風險投資公司數(shù)字貨幣集團已提出動議，駁回紐約總檢察長辦公室對其提起的刑事訴訟。

DCG 和 NYAG 之間的法律戰(zhàn)已經(jīng)持續(xù)了幾個月，并且直接與另外兩家著名的加密貨幣公司之間的糾紛糾纏在一起：Genesis（現(xiàn)已解散的經(jīng)紀公司）和 Gemini（交易所和銀行）。

這些團體多年來一直卷入一系列糾紛，涉及關(guān)系的急劇變化和嚴重的欺詐指控。

整個情況中一個特別相關(guān)的轉(zhuǎn)折是，破產(chǎn)的 Genesis 一直是實力雄厚的 DCG 的子公司，DCG 管理著價值數(shù)十億美元的資產(chǎn)，并將 ETF 發(fā)行商 Grayscale 視為另一家子公司。

換句話說，弄清楚這里涉及的所有不同參與者的背景是一項相當重要的任務，特別是考慮到當前存在的令人擔憂的環(huán)境。

總檢察長的訴訟不僅是針對 DCG、Genesis 和 Gemini 的同等程度的訴訟，而且 Genesis 和 Gemini 還在與此無關(guān)的民事訴訟中對峙。

NYAG 于 2023 年 10 月指控這些公司集體詐騙投資者超過 10 億美元，相互指責造成了混亂的氛圍。

首先，最近在法庭文件中發(fā)現(xiàn)的有關(guān)此次解雇的披露是一個很好的地方。

具體來說，今年 3 月的法庭文件已公開表明 Genesis 和 Gemini 考慮在 2022 年進行合并。

2022 年，DCG 首席執(zhí)行官巴里·希爾伯特 (Barry Silbert) 在午餐時與 Gemini 聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人卡梅倫·文克萊沃斯 (Cameron Winklevoss) 進行了一次會面，討論了將兩個公司實體合并在一起的一些動機和后勤問題。

當時，Genesis 面臨破產(chǎn)的嚴重危險，其與 Gemini 的實質(zhì)性合作關(guān)系意味著其后果可能會損害另一家公司的業(yè)務。

作為 Gemini Earn 計劃的一部分，Gemini 向 Genesis 提供了大量資金，但 Genesis 已經(jīng)損失了該計劃。

對沖基金三箭資本 (Three Arrows Capital) 在 FTX 崩潰后破產(chǎn)時負責管理這筆資金，Genesis 面臨著 10 億美元的困境。

至于這些損失資金的原始來源，NYAG 指控這些公司從投資者那里騙取了這筆錢。

At the meeting, Silbert made the sales pitch that the two firms should combine, and that they “would be a juggernaut and would be competitive with Coinbase and FTX”. He added that, even if Genesis and Gemini couldn’t reach an agreement on these terms, “there is a ton more Gemini and Genesis can do together and the two companies should be leaning in together, not pulling apart”. Although Winklevoss was allegedly “intrigued” by the proposed deal, it did not happen. Frictions, alongside Genesis’ declaration of bankruptcy, arose in the immediate aftermath.

A particular point of friction is found in the aforementioned Gemini Earn partnership, which made headlines this February when Genesis won a court ruling against Gemini. Essentially, Genesis owned a tranche of Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC) shares that were promised to Gemini as collateral for an exchange of money between the two companies, but Genesis declared bankruptcy before the shares could actually change hands. Since GBTC is unique among the Bitcoin spot ETFs as a pre-existing fund that was converted into an ETF, this tranche of shares had ballooned by early 2024 to be worth more than $1.2B. DCG’s ownership of both Grayscale and Genesis put an extra complication over the issue. Gemini objected to Genesis’ legal right to sell the shares it was promised years prior, and this began a lengthy civil suit.

