any, does it give rise to?

182. "Cryptocurrency: A Global Public System" by Addison Cameron-Huff

The critic has in mind a relative measure, one of utility to society per unit of energy. The remainder of the article explains why this isn't the case, while agreeing that cryptocurrency uses far too much power. The problem is even worse than many critics even recognize, because crypto miners also consume significant amounts of computer hardware which costs energy and rare resoruces to make. So how can bitcoin be defended?

WHY DEFEND BITCOIN?

Why defend a cryptocurrency network that runs on open-source software, made by one or more anonymous people? There are no shares of bitcoin, aside from the accounting units within the bitcoin network, created by the most popular parameters (BTC). The reasons to care about the bitcoin network, and similar cryptocurrency networks, is that they have unrecognized value. Not value in the money sense, which is well covered by the media, but in other kinds of value.

Only a small number of people are needed to participate in bitcoin in order for it to be useful as a means of timestamping data. Timestamping is a bit esoteric but quite value to society for intellectual property, plagiarism, evidence, and anti-counterfeiting. There are other ways to do timestamps that don't involve cryptocurrency but at least some of the people using it have done so because it is the best technical solution for their needs. Similarly, few people can imagine themselves having something to say that's so valuable but unpopular that they would be blacklisted by financial institutions. But this happens regularly to people who are human rights defenders in authoritarian places and unpopular workers in rich nations. Vastly different life circumstances make the need for cryptocurrency more or less obvious.

Being "not the worst" is hardly a strong case. How strong the case is depends on which use cases you know and value. In an increasingly authoritarian world there's wisdom in building services that are publicly accessible to regular people, who can be slightly more free with access to cryptocurrency. Freedom is difficult to value economically, but it's easy to see the cost when a country becomes not free. Focusing on these use cases is trickier for journalists but better respects the intentions of the people who made Bitcoin in the first place.

183. Cryptocurrency: the Wild West no more? – LegalWriter.net

Regulatory amendments creating new virtual currency obligations for entities subject to Canada’s Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act came into force on June 1. Provincially, securities regulators are stepping up scrutiny of cryptoasset trading platforms. As well, The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development has announced that international crypto reporting standards are coming later this year.

184. Cryptomonnaie au Canada : situation actuelle et perspectives | BLG

Le terme « contrat sur cryptoactifs » s’entend du droit contractuel d’un utilisateur à l’égard de cryptoactifs. Ainsi, selon le mode de livraison et le type d’actif, les lois canadiennes sur les valeurs mobilières pourraient s’appliquer à la négociation de cryptoactifs comme le bitcoin et l’ether.  

Le Document de consultation conjoint 21-402 des Autorités canadiennes en valeurs mobilières (ACVM) et de l’Organisme canadien de réglementation du commerce des valeurs mobilières (OCRCVM), Projet d’encadrement des plateformes de négociation de cryptoactifs, établit le cadre de base de la réglementation des cryptoactifs au Canada. L’un des principaux points examinés dans le document de consultation conjoint est la question de savoir si les cryptoactifs constituent des valeurs mobilières ou des dérivés. En règle générale, les organismes de réglementation utilisent le terme défini « cryptoactifs » pour désigner les cryptoactifs ou les monnaies ou jetons numériques ou virtuels qui ne sont pas des valeurs mobilières ni des dérivés. Jusqu’à maintenant, les organismes de réglementation n’ont pas voulu se prononcer sur la question de savoir si une cryptomonnaie ou un actif numérique précis constitue une valeur mobilière, un dérivé ou un cryptoactif. Dans le contexte des plateformes de négociation de cryptoactifs réglementées, cette détermination a plutôt été laissée aux mains des exploitants. Cependant, force est de constater que le bitcoin, l’ether, le bitcoin cash et le litecoin ne sont considérés ni comme des valeurs mobilières, ni comme des dérivés. Ces cryptoactifs sont généralement traités comme des marchandises en vertu des lois sur les valeurs mobilières et des lois fiscales. Cette position pourrait toutefois changer.

L’année 2021 a été une année importante pour les marchés financiers canadiens, un certain nombre d’entreprises ayant fait leur entrée en bourse par cotation directe (premier appel public à l’épargne) ou à la suite d’un regroupement ou d’une opération admissible (souvent sous la forme d’une prise de contrôle inversée). Le nombre de fonds négociés en bourse (FNB) et d’émetteurs inscrits dont les activités sont liées au bitcoin ou à l’ether a explosé depuis l’inscription du premier FNB de bitcoins en février 2021. En date de janvier 2022, on comptait 56 fonds (émetteurs inscrits, FNB et fonds d’investissement à capital fixe) dont les activités sont liées au bitcoin ou aux cryptomonnaies à la Bourse de Toronto et à la Bourse de croissance TSX, 34 émetteurs faisant appel à la technologie de la chaîne de blocs à la Bourse des valeurs canadiennes (CSE) et au moins dix émetteurs d’actifs numériques à la NEO Bourse (NEO). Sur les marchés publics, les particuliers peuvent non seulement investir dans des entreprises de minage de bitcoins et de chaînes de blocs, mais aussi dans des sociétés liées à la finance décentralisée, au métavers, aux plateformes de jetons non fongibles, aux infrastructures de paiement (y compris le réseau Lightning) et aux plateformes de négociation de cryptoactifs.

185. Cryptomonnaies : Cadre réglementaire applicable aux fonds d'investissement | Ressources | Fasken

Les conditions imposées aux gestionnaires de portefeuilles en cryptomonnaies comprennent l'obligation d'obtenir l'approbation préalable des autorités en valeurs mobilières avant de : (i) gérer le portefeuille de placements d'un fonds d'investissement qui investit dans les cryptomonnaies; (ii) modifier l'objectif de placement du fonds d'investissement afin d'y inclure une cryptomonnaie qui n'était pas détenue auparavant par ce fonds; et (iii) apporter un changement important aux politiques et procédures d'évaluation applicables aux cryptomonnaies. À ce jour, les ACVM ont autorisé les fonds d'investissement à investir uniquement dans Bitcoin et Ether. Tout gestionnaire de portefeuilles souhaitant inclure d'autres cryptomonnaies dans ses stratégies devra convaincre les ACVM de lui accorder leur autorisation. S'il est difficile de cerner les critères choisis par les ACVM pour approuver ou restreindre l'utilisation d'une cryptomonnaie, l'utilisation et l'adoption générale de celle-ci par les marchés semble être l'une des considérations essentielles.

186. Cryptomonnaies : dissiper le flou | BLG

Une cryptomonnaie est une forme sécurisée de monnaie virtuelle dont l’utilisation est rendue anonyme par le recours à la cryptographie. L’information relative aux transactions et aux achats n’apparaît que sous la forme d’un code indéchiffrable. Le bitcoin a été la première cryptomonnaie.

