Direct from the blockcrypto gang
© 2020 The Block Crypto, Inc. All Rights Reserved. This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.
Definitely worth a re-post here for the Publish0x herd... full article below.., after my value add 'scananalyis' ;)
Suffice it to say, EOS was (and still is) trying to bring the C++/C# dev folks into the crypto 'fold', which again, is 'WIP'....,
The Big Legal Question (around this latest law suit)?
"Was the EOS(Blockone) blockchaintech better than other 'blockchain' offers at the time of of their year ICO? (as they claimed in their ICO)"
That central part of the BlockOne EOS claim attracted lots of dough.
The answer? EOS tech was PoS Proof of Stake and subject to possible collusion to manipulate price given, only 21 PoS group stakes were able to mine per mining period (EOS, if they are smart, will talk about 'coin mixing' and 'coin washing' to achieve the same type of market manipulation 'collusion' and, point to the fact their TPS is/was indeed better at the time).
Q? "Was that EOS PoS better than POW a la BTC as developed by BlockOne?"
That will be the argument central to this case, over which the outcome of the case will be argued for years and maybe never settled in court (out of court settlement is likely the goal of the class action suit knowing BlockOne has lots of cash in the bank).
Now the other BIG Question.
Does anyone care?
Yup, especially those ICO EOS investors who expected a short quick return over a two year Hodl (and smell "there is money in them there BlockOne accounts")
The Lesson Learned(ignored)?
Oversell and there are always (bad/annoying) consequences from people with unaligned expectations of future outcomes (Where's my money, I want it now!).
Does BlockOne care? - About their developer base they should...
I doubt it, BlockOne are armed with close to US $ 1 Billion from their year long ICO 'take', SO, it will take a lot of 'raptor' class action law suits to 'bring 'em down' or at least get a payout,(pushed by investors looking for a quick return, given the BlockOne backers have really deep pockets, and of course the SEC always needs cash, probably see EOS as a revenue stream. ;)
EOS and BlockOne will 'tough it' out.
I am not so sure the C++, C# crowd will do the same though AS, I see a lot of converts to the ETH 2.0 (PoS and PoW supported) camp and other crypto camps since, most of these C++/C# dev types are 'object oriented' and 'script skilled' developers, so anyone with "half a brain", including the simplest of investors ;) , can see Ethereum's Solidity is an easy transition...
The Window of Opportunity for EOS to Make Good with the C++/C# Community is Shrinking, Fast..
Imo, the window of opportunity to truly make it and stay in the top tier of crypto is shrinking, I give EOS and Blockone 'em 2 years, 3 years max, to convince the C++/C# herd they should not transform and stay put...
Of course #stfugates and his MS crew could influence the outcome as well given they are the foundation of many C++/C# in the world of Windows.
Definitely an interesting crypto 'day time soap opera' is emerging here, one I am following and will keep you all up to date as the "stomach turns" on these unfolding events.
Good original post from blockcrypto's Aislinn Keely below, again worth a read.
TK over and out
Class action lawsuit filed against Block.one over allegations about its EOS initial coin offering
Download PDF / Print by Aislinn Keely
May 18, 2020, 11:42AM EDT · 2 min read
- Investors in the EOS initial coin offering have filed a class action complaint against Block.one in the Southern District of New York
- The plaintiffs allege that the company provided misleading statements to investors
- This development comes months after Block.one paid a $24 million penalty to the Securities Exchange Commission following an investigation into the ICO
Just months after settling with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Block.one is on the receiving end of legal action once again for allegations surrounding its EOS token sale.
Crypto Assets Opportunity Fund LLC and Johnny Hong filed a class action complaint against the company Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Along with Block.One, its CEO Brendan Blumer, CTO Daniel Larimer, cryptographer and previous Block.one partner Ian Grigg and previous adviser Brock Pierce are all listed as defendants.
The plaintiffs allege that Block.one provided investors with false and misleading information about EOS in an effort to raise billions in an allegedly unregistered securities sale. According to the complaint, Victoria Capital and Hong claim to have purchased tokens during the sale, which, as reported at the time, brought in an estimated $4 billion.
"To drive the demand for and increase profit from the sales of EOS Securities, Defendants further violated the securities laws by making materially false and misleading statements about EOS, which artificially inflated the prices for the EOS Securities and damaged unsuspecting investors," read the complaint.
Block.one was not immediately available for comment when reached.
Pierce, Blumer and Larimer founded Block.one in 2017 with plans to launch a blockchain that would prioritize decentralization in its architecture. They later launched an initial coin offering (ICO) for the EOS token, which was originally in the form of an ERC-20 token that could later be swapped for tokens on the native EOS network. The SEC eventually took issue with the year-long sale, alleging that it qualified as an unregistered securities offering. Block.one subsequently paid a $24 million penalty to the agency.
In this new complaint, the plaintiffs lean on Block.one's past squabbles with the SEC, using the title "EOS Securities" for the company's token throughout. Indeed, in last fall's Cease-and-Desist Order from the SEC, the regulator indicated that it viewed the EOS sale as an unregistered securities sale.
Plaintiffs contended that Block.one drove the price of EOS by "aggressively" marketing it to U.S. investors and insisting that the EOS blockchain would outperform existing blockchains. The complaint alleges that defendants even told prospective investors that EOS stood for "Ethereum on steroids."
However, the complaint alleges that by not outperforming other blockchains, not disclosing significant internal disagreements and failing to decentralize sufficiently, Block.one misled investors. The complaint details several instances where it alleges Pierce, Blumer, Larimer and Grigg made statements that failed to reflect how EOS was actually performing.
"Contrary to Defendants' false statements, as was slowly revealed throughout the Class Period, the EOS Blockchain was highly centralized and was not superior to the other blockchains already in use," read the complaint.