Momentica’s NFT Photo Cards Captivate K-Pop Enthusiasts

Japan’s Financial Services Agency (FSA), a government agency and financial regulator responsible for overseeing banking, securities and exchange, has ordered both Apple and Google to remove specified unregistered crypto exchange apps from the Japanese versions of their app stores.Photo by Louie Martinez on UnsplashFive exchange apps specifiedIt is understood that the request was made at the beginning of this month, with the regulator specifically calling for the removal of the ability of Japanese consumers to download apps related to Bybit, MEXC Global, LBank Exchange, KuCoin and Bitget. In response to a query from The Block, Bitget Chief Legal Officer (CLO) Hon Ng said that the company is “aware of the issue and sincerely apologize for any inconvenience caused by the temporary removal of the Bitget app from the iOS App Store in Japan." The Bitget CLO went on to state that the company is working with Apple and regulators to resolve the matter. News of the regulator’s request emerged via a report published by Japanese financial media platform Nikkei on Feb. 7.  Apple had removed the apps from its App Store on Feb. 6. Reclassification of digital assets as securitiesA subsequent report by Nikkei on Feb. 10 suggests that the FSA is considering classifying digital assets as financial products akin to securities. The objective of the move is to protect Japanese investors as it would mean increased disclosure requirements from those that offer crypto-related investment products. Last August, FSA Commissioner Hideki Ito told Bloomberg that any decision to approve crypto-linked exchange-traded funds (ETFs) requires “careful consideration.” At the time Ito said that many people believe that digital assets “do not necessarily contribute to the wealth creation of the Japanese people in a stable and long-term manner.” The Japanese have been far more cautious in their approach to virtual assets by comparison with other Asian centers such as Hong Kong, which had approved spot Bitcoin and Ether ETFs some time ago. It appears that Japan’s FSA is wary of the volatility of cryptocurrencies and risks associated with the nascent assets. It’s understood that the FSA will announce crypto policy reforms by June 2025. Legislative amendments would then follow in the following parliamentary session in 2026. The change would mean a lifting of the current prohibition related to crypto ETFs. Another aspect likely to be reformed is taxation as it relates to crypto. It’s thought that a reduction from the existing 55% tax rate on crypto to 20% is on the cards. This is not the first occasion when a regulator has leaned on Apple and Google to cut off access to crypto exchange apps. In January 2024 Apple India blocked access to eight exchanges which had been subject of a show-cause notice from India’s Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU). Following a seven month ban, access to the Binance app was subsequently restored once it had come back into compliance in India. In April 2024 the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in the Philippines had ordered both Google and Apple to remove the Binance app from their app stores on the basis that it posed a risk to Filipino investors at the time.

Korbit Report: SEC Commissioner Shares Insights on Crypto RegulationKorbit Research Center, a division of South Korea’s cryptocurrency exchange Korbit, on Monday, released a report that provides a comprehensive summary of its interview with Hester M. Peirce, a Republican Commissioner at the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which took place on August 18. The interview was conducted by Peter Chung, the head of research at Korbit Research Center.Photo by Joshua Hoehne on UnsplashKorbit’s meeting with US crypto expertsIn August, Chung made a trip to the United States, where he met with prominent figures and companies within the cryptocurrency industry to gain a deeper understanding of the ongoing institutionalization of cryptocurrencies in the United States. Through this opportunity, Korbit intends to release a series of reports that will encapsulate the valuable insights garnered during these interactions in the US.His first interviewee of the series was Commissioner Peirce, who serves as one of the five commissioners at the SEC. These commissioners are appointed by the President of the United States with the confirmation of the US Senate. To maintain political balance and impartiality, it is mandated that no more than three commissioners belong to the same political party.Peirce assumed her role as a Commissioner at the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in January 2018, following her appointment by President Trump. Before her tenure at the SEC, she held the position of Senior Counsel on the United States Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. She is known as an advocate for technological innovation.Token safe harbor proposalPeirce earned the nickname “Crypto Mom” due to her advocacy for encouraging innovation within the cryptocurrency industry through the implementation of reasonable regulations. One notable initiative that exemplifies her perspective is the token safe harbor proposal. This proposal suggests giving blockchain network developers a three-year grace period during which they can work on building a decentralized network while being exempted from complying with the registration rules of federal securities laws, as long as certain conditions are met.During the interview, Peirce expressed concerns about recent actions taken by the SEC, which have added to the uncertainty surrounding cryptocurrency regulations. She also emphasized the need for swift legislative action to establish a framework for cryptocurrency regulation. Peirce noted that there appears to be a tendency to prioritize the classification of virtual assets over investor protection.Suggestions for KoreaAlthough Peirce hasn’t engaged in any direct interactions with Korean regulators, she suggested the Korean government optimize regulations for its own cryptocurrency industry. Her suggestion was to minimize unnecessary intervention and instead foster an environment where the sector can naturally evolve in accordance with the principles of a free-market economy.Furthermore, Peirce delved into detailed discussions on three pivotal topics: the classification of virtual assets as securities, the need for disclosure requirements, and the significance of assessing the extent of decentralization within a network.Classification of cryptocurrenciesThe Commissioner said that it is inappropriate for the SEC to contend that most cryptocurrency projects should fall under its regulatory purview. The SEC’s argument is based on the assertion that cryptocurrencies may constitute securities because they function as a medium of value exchange in fundraising activities, much like investment contracts in traditional financial markets. Despite this, she expressed optimism regarding the recent US court’s ruling on the Ripple vs. SEC case, which she believes may help rectify misconceptions surrounding the classification of investment contracts.Balancing investor protection and investor choiceMeanwhile, she expressed her viewpoint that regulations aimed at protecting investors should stay true to the disclosure principles introduced back in 1934 when the SEC was first established. However, she also argued that the SEC should avoid imposing arbitrary restrictions on investors’ choices. During the initial phases of a cryptocurrency project, there tends to be an inherent information asymmetry between crypto project leaders and individual investors. To ensure a fair investment environment, she advocated for legal mandates for disclosure. Notably, both her token safe harbor proposal and the Responsible Financial Innovation Act proposed by US Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Cynthia Lummis incorporate such disclosure requirements.Decentralization assessmentCommissioner Peirce also approached the assessment of decentralization with a thoughtful perspective. Her Token Safe Harbor Proposal 2.0 states that after the three-year grace period, “token transactions may not constitute securities transactions if the network has matured to a functioning or decentralized network.” However, she admitted to grappling with the challenge of precisely defining what constitutes sufficient decentralization. During the conversation, she sought Mr. Chung’s perspective on this matter. In response, Mr. Chung shared that the Korbit Research Center regularly conducts measurements and assessments of the degree of decentralization for major blockchain networks every six months.Regarding the interview, Peter Chung expressed his admiration for the high-ranking official’s openness to innovation and strong communication skills. He also voiced his hope for more open discussions in Korea that could promote sustainable growth of the country’s crypto industry.