Le mot « bouleverser » semble galvaudé : la moindre innovation est présentée comme si elle allait complètement changer la donne même si, en fin de compte, il n’en est rien. Nous avons pourtant toutes les raisons de qualifier de révolutionnaire l’invention du bitcoin et de la technologie de la chaîne de blocs qui le sous-tend.

187. Daniel Leslie | Avocat-conseil en Financement et opérations bancaires à Toronto | Équipe | Fasken

À la suite de la cyberattaque contre Colonial Gas aux États-Unis (et la fascinante récupération d’une partie des bitcoins payés en rançon), il ne fait aucun doute que les demandes de rançons par contrôle de données ne sont pas près de cesser. Qu’arrivera-t-il lorsque ce type de menace se transformera en contrôle physique d’infrastructures essentielles? Est-ce que nous paierons ou nous prendrons position? Quelles sont les conséquences en fonction des différents choix? Joignez-vous au groupe d’experts de Fasken alors qu’ils présenteront différents scénarios inspirés de l’actualité et se pencheront sur des questions de légalité, d’éthique, de politique et de tactiques, relativement aux paiements effectués aux acteurs malveillants pour la restitution du contrôle de systèmes essentiels et d’ensembles de données.

188. Daniel Leslie | Banking & Finance Counsel in Toronto | People | Fasken

In the wake of the attack on Colonial Gas in the United States (and the fascinating recovery of some of the Bitcoin involved), it is clear that ransom for the control of data is not going away. What happens when this threat evolves into the physical control of critical infrastructure – will we pay, or take a stand? What are the implications of these choices? Join Fasken’s panel of experts as they tackle scenarios ripped from the headlines, looking at issues of legality, ethics, policy, and tactics related to payments to malicious actors for the return of control of critical systems and datasets.

189. Darren Reed | Associé en Litiges et résolution de conflits à Calgary | Équipe | Fasken

À la suite de la cyberattaque contre Colonial Gas aux États-Unis (et la fascinante récupération d’une partie des bitcoins payés en rançon), il ne fait aucun doute que les demandes de rançons par contrôle de données ne sont pas près de cesser. Qu’arrivera-t-il lorsque ce type de menace se transformera en contrôle physique d’infrastructures essentielles? Est-ce que nous paierons ou nous prendrons position? Quelles sont les conséquences en fonction des différents choix? Joignez-vous au groupe d’experts de Fasken alors qu’ils présenteront différents scénarios inspirés de l’actualité et se pencheront sur des questions de légalité, d’éthique, de politique et de tactiques, relativement aux paiements effectués aux acteurs malveillants pour la restitution du contrôle de systèmes essentiels et d’ensembles de données.

190. Darren Reed | Litigation and Dispute Resolution Lawyer | People | Fasken

In the wake of the attack on Colonial Gas in the United States (and the fascinating recovery of some of the Bitcoin involved), it is clear that ransom for the control of data is not going away. What happens when this threat evolves into the physical control of critical infrastructure – will we pay, or take a stand? What are the implications of these choices? Join Fasken’s panel of experts as they tackle scenarios ripped from the headlines, looking at issues of legality, ethics, policy, and tactics related to payments to malicious actors for the return of control of critical systems and datasets.

191. De la propriété

par les Bitcoins et d’autres crypto-

monnaies, dont le célèbre Bitcoin.

3 Aggarwal, Divesh, et al. « Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to

192. Dealing with Digital | BLG

The past 18 months have been a whirlwind with the economic surge in bitcoin and other digital currencies. As a result, regulators are having to re-examine how trades and deals are done and whether these cryptocurrencies qualify as securities. Carol Derk, the National Leader of the firm's Derivatives Group and a member of the firm's Cryptocurrency and Blockchain Group, explains some of the major issues surrounding the use of blockchain and cryptocurrencies. In this video, Carol looks at how the traditional business model is shifting to accommodate this newer digital asset model. The landscape is changing. BLG is here to ensure your business stays on top of new technologies, regulations and the revolutionary way money is being handled.

193. "Dealing with YouTube's Content ID Claims in Canada" by Addison Cameron-Huff

BLOG HOME CONTACT AUTHOR NEXT POST: PAYING CONTRACTORS IN BITCOIN: CONTRACT DRAFTIN...”

NEXT: PAYING CONTRACTORS IN BITCOIN: CONTRACT DRAFTIN... ►

194. Deals, Cases & Projects | McCarthy

Gemini Trust Company acts as sub-custodian in respect of The Bitcoin Fund

195. Decentral | Gowling WLG

Based in Toronto, Decentral is one of Canada's most recognizable blockchain companies. Its Founder and CEO, Anthony Diiorio, co-founded Ethereum. Decentral's flagship product is Jaxx, a cryptocurrency wallet and multi-token blockchain interface.

196. "Decentralized Bitcoin Exchanges" by Addison Cameron-Huff

"Decentralized Bitcoin Exchanges" by Addison Cameron-Huff

Decentralized Bitcoin Exchanges

I've written a blog post on the Decentral Tumblr blog: "Decentralized Bitcoin Exchanges: A Solution with Three Big Challenges". This blog post explains what a decentralized Bitcoin exchange is, why Bitcoin industry people are keen on the idea and what the implementation challenges are.

197. Decoding crypto – Providing regulatory clarity to cryptoasset businesses

Decoding crypto – Providing regulatory clarity to cryptoasset businesses

In 2021, the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) brought much anticipated clarity to the regulatory landscape for cryptoasset businesses offering services to Canadians and/or listed on Canadian securities exchanges. There have been  a number of significant developments in regulation and enforcement by the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) that have materially changed the legal environment in which these businesses operate in Canada.

One key change consists of the adoption of a clear registration regime for cryptoassets trading platforms (CTPs) that offer custodial services to Canadian clients, pursuant to which six CTPs, five restricted dealers and one Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC) member, have now registered.  Regulatory guidance has now been provided with respect to the advertising and marketing practices of custodial CTPs that are registered under securities laws. Additionally, regulatory guidance has been issued regarding public disclosure for reporting issuers that engage materially with cryptoassets.

198. Dec 13, 2019

wrongdoers in the cryptoasset space: 

“crypto consultant,” offering marketing and promotional services to prospective cryptoasset token

firms in the cryptoasset sector that ignore registration obligations were “on notice” and “can

In British Columbia, the BCSC initiated investigations into two cryptoasset trading platforms. It

Commission against participants in the cryptoasset space. Read our Emerging clarity on cryptoasset

199. Dec 13, 2021

clarity to cryptoasset businesses

landscape for cryptoasset businesses offering services to Canadians and/or listed on Canadian securities

One key change consists of the adoption of a clear registration regime for cryptoassets trading platforms

issued regarding public disclosure for reporting issuers that engage materially with cryptoassets.

