Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dvt 1312 days ago
I fully understand the purported chain of events. But, again: the US does not have jurisdiction over FTX. So why would he "get arrested" in California for embezzlement? He didn't break any US laws. The FTX/Alameda deal was likely done via SAFT[1], which is both legal and popular.

[1] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/simple-agreement-future...
2 comments
Animats 1311 days ago
The US has jurisdiction over Mr. Bankman-Fried, who is an American citizen born in California. The US has jurisdiction over Alameda Research, which is a US company operating in California and appears to have been the beneficiary of the scam. That's plenty of jurisdiction.
link
cmeacham98 1312 days ago
Does FTX international have any US investors? This would be a theft of their funds too, right?
link
nemothekid 1312 days ago
It does, but those investors were breaking FTX ToS by using the site (you had to use a VPN to access it).

I'm not sure if the SEC has standing for American investors that pretended to not be American.

link
cmeacham98 1312 days ago
Sorry, I mean investors in the company itself, not crypto traders.
link
dvt 1312 days ago
Sequoia marked their $150M investment into FTX down to $0 in a letter to LPs[1].

[1] https://twitter.com/sequoia/status/1590522718650499073/photo...

link