Uniswap founder Hayden Adams announced on Wednesday that the SEC had sent a Wells notice to Uniswap Labs, requesting compliance with law enforcement.
Hayden Adams, the founder of Uniswap, stated: “I’m not surprised. I just feel uncomfortable and disappointed, but we’re ready to face the challenge. I believe that the products we provide are legal and we are doing the right thing historically.”
Adams also expressed dissatisfaction with the SEC focusing on dealing with companies like Uniswap and Coinbase instead of addressing cases like FTX.
Information about law enforcement actions against Uniswap comes amid the SEC’s increasing focus on controlling cryptocurrency activities, especially with major companies like Coinbase, Ripple, and Binance.
Marvin Ammori, Legal Director of Uniswap Labs, described the SEC’s warning about law enforcement as “another abuse of power” and deemed the Wells notice “regrettable, but not surprising.” He also emphasized that Uniswap’s products comply with U.S. law and seek cooperation with reasonable regulations for cryptocurrencies, rather than continuing the abuse of power. Uniswap Labs is prepared to fight against this abuse and believes they will prevail.
Uniswap has grown so much that it is quite normal for it to be accused of money laundering, violating anti-terrorism laws, etc., the usual accusations.I have read through the link and what the Uniswap founder tweeted but I still do not know the reason SEC wants to be in lawsuit with Uniswap. We do not know yet if it is money laundering and terrorism financing or not. It can be more of a way that SEC want the government to have more control. According to the news, SEC said they have been investigating Uniswap for years about how it is functioning without intermediary. Or is there something I still do no understand about the lawsuit?
I have read through the link and what the Uniswap founder tweeted but I still do not know the reason SEC wants to be in lawsuit with Uniswap. We do not know yet if it is money laundering and terrorism financing or not. It can be more of a way that SEC want the government to have more control. According to the news, SEC said they have been investigating Uniswap for years about how it is functioning without intermediary. Or is there something I still do no understand about the lawsuit?Indeed, as you mentioned, there are no clear charges yet. I guessed that the charges would be money laundering and violating anti-terrorism laws, as was usual in previous exchange charges.
“I am confident that the products we offer are legal and that our business is on the right side of history. But it has been clear for some time that instead of working to create clear and informed rules... The SEC decided to focus on attacking long-time good players like Uniswap and Coinbase. All while letting bad actors like FTX through.”From what he said, it appears that the US government is questioning the legality of Uniswap products and has no clear accusations yet. I expect they want to pass the message that all centralized and decentralized exchanges are under the eyes of the government.
So now SEC is also after non-centralized service (at least not as centralized as CEX), which isn't surprising at this point.This is not the first, remember Etherdelta (https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2018-258)? You've probably heard of it but just in case, it's one of the pioneer non-custodial exchanges. I think the founder abandoned it after the lawsuit.
So now SEC is also after non-centralized service (at least not as centralized as CEX), which isn't surprising at this point.This is not the first, remember Etherdelta (https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2018-258)? You've probably heard of it but just in case, it's one of the pioneer non-custodial exchanges. I think the founder abandoned it after the lawsuit.
The Uniswap case is going to be interesting. I doubt they would win the case against SEC and they will be unmasked as not a 100% DEX. Many of the old users are aware of that already but the new users might be disappointed if they found out.
1. Do you think this can hamper Uniswap in doing its business and will it affects its standing in the market?
2. Do you think SEC is just doing its job and is really doing things for the sake of protecting the small investors and users?
3. Which can be the next platform to experience the power of SEC and be facing possible charges?
So now SEC is also after non-centralized service (at least not as centralized as CEX), which isn't surprising at this point.This is not the first, remember Etherdelta (https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2018-258)? You've probably heard of it but just in case, it's one of the pioneer non-custodial exchanges. I think the founder abandoned it after the lawsuit.
The Uniswap case is going to be interesting. I doubt they would win the case against SEC and they will be unmasked as not a 100% DEX. Many of the old users are aware of that already but the new users might be disappointed if they found out.
Their lawyers and funding can drag this out but I still think it's going to be a waste of money. Best scenario for them is probably to agree to a settlement deal. Even if we don't know all the details, it's impossible that Uniswap never allowed US citizens to use their platform but, yeah, it's up to the SEC to prove that.So now SEC is also after non-centralized service (at least not as centralized as CEX), which isn't surprising at this point.This is not the first, remember Etherdelta (https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2018-258)? You've probably heard of it but just in case, it's one of the pioneer non-custodial exchanges. I think the founder abandoned it after the lawsuit.
The Uniswap case is going to be interesting. I doubt they would win the case against SEC and they will be unmasked as not a 100% DEX. Many of the old users are aware of that already but the new users might be disappointed if they found out.
Thanks for the reminder, i totally forget that. But unlike Etherdelta case, Uniswap is more popular and Uniswap Labs have decent funding and should able to hire decent lawyer/legal team. So there should be possibility they can repel SEC's sue attempt.
~That's true but if the exchange is big enough and if authorities thinks it violated anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism financing, who knows what they'll do to get them.
if the CEOs are just unknown and the website host is offshore i think the SEC will have no way of reaching out someone that is unknown and so they will not be able to sue the CEO nor the owner.
2. Do you think SEC is just doing its job and is really doing things for the sake of protecting the small investors and users?It is hard to say, i know many of these services are into shady things, and some of them willfully break AML laws and other regulatory requirements, a lot of them also operate without acquiring the necessary license to operate. However, at some point i think the SEC and the U.S government are simply after crypto services and crypto privacy solutions, it is kind of looking like witch-hunting now.
if the CEOs are just unknown and the website host is offshore i think the SEC will have no way of reaching out someone that is unknown and so they will not be able to sue the CEO nor the owner.Yeah, but they can easily crack it down, just like what happened to these shut mixers in the past for the reason of being accused of money laundering regardless if the site is in clearnet or darknet.
...
a website with .onion i think will not be reached by the extended hands of SEC.
Thanks for the reminder, i totally forget that. But unlike Etherdelta case, Uniswap is more popular and Uniswap Labs have decent funding and should able to hire decent lawyer/legal team. So there should be possibility they can repel SEC's sue attempt.Their lawyers and funding can drag this out but I still think it's going to be a waste of money. Best scenario for them is probably to agree to a settlement deal. Even if we don't know all the details, it's impossible that Uniswap never allowed US citizens to use their platform but, yeah, it's up to the SEC to prove that.
It's hard to imagine SEC would agree to settlement deal which allows Uniswap Labs continue to develop Uniswap without introducing more centralization or even enforcing AML/KYC. But i still wish Uniswap Labs would trying to win this one, since it'll make SEC have harder time to crack down cryptocurrency development or software in the future.
1. Do you think this can hamper Uniswap in doing its business and will it affects its standing in the market?1. Ofcourse it will affect the standing of Uniswap in the market as if things are not that serious then the team of Uniswap would not react the way it reacted now. I mean they are calling SEC Abusive. As they are misusing their power. IMO these are big words and it indicates the seriousness of the case.
2. Do you think SEC is just doing its job and is really doing things for the sake of protecting the small investors and users?
3. Which can be the next platform to experience the power of SEC and be facing possible charges?