200. Dec 18, 2018

registry and title insurance companies and cryptoasset exchanges in the AML/ATF regime; numerous

201. Dec 8, 2020

a settlement with a Toronto‐based cryptoasset trading platform that admitted to having developed and

2016. See also our “New opportunities and new challenges for Cryptoasset Trading Platforms [A1]”

202. Delay damages for insurance policy payouts | Gowling WLG

Bitcoin dispute gives insight into English court's approach

203. Devrions-nous vraiment faire confiance au blockchain? – ABC National

Dans un article publié récemment dans ABC National, la publication périodique de l’Association du Barreau canadien, Agnese Smith se penche sur la popularité grandissante de la technologie des chaînes de blocs et explore la possibilité que la plateforme soit adoptée à grande échelle, ce qui exigerait d’éliminer les tiers et intermédiaires de confiance, notamment des banquiers, des gouvernements et des réseaux sociaux. À l’heure actuelle, les chaînes de blocs doivent relever plusieurs défis d’ordre technique, comme la capacité de les déployer à grande échelle, qui nuisent à son adoption. Mme Smith aborde les possibilités des blocs de chaînes publiques ou sans permission, qu’elle décrit comme un « moyen d’entreposer des données sur un registre public », qui est validé par plusieurs ordinateurs non reliés dans l’objectif de créer un « un registre sécuritaire, vérifiable et permanent des transactions ». À l’heure actuelle, l’exemple le plus courant des chaînes de blocs sans permission est le bitcoin. Dans l’article, Wendy Gross, coprésidente du groupe de la Technologie d’Osler à Toronto, se prononce sur l’avenir des chaînes de blocs publiques.

204. Digital Art Marketplace Archives - The Angle | Fasken IP

bitcoin, Colored Coins, Digital Art Marketplace, Intellectual Property, NFT

205. Digital Asset Investing for Institutional Investors

This past week bitcoin reached an all time high price soaring past US$43,000 and Tesla announced it has invested $1.5 billion in the cryptocurrency. In addition, many institutional investors are looking at this asset class for the first time. Please join us for a panel discussion where we will help you understand the digital asset investment universe, various investment structures available, key risks and how to manage them.

206. "Digital Balance Sheets Using Digital Currency" by Addison Cameron-Huff

Until the 1930s there were few rules for public company accounting. Even with our thousands of modern rules and standards accounting is a complicated process that is generally post-hoc. Receipts are collected, tabulated and entered. Bank accounts are compared against invoices and income assessed. Digital currency (e.g Bitcoin) could change this.

Bitcoin is an Internet-first currency. It's digital and instantaneous. When you cash a cheque the bank will place a hold on the amount of money because they don't actually receive the money for several days. Digital currency skips the antiquated banking system that relies on reconciling amounts over days.

If companies adopted Bitcoin for all of their income and expenses then they'd always have an accurate view of their finances. There might still be minor issues like pending refunds, etc. but it would be a mostly accurate picture. Instead of relying on forecasting and estimates business owners could know exactly how much money they have. Investors could receive automatically generated balance sheets every month to keep up-to-date on their portfolio companies. Banks could assess risk on a daily basis and offer better terms for loans. Financial fraud might be easier to detect (since there'd be many samples it would be harder to fake the "paper" trail and there would always be a blockchain record). "Bitcoin Accounting" would have hundreds of benefits.

207. "Digital Security for the 2017 Lawyer" by Addison Cameron-Huff

BLOG HOME CONTACT AUTHOR NEXT POST: BITCOIN MAGAZINE ARTICLE ON TOKENIZATION OF REA...

Phone company social engineering leading to losses: https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurashin/2016/12/20/hackers-have-stolen-millions-of-dollars-in-bitcoin-using-only-phone-numbers/#14eeb73f38ba

NEXT: BITCOIN MAGAZINE ARTICLE ON TOKENIZATION OF REA... ►

208. Digital assets | Stake your claim in what’s next | BLG

BLG was also involved in providing regulatory advice on the development of policies and procedures for Canada’s first investment dealer to offer bitcoin futures and was counsel in one of the first cases in Canada where the court grappled with what cryptocurrency is in law, and how cryptocurrencies can be recovered.

Acted for the first investment dealer in Canada to offer bitcoin futures, providing a regulatory framework and developing policies and procedures.

209. Digital dollars: central banks, cyber space and your cash | Insights | Torys LLP

Among the ideas that have emerged, aspirations of what a “new normal” might look like after the pandemic are evolving, with many envisioning a faster shift towards a digital future. Perhaps no developing trend has made bigger headlines than Bitcoin and the emergence of cryptocurrencies.

As we have previously explained, a CBDC would be a new form of central bank currency, liability, unit of account, and medium of exchange—in other words, a digital version of what we know as the dollar today. Unlike cryptocurrencies, like Bitcoin, a CBDC would provide a stable price and would be guaranteed and backed by a central bank. According to the Atlantic Council, over 75 countries are exploring a potential CBDC. The European Central Bank issued a report recognizing that a “digital Euro” is a significant step towards the digitalization of the economy in response to a decline in cash payments, by providing consumers with a legitimate digital alternative. In April, the Bank of England created a CBDC Taskforce to coordinate the exploration of a potential UK CBDC. The United States will start discussions this summer for a report on a potential CBDC with particular consideration to how such an adoption would impact the global economy and monetary system as the world’s reserve currency. China has launched a pilot in certain cities using a cyber yuan. And the Bank of Canada has recently announced that it is well into the development process of a CBDC and is exploring what it might look like.

210. "Don't Put the Accountants in Charge of Bitcoin" by Addison Cameron-Huff

"Don't Put the Accountants in Charge of Bitcoin" by Addison Cameron-Huff

Don't Put the Accountants in Charge of Bitcoin

If your business is considering using Bitcoin then please don't put the accountants in charge (or at least the internal auditors).

In this month's issue of Internal Auditor Magazine (put out by the 180,000 member Institute of Internal Auditors) there's an article titled "Digital Currency Risks" that describes Bitcoin as being used by "10,000" people with "12.8 million" bitcoins in circulation ("worth about US$8 million").

The actual value of the Bitcoin in circulation is about $8 billion because 12.5 million bitcoins x ~$600 USD/BTC = $8 billion not $8 million. The actual number of users is impossible to say (because of the way the protocol works) but there are about 2,000,000 users of the most popular online Bitcoin wallet program and in total certainly far more than 10,000 users. A US company called CoinBase has >35,000 stores signed up to use Bitcion as a method of payment.

