Crypto Tokens vs. the United States of America
summary
Panel examines how SAFT-fueled projects raised millions and then face SEC enforcement, noting $1.7 billion refund by Telegram and a $24 million settlement with Block.one as precedent. Discussion pins liability to the facts-and-circumstances test: buyer intent at purchase and platform functionality at distribution, reviews DAO report and April framework, weighs litigation outcomes (Kik) against prospects for no‑action relief, and stresses that meetings with regulators give opaque feedback rather than clear safe harbor.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (9)
- 0:00HotelPAC crypto PAC
- 1:07Token enforcement in America
- 2:31SEC precedent on SAFTs
- 4:57Fair field for token projects
- 7:02Telegram and Kik cases
- 9:07SEC no-action relief prospects
- 10:32Client engagement with regulators
- 11:55SEC's crypto thinking evolution
- 13:37Closing remarks
related talks
37mThe Legally Compliant ICO: Securities Regulation, SAFTs, and Beyond
23mRegulatory Considerations for Dapp Development
41mU.S. Policy in the “Golden Age of Digital Assets”
21mDebate: Scams Should Be Actively Reported to the SEC
10mSEC Crypto Task Force Chief Counsel: 'I Bought My First Bitcoin in 2013'
29mLegal framework for Initial coin offerings (cryptocurrencies)
36mAMA w/Tung Chan, Colorado Securities Commissioner; From Ethereum to Colorado
29mU.S. Policy and Regulatory Updates