OKX to compensate service users following flash crash

Upbit Singapore Gains In-Principle Approval for Major Payment Institution LicenseCryptocurrency exchange Upbit Singapore announced in a press release via PR Newswire that it has secured an in-principle approval (IPA) for a Major Payment Institution (MPI) license from the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS). The IPA enables Upbit Singapore to continue providing regulated Digital Payment Token services in compliance with the Payment Services Act 2019 as it progresses on the path toward obtaining a full license.Photo by Paul MARSAN on UnsplashUpbit’s presence in AsiaIt’s worth noting that Upbit Singapore is part of Upbit APAC, a larger entity that operates exchanges bearing the same name in Thailand and Indonesia. Both Upbit Thailand and Upbit Indonesia are also regulated by their respective local authorities: Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission of Thailand and Indonesia’s Commodity Futures Trading Regulatory Agency (BAPPEBTI).Upbit APAC holds a technological partnership with Dunamu, the operator behind South Korea’s largest cryptocurrency exchange, Upbit.Crypto firms flocking to SingaporeThis development places Upbit Singapore among the ranks of other cryptocurrency exchanges in the city-state. Earlier this month, GSR Markets, the Singaporean arm of global crypto trading firm GSR, also achieved IPA status in its journey towards obtaining a full license. Other notable names in the industry, such as crypto exchange Coinbase and crypto payment firm Ripple, have already attained full licenses. The transition from an IPA to a full license took approximately a year for Coinbase and about four months for Ripple.Meanwhile, the Upbit enterprise has been making various efforts to solidify its presence in the crypto industry. One of its key initiatives is focused on enhancing user protection. For instance, as the leading cryptocurrency trading platform in South Korea, Upbit recently launched a campaign aimed at assisting crypto investors in recovering mistakenly transferred assets.However, there have been concerns regarding Upbit’s relationship with Kbank, the internet-only bank that provides real-name bank accounts to the Korean exchange. In Korea, cryptocurrency exchanges that facilitate the trading of Korean won are legally obligated to secure such bank accounts as part of anti-money laundering measures. Referring to a document provided by the Financial Services Commission (FSC), Lawmaker Kim Hee-gon highlighted that Upbit customers make up 18% of the bank’s total customer deposits. This percentage is significantly higher than what other banks that offer accounts to exchanges typically experience. Lawmaker Kim has criticized the bank’s relatively extensive exposure to the cryptocurrency exchange, underscoring the importance of elevating the level of Upbit’s reserve funds held at Kbank to prepare for unforeseen losses.

In the aftermath of the massive $235 million hack of the WazirX cryptocurrency exchange on July 18, users and stakeholders are grappling with its devastating consequences. The breach, which compromised a significant portion of the exchange’s reserves, has led to a series of legal, financial and security-related challenges, leaving millions of users uncertain about the future of their funds. The hack and its aftermathWazirX, once a leading Indian cryptocurrency exchange, lost approximately $235 million due to a breach in one of its multi-signature wallets. This included significant amounts of Shiba Inu (SHIB), Ethereum (ETH) and other assets. The hack crippled the exchange, forcing it to temporarily shut down operations and seek a restructuring process under Singapore's insolvency laws. The WazirX hacker has since begun laundering the stolen assets through Tornado Cash, a crypto mixer known for obscuring transaction details. According to blockchain security firm Cyvers, the hacker transferred over 5,000 ETH (approximately $12 million) to a new wallet and laundered $10 million in Ethereum through Tornado Cash. This mirrors the tactics of the North Korea-backed Lazarus Group, which has used similar methods in past high-profile crypto thefts. Photo by GuerrillaBuzz on UnsplashUsers seeking redress and government interventionAs the victims of the hack face uncertainty, over 4 million active WazirX users are expected to suffer a loss of at least 43% of their funds due to the restructuring process. Frustrated by the lack of action from Indian authorities, many users have sought help from Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who was visiting Singapore at the time. Users took to social media to air their grievances and demand justice, urging the government to intervene. WazirX co-founder Nischal Shetty, who is based in Dubai, added to the confusion by stating that he does not know who is responsible for safeguarding user crypto funds on the platform. His statement has fueled outrage among users, who feel abandoned by the exchange’s management. Legal and ownership disputesAmid the chaos, WazirX is also battling a legal dispute over its ownership with Binance, the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange. Shetty has repeatedly claimed that Binance acquired WazirX, granting it significant control over the platform's operations. However, Binance founder Changpeng Zhao (CZ) refuted these claims in 2022, stating that the acquisition deal was never completed. The uncertainty surrounding the ownership of WazirX has further aggravated users, many of whom are demanding a clear statement from Binance. So far, Binance has remained silent, neither confirming nor denying its involvement. This ambiguity has intensified calls for clarification, with users fearing that a lack of transparency may worsen their chances of recovering their funds. Partial withdrawals and restructuring effortsIn response to the crisis, WazirX has initiated phased withdrawals for users, allowing them to access 66% of their Indian Rupee (INR) token balances. Initially set for September 9, the withdrawal window was moved forward, offering some relief to users. However, many are dissatisfied with the partial access to their funds and are questioning when full crypto withdrawals will resume. WazirX’s legal team has indicated that users may recover only 55% to 57% of their crypto holdings, sparking further discontent. Meanwhile, the exchange has filed a moratorium application in the Singapore High Court, seeking a six-month reprieve from legal actions as it works on a restructuring plan. Looking aheadAs the WazirX saga unfolds, the future of the exchange and its users remains uncertain. The legal battles, ownership disputes and the ongoing laundering of stolen assets pose significant challenges to the platform's recovery. For now, users can only hope that the restructuring process will bring them closer to recovering their lost funds and that authorities will step in to provide clarity and resolution. 