211. Dr Robot, à votre service : l’intelligence artificielle en matière de santé

Le 11 mars dernier, la maison de vente Christie’s concluait une vente historique en proposant aux enchères une œuvre-cryptoactif de l’artiste Beeple, uniquement numérique, se concluant par une transaction de 69 millions de dollars en Ether, une cryptomonnaie1. Ce faisant, la célèbre maison d’enchères a mis sous les projecteurs les Non-Fungible Tokens (« NFT »), les jetons non fongibles pour franciser le tout, produits de la chaîne de blocs décentralisée. Si plusieurs soulignent les avantages de cette technologie des cryptoactifs, des risques importants y sont par ailleurs associés2, demandant une vigilance accrue pour tout investissement ou toute transaction impliquant des NFT. Qu’est-ce qu’un NFT ? La distinction entre biens fongibles et non fongibles n’est pas récente. Avant même l’invention de la chaîne de blocs, cette distinction servait déjà à départager ces biens dont la valeur dans l’économie est fondée soit, quant aux biens fongibles, sur leur grande disponibilité, soit, quant aux biens non fongibles, sur leur rareté. Ainsi, un bien fongible est facilement remplaçable par un équivalent ayant la même valeur marchande. Le meilleur exemple est celui de la monnaie, que ce soient les pièces, les billets, la monnaie scripturale ou la monnaie électronique, par exemple le Bitcoin. Au contraire, un bien non fongible est unique, irremplaçable. À ce titre, les œuvres d’art sont des biens non fongibles de par leur unicité ou leur très petit nombre d’exemplaires, de telle sorte que leur valeur est, entre autres, fonction de leur authenticité et de leur provenance. Les NFT sont des cryptoactifs associés à la chaîne de blocs qui reproduisent ce phénomène de rareté. À chaque NFT est associé un identifiant unique qui permet d’en assurer la traçabilité. En plus du marché de l’art, les NFT ont été associés sur le Web à la collecte d’objets virtuels, tels que des cartes de sports et d’autres souvenirs et objets de collection, incluant le premier tweet de l’histoire3. Les NFT peuvent aussi être associés à des biens réels et permettent dans ce cas d’assurer le suivi des échanges et des transactions afférents à ces biens. Déjà en 2019, Ernst & Young avait développé pour un client un système d’identifiants numériques uniques permettant d’assurer le suivi et la gestion de la collection de vins de grands crus de ce client4. Plusieurs projets s’appuient sur des cryptomonnaies, comme l’Ether, pour créer les NFT. Ce genre de cryptomonnaie est programmable et permet d’enchâsser des métadonnées par l’intermédiaire du code qui devient la clé assurant le suivi de biens tels des œuvres d’art ou d’autres biens de valeur. Quels sont les risques associés aux NFT ? Si plusieurs vantaient les avantages des NFT, notamment pour assurer une plus grande traçabilité quant à la provenance des biens échangés par transactions numériques, force est de constater que la bulle spéculative des dernières semaines a, contrairement aux attentes, engendré de nouvelles occasions de fraudes et des dérives quant aux droits associés aux œuvres échangées sur Internet. Un marché non réglementé? Même s’il n’existe pour l’instant aucun cadre législatif qui réglemente spécifiquement les transactions de cryptoactifs, les vendeurs et les acheteurs de NFT sont tout de même assujettis, notamment, aux lois et réglementations encadrant actuellement la distribution des produits et services financiers5, aux lois sur les valeurs mobilières6, à la Loi sur les entreprises de services monétaires7 et aux lois fiscales8. Un NFT, une valeur mobilière ? Dès janvier 2020, les Autorités canadiennes en valeurs mobilières (ACVM) ont identifié les « marchandises » cryptoactifs comme des biens pouvant être assujettis aux lois et aux règlements en valeurs mobilières. Ainsi, les plateformes qui gèrent et hébergent des NFT pour le compte de leurs utilisateurs exercent des activités encadrées par les lois applicables au commerce de valeurs mobilières, dans la mesure où elles conservent la possession ou le co[Truncated to 4000 Characters]

212. Dr. Robot at your service: artificial intelligence in healthcare

On March 11, 2021, Christie’s auction house made a landmark sale by auctioning off an entirely digital artwork by the artist Beeple, a $69 million transaction in Ether, a cryptocurrency.1 In doing so, the famous auction house put non-fungible tokens (“NFT”), the product of a decentralized blockchain, in the spotlight. While many extol the benefits of such crypto asset technology, there are also significant risks associated with it,2 requiring greater vigilance when dealing with any investment or transaction involving NFTs. What is an NFT? The distinction between fungible and non-fungible assets is not new. Prior to the invention of blockchain, the distinction was used to differentiate assets based on their availability, fungible assets being highly available and non-fungible assets, scarce. Thus, a fungible asset can easily be replaced by an equivalent asset with the same market value. The best example is money, whether it be coins, notes, deposit money or digital money, such as Bitcoin. On the contrary, a non-fungible asset is unique and irreplaceable. As such, works of art are non-fungible assets in that they are either unique or very few copies of them exist. Their value is a result of their authenticity and provenance, among other things. NFTs are crypto assets associated with blockchain technology that replicate the phenomenon of scarcity. Each NFT is associated with a unique identifier to ensure traceability. In addition to the art market, online, NFTs have been associated with the collection of virtual items, such as sports cards and other memorabilia and collectibles, including the first tweet ever written.3 NFTs can also be associated with tangible goods, in which case they can be used to track exchanges and transactions related to such goods. In 2019, Ernst & Young developed a system of unique digital identifiers for a client to track and manage its collection of fine wines.4 Many projects rely on cryptocurrencies, such as Ether, to create NFTs. This type of cryptocurrency is programmable and allows for metadata to be embedded through a code that becomes the key to tracking assets, such as works of art or other valuables. What are the risks associated with NFTs? Although many praise the benefits of NFTs, in particular the increased traceability of the origin of goods exchanged through digital transactions, it has become clear that the speculative bubble of the past few weeks has, contrary to expectations, resulted in new opportunities for fraud and abuse of the rights associated with works exchanged online. An unregulated market? While there is currently no legislative framework that specifically regulates crypto asset transactions, NFT buyers and sellers are still subject to the laws and regulations currently governing the distribution of financial products and services5, the securities laws6, the Money-Services Business Act7 and the tax laws8. Is an NFT a security? In January 2020, the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) identified crypto asset “commodities” as assets that may be subject to securities laws and regulations. Thus, platforms that manage and host NFTs on behalf of their users engage in activities that are governed by the laws that apply to securities trading, as long as they retain possession or control of NFTs. On the contrary, a platform will not be subject to regulatory oversight if: “the underlying crypto asset itself is not a security or derivative; and the contract or instrument for the purchase, sale or delivery of a crypto asset results in an obligation to make immediate delivery of the crypto asset, and is settled by the immediate delivery of the crypto asset to the Platform’s user according to the Platform’s typical commercial practice.”9 Fraud10 NFTs don’t protect collectors and investors from fraud and theft. Among the documented risks, there are fake websites robbing investors of their cryptocurrencies, thefts and/or disappearances of NFTs hosted on platforms, and copyright and tradem[Truncated to 4000 Characters]

213. Droit fiscal | McCarthy Tétrault

Miners Be Aware:  New GST/HST Measures Announced for Cryptoasset Mining

214. Décision de la Commission des Valeurs Mobilières de l’Ontario (CVMO) quant à l’émission de cryptomonnaie (ICO) de Token Founder Inc. : le Canada devient-il une juridiction favorable aux ICO? - Langlois avocats

Opération : première émission de cryptomonnaie de 1 000 000 000  de jetons numériques effectuée aux termes d’un contrat intelligent sur Ethereum Blockchain (chacun, un « jeton FNDR ») au moyen d’un placement privé réalisé selon les modalités d’une dispense de prospectus relative à la notice d’offre prévue à l’article 2.9 du Règlement 45-106.

