|
|
|
|
|
by throaway6942
1683 days ago
|
|
We can't apply 1:1 laws to crypto precisely because of this. I can write a piece of code in a few minutes for all the collection I own, does not make it wash trading. In fact, you can very easily check it on etherscan or similar tools that this was a flash loan. |
|
I think in a lot of cases that's simply wishful thinking. They Howey test is actually a very good fit in the crypto space broadly, especially alongside the guidance from the SEC on how to interpret it with respect to digital assets. [1] Most tokens are just straight-up securities, what we're lacking isn't regulation but enforcement.
NFTs are likely not securities as they fail the Howey test. [2] Fractionalized NFTs, however, probably are securities.
> I can write a piece of code in a few minutes for all the collection I own, does not make it wash trading.
It's still wash trading, of course, it may not be a crime because it's not done against a security as I mentioned.
IMO it could be some other kind of fraud or civil matter already as you're enticing a purchase on the basis of intentionally misrepresenting past trades. If not, I agree, this might be a good area for some additional regulation, either here or in markets broadly (I'm looking at you, art and collectibles).
[1] https://www.sec.gov/files/dlt-framework.pdf
[2] https://clsbluesky.law.columbia.edu/2021/03/19/latham-watkin...