Hong Kong court grants trademark injunction against HuobiThe Hong Kong Special Administrative Region High Court has resolved a trademark dispute between X-Spot Global Limited and Huobi Global Limited, ruling in favor of X-Spot.Back in June, X-Spot alleged that Huobi Global infringed on its trademark rights related to the “Huobi” name. In the legal process which followed, the court sided with X-Spot, compelling Huobi Global to cease using the “Huobi” trademark or any similar name or logo in Hong Kong.Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on UnsplashPotential confusionThe court’s official judgment highlighted concerns about potential confusion among the public and industry professionals arising from Huobi Global’s use of the “Huobi” trademarks. It emphasized that such confusion could lead people to believe that X-Spot Global, as the registered trademark owner, is actively engaged in cryptocurrency business associated with the trademark. In response, the court dismissed Huobi Global’s plea to revoke the service order and halt negotiations, also instructing the covering of X-Spot Global’s legal expenses.Post-acquisition conflictThe background to this dispute originates in the acquisition of Huobi Global last year. It’s widely believed that TRON blockchain network founder Justin Sun purchased the exchange for $1 billion although Sun has subsequently suggested that he is just an advisor to the crypto exchange business. The acquisition was made by About Capital Management, an entity associated with the controversial crypto entrepreneur.In May of this year, Sun claimed that Wei Li, a brother of Huobi founder Leon Li, had unjustly profited from the sale of Huobi’s native HT token. The disagreement escalated and as a consequence of that conflict, it became apparent that the acquisition agreement explicitly prohibited the buyer from using the “Huobi’’ trademark.Leon Li accused the cryptocurrency exchange of violating the acquisition agreement’s rules by unauthorized use of the “Huobi” trademark. This legal battle has shed light on the strained relationship between Leon Li and Justin Sun.The court’s decision adds a layer of complexity to Huobi Global’s legal challenges, intensifying existing regulatory issues. Notably, the cryptocurrency exchange is already grappling with a recent order from Malaysian authorities to cease operations in the country due to alleged illegal activities.The ruling comes at a critical juncture for Huobi Global. In September the business rebranded to HTX, signaling aspirations for global expansion amidst a shifting legal landscape. At the time, Justin Sun provided the rationale behind the rebrand. Taking to the X social media platform, he wrote:“It’s very hard for foreigners, Westerners, to pronounce ‘Huobi’… It doesn’t make any sense to them.” Sun went on to explain that the word Huobi means fire and coin in Chinese, adding, “That’s why we rebranded as HTX for international branding.”In light of this trademark infringement injunction decision, it could equally be speculated that the company was acting in advance of an unfavorable ruling in compliance with the terms of the business acquisition agreement.In reaching a decision on the matter, Judge Mimmie Chan J noted the lack of a defense mounted by Huobi against the trademark infringement action.