Politiques : Token devra établir, gérer et appliquer des politiques et des procédures visant à établir un système de contrôle et un encadrement suffisants pour gérer les risques associés à son entreprise, conformément à des pratiques commerciales prudentes, y compris en ce qui a trait à Ethereum Blockchain, à la cybersécurité et aux conflits d’intérêt entre Token et ses investisseurs.

215. E-commerce Businesses Now Face PST Registration in Saskatchewan | McCarthy Tétrault

Miners Be Aware:  New GST/HST Measures Announced for Cryptoasset Mining

216. ESG and Sustainability | McCarthy

SATO Technologies Corp. signs a loan agreement with Sygnum Bank AG for C$4M to finance bitcoin mining equipment

217. "Easy Backup Script for a MySQL DB" by Addison Cameron-Huff

BLOG HOME CONTACT AUTHOR NEXT POST: BITCOIN LAWYERS OF CANADA”

NEXT: BITCOIN LAWYERS OF CANADA ►

218. Eliane Ellbogen, Author at The Angle | Fasken IP

bitcoin, Colored Coins, Digital Art Marketplace, Intellectual Property, NFT

Earlier this year, something called an “NFT” sold for $69 million USD at auction.[1] This was likely the first time most people had ever heard the term “NFT.” From that point forward, discussions of various NFTs were everywhere; as a result, they entered mainstream consciousness, much like Bitcoin had nearly ten years ago. In fact, NFT or “non-fungible token” was named word of the year for 2021.[2]

219. Elly Seddon | Financial Services Lawyer Vancouver | BLG

Speaker, "Bitcoins: What Are They and What Are the Legal Implications of Using Them?" BLG U, May 2014

220. Emma Houldsworth | Knowledge Lawyer | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

Cryptoassets and sanctions: How easy is it to freeze cryptoassets?

221. En quoi la flambée du bitcoin pourrait-elle être le signe annonciateur d’une révolution monétaire? –

En quoi la flambée du bitcoin pourrait-elle être le signe annonciateur d’une révolution monétaire? –

En quoi la flambée du bitcoin pourrait-elle être le signe annonciateur d’une révolution monétaire? – CBC News

Le commerce des cryptomonnaies – comme le bitcoin, l’ether et la nano – a récemment gagné en popularité, grâce à une forte augmentation du cours du bitcoin : d’environ 9 000 $ par pièce il y a un an, il a atteint un sommet de 58 000 $ en février 2021. Certains investisseurs considèrent les cryptomonnaies comme la voie de l’avenir, tandis que d’autres observateurs financiers mettent plutôt en garde contre la nature spéculative de tels investissements. Dans un article publié sur le site Web de CBC News, le journaliste Reid Southwick propose un examen approfondi des arguments des deux camps concernant les cryptomonnaies. Il a interrogé de nombreux acteurs du secteur, que ce soit un « banquier du bitcoin » autoproclamé ou un analyste de marché dans une société de courtage en devises. L’un des experts que Reid Southwick a consultés est le conseiller spécial d’Osler et ancien gouverneur de la Banque du Canada, Stephen Poloz. Dans l’article, Stephen s’inscrit en faux contre l’argument selon lequel les cryptomonnaies devraient être considérées comme une solution de rechange à la monnaie émise par le gouvernement.

« Même les professionnels qui négocient des bitcoins utilisent souvent le mot “parier” plutôt qu’“investir”, ce qui suggère que le bitcoin est largement volatile ; le bitcoin est vraiment proche du jeu par opposition à un investissement réel, puisque l’actif lui-même n’a aucune valeur intrinsèque, a déclaré Stephen. Mais cela ne veut pas dire qu’il ne peut pas devenir “grand public”.

Il poursuit en expliquant que le fait que la Bourse de Toronto ait récemment inscrit deux fonds négociés en bourse de bitcoin sur la liste devrait être considéré comme une étape importante, car cela signifie que “les investisseurs peuvent investir dans le bitcoin dans le cadre d’un système de contrôle réglementé”. Cela dit, il soutient que les opérations en bitcoin prennent trop de temps à traiter et qu’il n’y a pas de valeur fondamentale derrière les pièces – ce qui rend leur prix susceptible de fluctuations.

222. Essential Corporate News – Week ending August 12, 2022 | Belgium | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

This follows the publication by the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce, in November 2018, of its Legal Statement on the Status of Cryptoassets and Smart Contracts (which Statement expressed the view that cryptoassets were property and smart contracts were contracts under English law) and the publication, on April 22, 2021, of its Digital Dispute Resolution Rules to be incorporated into on-chain digital relationships and smart contracts. They allow for arbitral or expert dispute resolution in very short periods, for arbitrators to implement decisions directly on-chain using a private key, and for optional anonymity of the parties.

The focus is on equity or debt securities which are constituted or evidenced by reference to a blockchain or distributed ledger. Certain rules of English law govern how traditional securities can be issued, and how they can be transferred from one person to another, with some securities also having to be registered. The questions in the consultation paper focus on whether (and if so how) English law might apply these rules to digital securities and how blockchain and DLT might legally be used for any necessary registers. They relate to issuance of digital securities, stapling of rights and interests to a cryptoasset or other entry in a blockchain or DLT-based system, transfers of digital securities and corporate requirements for UK companies (for example, can a blockchain or DLT-based system serve as a register of members or debenture holders for the purposes of compliance with sections 113 and 743 Companies Act 2006).

223. Essential Corporate News – Week ending August 12, 2022 | France | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

This follows the publication by the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce, in November 2018, of its Legal Statement on the Status of Cryptoassets and Smart Contracts (which Statement expressed the view that cryptoassets were property and smart contracts were contracts under English law) and the publication, on April 22, 2021, of its Digital Dispute Resolution Rules to be incorporated into on-chain digital relationships and smart contracts. They allow for arbitral or expert dispute resolution in very short periods, for arbitrators to implement decisions directly on-chain using a private key, and for optional anonymity of the parties.

The focus is on equity or debt securities which are constituted or evidenced by reference to a blockchain or distributed ledger. Certain rules of English law govern how traditional securities can be issued, and how they can be transferred from one person to another, with some securities also having to be registered. The questions in the consultation paper focus on whether (and if so how) English law might apply these rules to digital securities and how blockchain and DLT might legally be used for any necessary registers. They relate to issuance of digital securities, stapling of rights and interests to a cryptoasset or other entry in a blockchain or DLT-based system, transfers of digital securities and corporate requirements for UK companies (for example, can a blockchain or DLT-based system serve as a register of members or debenture holders for the purposes of compliance with sections 113 and 743 Companies Act 2006).