DeFiance Capital Secures Interim Victory in Dispute With 3ACSingapore’s DeFiance Capital, a Web3 and crypto investment firm, has notched up a small triumph in its ongoing $140 million legal clash with failed Singaporean crypto hedge fund, Three Arrows Capital (3AC).Photo by Sasun Bughdaryan on UnsplashFavorable rulingAccording to a statement provided via a Medium blog post by DeFiance Capital Founder and CEO Arthur Cheong on Tuesday, the High Court of Singapore has delivered a favorable ruling for the firm, endorsing its preference for jurisdiction in Singapore, rather than the British Virgin Islands, which had been advocated by 3AC.The tussle between 3AC and DeFiance Capital centers around the ownership of certain assets. The liquidators appointed by the British Virgin Islands Court, from Teneo, assert that these assets essentially belong to 3AC’s creditors. However, DeFiance Capital argues vehemently that these assets must be partitioned and returned to its stakeholders.Struggle over assets and jurisdictionAt the heart of the matter are assets totaling $115 million, encompassing digital currencies and non-fungible tokens (NFTs), which currently remain under the control of DeFiance Capital. Additionally, there are 69 SAFE (simple agreement for future equity)/SAFT (simple agreement for future tokens) agreements linked to 3AC. Although Teneo places the collective worth of these assets at roughly $141 million, DeFiance Capital’s estimation is more conservative, pegging it at around $120 million.Beyond asset ownership, jurisdiction has become a pivotal point of contention in the legal discourse. DeFiance Capital has steadfastly advocated for legal proceedings to take place in Singapore, where it operates, as opposed to the British Virgin Islands. The recent ruling from the High Court of Singapore lends support to this stance, challenging Teneo’s argument.DeFiance articulated its position, asserting: “Our position was that all the important witnesses and documents are in Singapore and the dispute ought to be heard by the Singapore Courts to ensure all relevant evidence would be available.”With the court’s decision aligning with DeFiance’s jurisdictional preference, the firm hopes that this development will pave the way for more substantive engagement between the parties, rather than being embroiled in procedural wrangling. The firm believes that this will allow the focus to shift towards addressing the core issues at hand.Business riftThe genesis of this legal saga dates back to 2020 when DeFiance was established as part of the 3AC group, operating autonomously under the stewardship of its founder, Arthur Cheong. The rift escalated in February 2022, when Cheong declined 3AC’s proposal to relocate to Dubai, eventually leading to the formation of two Singapore-based firms in May of that year.Furthermore, in the same month, DeFiance extended a loan of $35 million worth of USDC to 3AC, effectively becoming a creditor. Complications arose when 3AC’s founders transferred legal rights related to DeFiance Capital, a transaction that remained incomplete as 3AC filed for bankruptcy.In light of the ongoing dispute, 3AC asserted that DeFiance’s assets should be harnessed to settle its debts. However, DeFiance firmly stood its ground, upholding its ownership claims over the assets.With liquidators advocating for resolution in the British Virgin Islands — a move that DeFiance rejected due to its Singaporean management ties with 3AC — the stage was set for the legal clash that has now taken a notable turn with this recent court ruling.