In the absence of “actual issuers” of the “scam tokens,” the plaintiffs argued that Uniswap facilitated the trades at issue by “providing a marketplace and facilities for bringing together buyers and sellers of securities” for a transaction fee, “hoping that this Court might overlook the fact that the current state of cryptocurrency regulation leaves them without recourse, at least as to the specific claims alleged in this suit.”
Related posts
-
Michael Saylor’s ‘No Second Best’ Holds Strong as BTC Outpaces Hypothetical ETH Investment
Based on blockchaincenter.net’s “there is no second best” index—drawing... -
This OG Bitcoin (BTC) Investor Just Turned $120 Into $178M
The trend of more of the older wallets that held bitcoin from its early days coming... -
Pro-bitcoin Matt Gaetz nominated as U.S. Attorney General
Matt Gaetz, a Florida Representatives and American lawyer, has been nominated as Attorney General by President-elect...