224. Essential Corporate News – Week ending August 12, 2022 | Greece | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

This follows the publication by the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce, in November 2018, of its Legal Statement on the Status of Cryptoassets and Smart Contracts (which Statement expressed the view that cryptoassets were property and smart contracts were contracts under English law) and the publication, on April 22, 2021, of its Digital Dispute Resolution Rules to be incorporated into on-chain digital relationships and smart contracts. They allow for arbitral or expert dispute resolution in very short periods, for arbitrators to implement decisions directly on-chain using a private key, and for optional anonymity of the parties.

The focus is on equity or debt securities which are constituted or evidenced by reference to a blockchain or distributed ledger. Certain rules of English law govern how traditional securities can be issued, and how they can be transferred from one person to another, with some securities also having to be registered. The questions in the consultation paper focus on whether (and if so how) English law might apply these rules to digital securities and how blockchain and DLT might legally be used for any necessary registers. They relate to issuance of digital securities, stapling of rights and interests to a cryptoasset or other entry in a blockchain or DLT-based system, transfers of digital securities and corporate requirements for UK companies (for example, can a blockchain or DLT-based system serve as a register of members or debenture holders for the purposes of compliance with sections 113 and 743 Companies Act 2006).

225. Essential Corporate News – Week ending August 12, 2022 | Italy | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

This follows the publication by the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce, in November 2018, of its Legal Statement on the Status of Cryptoassets and Smart Contracts (which Statement expressed the view that cryptoassets were property and smart contracts were contracts under English law) and the publication, on April 22, 2021, of its Digital Dispute Resolution Rules to be incorporated into on-chain digital relationships and smart contracts. They allow for arbitral or expert dispute resolution in very short periods, for arbitrators to implement decisions directly on-chain using a private key, and for optional anonymity of the parties.

The focus is on equity or debt securities which are constituted or evidenced by reference to a blockchain or distributed ledger. Certain rules of English law govern how traditional securities can be issued, and how they can be transferred from one person to another, with some securities also having to be registered. The questions in the consultation paper focus on whether (and if so how) English law might apply these rules to digital securities and how blockchain and DLT might legally be used for any necessary registers. They relate to issuance of digital securities, stapling of rights and interests to a cryptoasset or other entry in a blockchain or DLT-based system, transfers of digital securities and corporate requirements for UK companies (for example, can a blockchain or DLT-based system serve as a register of members or debenture holders for the purposes of compliance with sections 113 and 743 Companies Act 2006).

226. Essential Corporate News – Week ending August 12, 2022 | Luxembourg | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

This follows the publication by the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce, in November 2018, of its Legal Statement on the Status of Cryptoassets and Smart Contracts (which Statement expressed the view that cryptoassets were property and smart contracts were contracts under English law) and the publication, on April 22, 2021, of its Digital Dispute Resolution Rules to be incorporated into on-chain digital relationships and smart contracts. They allow for arbitral or expert dispute resolution in very short periods, for arbitrators to implement decisions directly on-chain using a private key, and for optional anonymity of the parties.

The focus is on equity or debt securities which are constituted or evidenced by reference to a blockchain or distributed ledger. Certain rules of English law govern how traditional securities can be issued, and how they can be transferred from one person to another, with some securities also having to be registered. The questions in the consultation paper focus on whether (and if so how) English law might apply these rules to digital securities and how blockchain and DLT might legally be used for any necessary registers. They relate to issuance of digital securities, stapling of rights and interests to a cryptoasset or other entry in a blockchain or DLT-based system, transfers of digital securities and corporate requirements for UK companies (for example, can a blockchain or DLT-based system serve as a register of members or debenture holders for the purposes of compliance with sections 113 and 743 Companies Act 2006).

227. Essential Corporate News – Week ending August 12, 2022 | Middle East | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

This follows the publication by the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce, in November 2018, of its Legal Statement on the Status of Cryptoassets and Smart Contracts (which Statement expressed the view that cryptoassets were property and smart contracts were contracts under English law) and the publication, on April 22, 2021, of its Digital Dispute Resolution Rules to be incorporated into on-chain digital relationships and smart contracts. They allow for arbitral or expert dispute resolution in very short periods, for arbitrators to implement decisions directly on-chain using a private key, and for optional anonymity of the parties.

The focus is on equity or debt securities which are constituted or evidenced by reference to a blockchain or distributed ledger. Certain rules of English law govern how traditional securities can be issued, and how they can be transferred from one person to another, with some securities also having to be registered. The questions in the consultation paper focus on whether (and if so how) English law might apply these rules to digital securities and how blockchain and DLT might legally be used for any necessary registers. They relate to issuance of digital securities, stapling of rights and interests to a cryptoasset or other entry in a blockchain or DLT-based system, transfers of digital securities and corporate requirements for UK companies (for example, can a blockchain or DLT-based system serve as a register of members or debenture holders for the purposes of compliance with sections 113 and 743 Companies Act 2006).

228. Essential Corporate News – Week ending August 12, 2022 | Monaco | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

This follows the publication by the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce, in November 2018, of its Legal Statement on the Status of Cryptoassets and Smart Contracts (which Statement expressed the view that cryptoassets were property and smart contracts were contracts under English law) and the publication, on April 22, 2021, of its Digital Dispute Resolution Rules to be incorporated into on-chain digital relationships and smart contracts. They allow for arbitral or expert dispute resolution in very short periods, for arbitrators to implement decisions directly on-chain using a private key, and for optional anonymity of the parties.

The focus is on equity or debt securities which are constituted or evidenced by reference to a blockchain or distributed ledger. Certain rules of English law govern how traditional securities can be issued, and how they can be transferred from one person to another, with some securities also having to be registered. The questions in the consultation paper focus on whether (and if so how) English law might apply these rules to digital securities and how blockchain and DLT might legally be used for any necessary registers. They relate to issuance of digital securities, stapling of rights and interests to a cryptoasset or other entry in a blockchain or DLT-based system, transfers of digital securities and corporate requirements for UK companies (for example, can a blockchain or DLT-based system serve as a register of members or debenture holders for the purposes of compliance with sections 113 and 743 Companies Act 2006).

229. Essential Corporate News – Week ending August 12, 2022 | Netherlands | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

This follows the publication by the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce, in November 2018, of its Legal Statement on the Status of Cryptoassets and Smart Contracts (which Statement expressed the view that cryptoassets were property and smart contracts were contracts under English law) and the publication, on April 22, 2021, of its Digital Dispute Resolution Rules to be incorporated into on-chain digital relationships and smart contracts. They allow for arbitral or expert dispute resolution in very short periods, for arbitrators to implement decisions directly on-chain using a private key, and for optional anonymity of the parties.

