Breaking News
Investing Pro 0
Final hours: unlock premium data with Claim 60% OFF

Uniswap Triumphs In Federal Court Over Securities Allegations In Victory For DeFi

Published Aug 30, 2023 17:38 Updated Aug 30, 2023 18:40
Saved. See Saved Items.
This article has already been saved in your Saved Items
 
© Reuters. Uniswap Triumphs In Federal Court Over Securities Allegations In Victory For DeFi
 
UNI
+0.36%
Add to/Remove from a Portfolio
Add to Watchlist
Add Position

Position added successfully to:

Please name your holdings portfolio
 

Benzinga - by Murtuza Merchant, Benzinga Staff Writer.

In a landmark decision, Uniswap (CRYPTO: UNI), a leading decentralized finance (DeFi) platform, emerged victorious Wednesday in a legal battle in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The case revolved around allegations that Uniswap violated certain provisions of the Securities Act.

The Class Action Suit Against Uniswap: The civil lawsuit was filed by Matthew Risley, who alleged that Uniswap was operating an illegal securities exchange. Risley and others argued that Uniswap's liquidity pools, which allow users to swap cryptocurrencies without a centralized intermediary, were securities because they were investment contracts.

The judge disagreed, finding that Uniswap's liquidity pools did not meet the definition of an investment contract. The judge noted that liquidity providers in Uniswap's pools do not have a common enterprise with Uniswap and they do not expect to make profits solely from the efforts of others.

Central to the case was the question of whether Uniswap could be considered a "statutory seller" under the Securities Act.

Also Read: Bitcoin Is Like A Teenager Hopped Up On Sugar Diet Of Low Interest Rates: Analyst

The plaintiffs proposed two theories: the transfer of title theory and the solicitation theory.

Under the transfer of title theory, the plaintiffs argued that since Uniswap wrote and maintained the smart contracts that facilitated token transactions, they effectively passed the title of the tokens to the plaintiffs.

The court rejected this argument, noting that just because Uniswap may have drafted the contracts underlying the platform, it did not mean it held title to the assets traded on the platform.

The solicitation theory was based on the plaintiffs' claim that Uniswap had promoted and solicited the tokens directly to them to increase the value of their UNI governance tokens.

The court found this theory implausible, emphasizing that the plaintiffs had not provided substantial evidence to show that Uniswap had actively solicited the purchase of a security for their financial gain.

This decision is expected to have significant implications for other crypto platforms facing similar legal challenges and sets a precedent for future cases in the rapidly growing DeFi sector.

Read Next: Islamic Coin Secures Investment From A195 Capital After Partnering With Over 300 Banks

Discover Fintech innovations and delve into the Future of Digital Assets at Benzinga's premier events; grab your tickets today to be part of the revolution!

Photo via Shutterstock.

© 2023 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

Read the original article on Benzinga

Uniswap Triumphs In Federal Court Over Securities Allegations In Victory For DeFi
 

Related Articles

Add a Comment

Comment Guidelines

We encourage you to use comments to engage with users, share your perspective and ask questions of authors and each other. However, in order to maintain the high level of discourse we’ve all come to value and expect, please keep the following criteria in mind: 

  • Enrich the conversation
  • Stay focused and on track. Only post material that’s relevant to the topic being discussed.
  • Be respectful. Even negative opinions can be framed positively and diplomatically.
  •  Use standard writing style. Include punctuation and upper and lower cases.
  • NOTE: Spam and/or promotional messages and links within a comment will be removed
  • Avoid profanity, slander or personal attacks directed at an author or another user.
  • Don’t Monopolize the Conversation. We appreciate passion and conviction, but we also believe strongly in giving everyone a chance to air their thoughts. Therefore, in addition to civil interaction, we expect commenters to offer their opinions succinctly and thoughtfully, but not so repeatedly that others are annoyed or offended. If we receive complaints about individuals who take over a thread or forum, we reserve the right to ban them from the site, without recourse.
  • Only English comments will be allowed.

Perpetrators of spam or abuse will be deleted from the site and prohibited from future registration at Investing.com’s discretion.

Write your thoughts here
 
Are you sure you want to delete this chart?
 
Post
Post also to:
 
Replace the attached chart with a new chart ?
1000
Your ability to comment is currently suspended due to negative user reports. Your status will be reviewed by our moderators.
Please wait a minute before you try to comment again.
Thanks for your comment. Please note that all comments are pending until approved by our moderators. It may therefore take some time before it appears on our website.
 
Are you sure you want to delete this chart?
 
Post
 
Replace the attached chart with a new chart ?
1000
Your ability to comment is currently suspended due to negative user reports. Your status will be reviewed by our moderators.
Please wait a minute before you try to comment again.
Add Chart to Comment
Confirm Block

Are you sure you want to block %USER_NAME%?

By doing so, you and %USER_NAME% will not be able to see any of each other's Investing.com's posts.

%USER_NAME% was successfully added to your Block List

Since you’ve just unblocked this person, you must wait 48 hours before renewing the block.

Report this comment

I feel that this comment is:

Comment flagged

Thank You!

Your report has been sent to our moderators for review
Continue with Google
or
Sign up with Email