Although the issue was resolved through a series of settlements that allowed Genesis to make the sale and kept both it and Gemini from admitting culpability, the NYAG still filed a complaint alleging that the parties involved were all jointly guilty of substantial fraud. There were more than a billion dollars missing, and the attorney general’s office was growing tired of the mutual recriminations between the relevant parties. Even if Genesis could make enough money from their sale to recoup their investors, that still doesn’t address the issue of criminal activity. A particular illustration of the hostile environment came up when DCG, Genesis’ parent company, disputed Genesis’ own settlement with the NYAG.

So, this brings us to the present day. On March 7, Silbert and DCG filed a motion to dismiss the attorney general’s suit, claiming that the allegations against these companies were entirely baseless. In the motion, DCG’s legal team claimed that “The allegations against DCG in this case are a thin web of baseless innuendo, blatant mischaracterizations and unsupported conclusory statements. In search of a headline-worthy scapegoat for losses caused by others, the OAG [Office of the Attorney General] wrongfully seeks to portray DCG’s good-faith support of a subsidiary as participating in fraud”. They specifically claim that DCG acted in good faith by funneling money towards Genesis after the Three Arrows collapse, investing “hundreds of millions of dollars of additional capital into its subsidiary during the months leading up to its bankruptcy, even though DCG had no obligation to do so”. The attorney general took a different view, that DCG’s net contributions conceal a large drain of Genesis’ money at one crucial moment: DCG took their money back, Genesis declared a “l(fā)iquidity crunch” and did not allow users to withdraw their crypto, Genesis went bankrupt immediately. The burden of proof is on them, however, to demonstrate that this was a deliberate fraud tactic.

As of yet, there is no way of knowing what a judge will think of DCG’s proposed defense or motion to dismiss, or if a settlement is feasible in the event that the motion to dismiss is denied. However, one unambiguously good sign has come out of the morass: Gemini announced its plans to fully reimburse the allegedly defrauded users of the Gemini Earn partnership with assets in kind. In other words, these users had Bitcoin stolen from them in 2022, and Gemini has made commitments to pay them back, accounting for Bitcoin’s price jump since then. This has tacked on another $700M to the price tag of reimbursing over $1B in assets, and is a clear sign of confidence from the company.

If nothing else, this decision to reimburse users like this is an impressive display of sincerity and good intentions from Gemini. Gemini is named as a co-defendant on all the legal documents submitted by Silbert’s legal team about the NYAG suit, and would also benefit greatly from seeing the suit dismissed. This gesture of good faith might not be enough to clear the air for DCG and Genesis, but it certainly couldn’t hurt anyone’s chances of escaping the whole fiasco without a criminal conviction. Although Gemini failed to halt Genesis’ attempt at getting the money from GBTC sales, Gemini is still a successful and prominent exchange. Apparently, it was able to float a compensation of this size without relying on the GBTC tranche.

任何人都猜測該訴訟在未來幾個月將如何進行。

當 NYAG 在第一輪和解后首次提出申訴時，顯然檢察官已經(jīng)厭倦了這些前商業(yè)伙伴的尖刻態(tài)度。

盡管如此，Gemini 的賠償計劃肯定會在很大程度上證明他們?yōu)橛脩糇稣_的事的意圖。

如果不出意外的話，這表明他們正在積極主動地認真對待這個問題。

我們必須仔細觀察事態(tài)的發(fā)展，但很明顯，迄今為止所表現(xiàn)出的相互厭惡和卑鄙行為并沒有得到回報。

更廣泛的數(shù)字資產(chǎn)領域周期性地充斥著不穩(wěn)定的企業(yè)和徹頭徹尾的騙局，但最終它們都分崩離析。

另一方面，比特幣的成功是合法的。

當塵埃落定時，最大的贏家實際上可能是被騙的用戶，由于比特幣自身的實力，他們的預期支出將增加近一倍。

與這些收益相比，很難想象騙局的效果會更好。

熱點：數(shù)字貨幣 卡爾 反擊 數(shù)字 貨幣