The focus is on equity or debt securities which are constituted or evidenced by reference to a blockchain or distributed ledger. Certain rules of English law govern how traditional securities can be issued, and how they can be transferred from one person to another, with some securities also having to be registered. The questions in the consultation paper focus on whether (and if so how) English law might apply these rules to digital securities and how blockchain and DLT might legally be used for any necessary registers. They relate to issuance of digital securities, stapling of rights and interests to a cryptoasset or other entry in a blockchain or DLT-based system, transfers of digital securities and corporate requirements for UK companies (for example, can a blockchain or DLT-based system serve as a register of members or debenture holders for the purposes of compliance with sections 113 and 743 Companies Act 2006).

230. Essential Corporate News – Week ending August 12, 2022 | Nordic Region | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

This follows the publication by the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce, in November 2018, of its Legal Statement on the Status of Cryptoassets and Smart Contracts (which Statement expressed the view that cryptoassets were property and smart contracts were contracts under English law) and the publication, on April 22, 2021, of its Digital Dispute Resolution Rules to be incorporated into on-chain digital relationships and smart contracts. They allow for arbitral or expert dispute resolution in very short periods, for arbitrators to implement decisions directly on-chain using a private key, and for optional anonymity of the parties.

The focus is on equity or debt securities which are constituted or evidenced by reference to a blockchain or distributed ledger. Certain rules of English law govern how traditional securities can be issued, and how they can be transferred from one person to another, with some securities also having to be registered. The questions in the consultation paper focus on whether (and if so how) English law might apply these rules to digital securities and how blockchain and DLT might legally be used for any necessary registers. They relate to issuance of digital securities, stapling of rights and interests to a cryptoasset or other entry in a blockchain or DLT-based system, transfers of digital securities and corporate requirements for UK companies (for example, can a blockchain or DLT-based system serve as a register of members or debenture holders for the purposes of compliance with sections 113 and 743 Companies Act 2006).

231. Essential Corporate News – Week ending August 12, 2022 | Pakistan | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

This follows the publication by the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce, in November 2018, of its Legal Statement on the Status of Cryptoassets and Smart Contracts (which Statement expressed the view that cryptoassets were property and smart contracts were contracts under English law) and the publication, on April 22, 2021, of its Digital Dispute Resolution Rules to be incorporated into on-chain digital relationships and smart contracts. They allow for arbitral or expert dispute resolution in very short periods, for arbitrators to implement decisions directly on-chain using a private key, and for optional anonymity of the parties.

The focus is on equity or debt securities which are constituted or evidenced by reference to a blockchain or distributed ledger. Certain rules of English law govern how traditional securities can be issued, and how they can be transferred from one person to another, with some securities also having to be registered. The questions in the consultation paper focus on whether (and if so how) English law might apply these rules to digital securities and how blockchain and DLT might legally be used for any necessary registers. They relate to issuance of digital securities, stapling of rights and interests to a cryptoasset or other entry in a blockchain or DLT-based system, transfers of digital securities and corporate requirements for UK companies (for example, can a blockchain or DLT-based system serve as a register of members or debenture holders for the purposes of compliance with sections 113 and 743 Companies Act 2006).

232. Essential Corporate News – Week ending August 12, 2022 | Poland | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

This follows the publication by the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce, in November 2018, of its Legal Statement on the Status of Cryptoassets and Smart Contracts (which Statement expressed the view that cryptoassets were property and smart contracts were contracts under English law) and the publication, on April 22, 2021, of its Digital Dispute Resolution Rules to be incorporated into on-chain digital relationships and smart contracts. They allow for arbitral or expert dispute resolution in very short periods, for arbitrators to implement decisions directly on-chain using a private key, and for optional anonymity of the parties.

The focus is on equity or debt securities which are constituted or evidenced by reference to a blockchain or distributed ledger. Certain rules of English law govern how traditional securities can be issued, and how they can be transferred from one person to another, with some securities also having to be registered. The questions in the consultation paper focus on whether (and if so how) English law might apply these rules to digital securities and how blockchain and DLT might legally be used for any necessary registers. They relate to issuance of digital securities, stapling of rights and interests to a cryptoasset or other entry in a blockchain or DLT-based system, transfers of digital securities and corporate requirements for UK companies (for example, can a blockchain or DLT-based system serve as a register of members or debenture holders for the purposes of compliance with sections 113 and 743 Companies Act 2006).

233. Essential Corporate News – Week ending August 5, 2022 | Pakistan | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

In PS22/10 the FCA sets out its final policy and Handbook rules for high-risk investments subject to its financial promotion rules and for firms communicating and approving financial promotions. The FCA also summarises the feedback it received to Consultation Paper 22/2 ‘Strengthening our financial promotion rules for high risk investments, including cryptoassets’ (CP22/2).

234. Estates and Trusts | McCarthy

SATO Technologies Corp. signs a loan agreement with Sygnum Bank AG for C$4M to finance bitcoin mining equipment

235. Ether Capital - Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP

On March 15, 2021, Ether Capital Corporation completed an offering of units consisting of one common share and one-half of one common share purchase warrant. Concurrently, Ether Capital also completed an unbrokered private placement of units for gross proceeds of $28.75 million. The offering was led by a syndicate of underwriters, including Canaccord Genuity Corp., CIBC World Markets Inc., Cormark Securities Inc., PI Financial Corp. and M Partners Inc. Proceeds from the offering will be used to execute Ether Capital’s business strategy by investing in projects, protocols, technologies and businesses that leverage the Ethereum ecosystem and Web 3 technologies.

Ether Capital is a Toronto-based technology firm focused on providing public market exposure to the Ethereum and Web 3 ecosystem.

236. Ether Capital - Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt S.E.N.C.R.L./s.r.l.

Le 15 mars 2021, Ether Capital Corporation a réalisé un placement d’unités : chacune d’elles était constituée d’une action ordinaire et d’un demi-bon de souscription d’actions ordinaires. Ether Capital a aussi réalisé simultanément, sans l’entremise d’un courtier, un placement privé d’unités, pour un produit brut de 28,75 M$. Le placement a été dirigé par un syndicat de preneurs fermes, composé notamment de Corporation Canaccord Genuity, de Marchés mondiaux CIBC inc., de Cormark Securities Inc., de PI Financial Corp. et de M Partners Inc. Le produit du placement servira à l’exécution de la stratégie d’affaires d’Ether Capital, laquelle comprend des investissements dans des projets, des protocoles, des technologies et des entreprises qui tirent profit de l’écosystème Ethereum et des technologies Web 3.

Ether Capital est une société technologique établie à Toronto qui veut mettre de l’avant sur le marché public des entreprises de l’écosystème Ethereum et Web 3.

237. Ether Capital Corporation - Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP

On February 23, 2018, Ethereum Capital Inc. completed its private placement of subscription receipts for aggregate gross proceeds of $45 million. The offering was co-lead by Canaccord Genuity and CIBC Capital Markets and included GMP Securities. The proceeds were escrowed pending completion of a proposed reverse take-over bid involving Movit Media Corp.

