Crypto Developers – Concerns about the way cryptocurrency projects will be regulated and their place in the law are causing a great deal of unease among members of the Web3 community. It is especially obvious in the United States, where the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) fueled concerns in September by announcing that it was going to impose a fine of $250,000 on a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO), Ooki DAO, and its investors.
Why crypto developers should prepare to leave the US according to (CFTC)?
According to cointelegraph, this announcement fueled concerns in the market. This is especially obvious in the United States. Because of this announcement, there was a frenzy of activity in the bitcoin market. When taking into account the fact that DAOs are met to be “regulatory proof,” the fine appeared to be particularly ominous. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) claimed in their comment on the subject that the bZeroX protocol allowed for the illegal off-exchange trading of digital assets. The speaker was referring to Ooki DAO when they made this statement.
DAOs not exempted from enforcement
The fact that Tom Bean and Kyle Kistner, the founders of the DAO, intended to avoid regulatory supervision by employing the pre-existing bZeroX protocol within the DAO was problematic in the eyes of the government. The Commodity Futures TBronx Commission (CFTC) claimed that the founders of bZeroXBronxa promised to the people who were a part of the bZeroX community that if they transferred authority to a DAO, the operations of bZeroX would be untouchable by law enforcement. However, the founders of bZx were totally off base in their assumptions. DAOs are not exempt from enforcement, and if they disobey the law, they will be subject to the consequences of their actions.
Who are the DAOs?
The punishment does not come as an entirely unexpected turn of events. A pretense of decentralization is not something that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) or any of the other regulatory bodies are likely to countenance. On the other hand, there is one particular facet of the verdict that gives Web3’s attorneys and software engineers great cause for apprehension. According to the complaint that was submitted by the agency, the voters who participated in a particular DAO may be held individually liable.
More affiliates of cryptos to be included
That is to say, it won’t just be the people who created the company who will be under inspection; users who participate could also be held liable for any wrongdoings that may have occurred. It’s almost clear that this will have the effect of discouraging people from engaging in decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) and Web3 in general. After all, the idea is to steer clear of this kind of targeting and to develop brand-new ecosystems in which all parties can cast their votes in peace on issues that are essential to them.