Crypto Advocates Continue To Call For Clear Rules To Support U.S. Web3 Industry and See Path Forward Through Persistent Engagement With Regulators<\/p>\n
Last Thursday, an enforcement action<\/a> by the U.S. Commodities Futures and Trading Commission (CFTC) against three DeFi protocols was the latest event in an ongoing saga of legislative battles<\/a>, rulings<\/a> by district courts, and scuffles<\/a> over rulemaking.<\/p>\n As the CFTC has now ordered Opyn, 0x and Deridex to cease operations that violate the Commodity Exchange Act and CFTC regulations, some of crypto\u2019s prominent advocates are again questioning whether the regulatory landscape is conducive for entrepreneurs looking to operate in the space.<\/p>\n \u201cThis week\u2019s CFTC enforcement actions expose a series of contradictions,\u201d Marisa Coppel, senior counsel at the Blockchain Association, told The Defiant. \u201cFirst, it is in direct conflict with a court\u2019s recent opinion in Risley v. Uniswap, which held that developers were not liable for third-party misuse of their software.\u201d<\/p>\n In late August, a judge dismissed<\/a> a case which alleged that Uniswap Labs and others were liable for losses caused by scam tokens launched by third parties on the Uniswap decentralized exchange.<\/p>\n Coppel also noted inconsistencies within the CFTC itself, pointing towards a proposal<\/a> by Caroline Pham, one of the organization\u2019s five commissioners, to create a pilot program which would allow for supervised experimentation in the digital asset space.<\/p>\n She added that another commissioner, Summer Mersinger, published a dissenting statement<\/a>, highlighting that the CFTC did not show that the DeFi protocols in question misappropriated customers\u2019 funds or otherwise caused harm to their users.<\/p>\n The CFTC action comes in a year where markets have been seesawed<\/a> by numerous developments pertaining to crypto regulations.<\/p>\n