On April 18, 2018, Ether Capital Corporation (formerly named Movit Media Corp.) (Ether Capital) announced that it has completed its previously announced reverse take-over transaction pursuant to which it has acquired all of the issued and outstanding shares of Ethereum Capital Inc. by way of a three-cornered amalgamation. As a result, subscription receipt holders received listed common shares in the capital of Ether Capital.

The completion of this transaction and commencement of public trading represents a critical step in Ether Capital’s mission. This will provide investors with the opportunity to invest in the first publicly listed company focused solely on the Ethereum ecosystem and to help drive industry-shifting disruptive technologies.

Ether Capital is a Toronto-based technology company whose objective is to become the central business and investment hub for the Ethereum ecosystem. Ether Capital will invest in Ethereum’s native utility token “Ether” as a strategic asset, and selectively invest in or acquire Ethereum-based businesses.

238. Ether Capital Corporation - Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt S.E.N.C.R.L./s.r.l.

Le 23 février 2018, Ethereum Capital Inc. a effectué son placement privé de reçus de souscription, pour un produit brut total de 45 millions de dollars. Le placement a été codirigé par Canaccord Genuity et CIBC Marchés mondiaux, et comptait GMP Valeurs Mobilières. Le produit est entiercé jusqu’à l’achèvement de la prise de contrôle inversée proposée visant Movit Media Corp.

Le 18 avril 2018, Ether Capital Corporation (anciennement appelée Movit Media Corp.) (Ether Capital) a annoncé la conclusion de son opération de prise de contrôle inversée qui avait été annoncée précédemment dans le cadre de laquelle elle a acquis la totalité des actions émises et en circulation d’Ethereum Capital Inc. au moyen d’une fusion triangulaire. Par conséquent, des porteurs de reçus de souscription ont reçu des actions ordinaires inscrites à la cote du capital d’Ether Capital.

La réalisation de cette opération et le début de la négociation publique constituent une étape cruciale de la mission d’Ether Capital. Cette étape permettra aux investisseurs d’investir dans la première société cotée en Bourse consacrée exclusivement à l’écosystème Ethereum et contribuera à la promotion de technologies perturbatrices qui font évoluer l’industrie.

Ether Capital est une société technologique torontoise dont l’objectif est de devenir le centre d’affaires et d’investissements pour l’écosystème Ethereum. Ether Capital investira dans le « jeton de service » (utility token) d’origine « ether » d’Ethereum à titre d’actif stratégique, et investira de façon sélective dans des entreprises fondées sur l’Ethereum ou en fera l’acquisition.

239. Events | McCarthy

Raising Capital through Cryptoassets - The State of Security Token Offerings

240. Events | McCarthy Tétrault

Raising Capital through Cryptoassets - The State of Security Token Offerings

241. Evolving capital markets regulatory enforcement

This focus on greater market conduct regulation follows an announcement by the OSC on July 16, 2020 of a settlement with a Toronto-based cryptoasset trading platform that admitted to having developed and deployed an algorithm to assist in reporting inflated trading activity. This is the first settlement involving alleged manipulative trading on a crypto trading platform. It is also the first case alleging reprisals against a whistleblower under the Act since protections for employee whistleblowers were adopted in 2016. See also our “New opportunities and new challenges for Cryptoasset Trading Platforms [A1]” article.

242. Experience Search | McCarthy

Gemini Trust Company acts as sub-custodian in respect of The Bitcoin Fund

243. Express words are required in exclusion clauses to exclude claims for wasted expenditure | Inside Disputes | Global law firm | Norton Rose Fulbright

Cryptoassets

244. FATF’s Take on Digital Assets

volatile than cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ether as they derive their market value from some underlying external asset, such as

245. FATF’s Take on Digital Assets: Updated Guidance and Recommendations | Bennett Jones

Stablecoins, such as Tether and DAI, have become increasingly popular among cryptocurrency users in recent years, and are less volatile than cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ether as they derive their market value from some underlying external asset, such as gold or the U.S. dollar.

246. FCA consults on cryptoassets regulation | Gowling WLG

FCA consults on cryptoassets regulation | Gowling WLG

FCA CONSULTS ON CRYPTOASSETS REGULATION

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has published its Consultation Paper (CP19/3: Guidance on Cryptoassets) which sets out guidance on how cryptoassets can be subject to FCA regulation. Our Financial Services Regulatory experts summarise the FCA's expectations and highlight the key considerations for firms.

The Guidance seeks to clarify where different categories of cryptoasset tokens fall in relation to the FCA's regulatory perimeter, i.e. the boundary that separates regulated and unregulated financial services activities. Activities which fall within the regulatory perimeter are regulated and require authorisation from the FCA, and in limited circumstances the Prudential Regulation Authority, before they can be carried out. Carrying out regulated activities without the relevant authorisations may constitute a criminal offence.

Types of Cryptoassets

247. FCA publishes Final Rules on extension of the SMCR | Gowling WLG

Cryptoassets: The FCA further clarifies which tokens fall within the FCA's regulatory perimeter through Final Guidance

248. FCA's regulatory perimeter on Cryptoassets | Gowling WLG

FCA's regulatory perimeter on Cryptoassets | Gowling WLG

CRYPTOASSETS: THE FCA FURTHER CLARIFIES WHICH TOKENS FALL WITHIN THE FCA'S REGULATORY PERIMETER THROUGH FINAL GUIDANCE

The Financial Conduct Authority ("FCA") this month published Final Guidance on Cryptoassets in an attempt to help firms understand whether, and the extent to which, their cryptoasset activities fall under FCA regulation (PS 19/22: Guidance on Cryptoassets) ("the Final Guidance").

In this Insight, Sushil Kuner from our Financial Services Regulatory team explores how the FCA's guidance on cryptoassets has evolved since publication of its Consultation Paper on the same earlier this year (CP 19/3) ("the CP"). In particular, she explains the FCA's new taxonomy of cryptoassets and why authorised firms using unregulated cryptoassets need to be mindful of certain regulatory requirements which may still apply.

The Final Guidance seeks to clarify where different categories of cryptoassets fall in relation to the FCA's regulatory perimeter, i.e. the boundary that separates regulated and unregulated financial services activities. Activities which fall within the regulatory perimeter are regulated and require authorisation from the FCA, and in limited circumstances the Prudential Regulation Authority, before they can be carried out. Carrying out regulated activities without the relevant authorisations may constitute a criminal offence.

249. FINTRAC Guidance on Red Flag Indicators Associated With Virtual Currency Transactions | McCarthy Tétrault

A client transferring Bitcoin in large volumes in exchange for privacy coins.

250. "FINTRAC Will Regulate "Virtual Currencies" in Canada" by Addison Cameron-Huff

BLOG HOME CONTACT AUTHOR NEXT POST: BEING A LAWYER WHO ACCEPTS BITCOIN

The effect of this will be to make operating some types of Bitcoin businesses considerably more expensive because anyone who is "dealing" will have to undergo the MSB registration process, implement a compliance regime, etc.

NEXT: BEING A LAWYER WHO ACCEPTS BITCOIN