Korean crypto faces retail slowdown while eyeing institutional future

AEON, a modular payment protocol that aims to standardize and unify crypto payments, has launched a QR code payment system on the BNB Chain, with a view towards expanding crypto payments in Southeast Asia. The project clarified in a press release published on Nov. 11 that its BNB-based QR code payment system has been established in collaboration with Terminus, a payment association project that bridges crypto and real-world transactions through banks, e-wallets and fiat settlement networks. The new service means that merchants can now access AEON’s payment system without having to acquire additional hardware, while crypto payments are settled in fiat currency. AEON believes that the new offering provides greater convenience for users and merchants, while also supporting the BNB Chain ecosystem through the promotion of a seamless payment experience at offline locations throughout the Southeast Asian region.Lara Jameson on PexelsIntegrating with Asian payment networksUsers can now rely on assets such as Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), Tether (USDT), USD Coin (USDC) and Binance Coin (BNB) as a source of funds for payments, which can be made in-store by scanning a QR code via a network of merchants throughout Southeast Asia. Once a transaction is confirmed, funds are converted to fiat currency in real time. The offering minimizes friction for the merchant, making it easy for them to accept crypto as a means of payment. This scan-to-pay feature has now been integrated with national payment networks like VietQR, a money transfer service in Vietnam that enables customers to scan and pay across the mobile apps of the Southeast Asian nation’s banks. Similarly, AEON has integrated with another such service in Thailand known as ThaiQR, which is supported by a number of leading Thai banks.  Connecting Web2 with Web3In an article posted to X last month, Terminus outlined that acting as a “payment association” isn’t just a label but an attempt by the company to take an approach that seeks to connect Web2 with Web3 in a manner previously thought impossible. It believes that it is creating a powerful ecosystem by taking disparate payments providers and joining them together via a cohesive payments association. In bridging Web2 and Web3 Terminus says that it is laying “the groundwork for a future where payments are not only efficient but universally accessible.” Network integrations seem to be key where crypto payment solutions providers are concerned. With that, AEON has been active in bringing about other such integrations beyond this collaboration with Terminus. In September, it entered into a partnership with Singapore’s Alchemy Pay, a crypto-to-fiat payment gateway, with a view towards combining Alchemy’s expertise in payments with AEON’s payments infrastructure and protocol. In October AEON integrated with the TRON layer-1 blockchain network. The collaboration means that decentralized applications within the TRON ecosystem can accept crypto payments over AEON’s payments infrastructure.

3AC Founder Secures Restraining Order in SingaporeSu Zhu, the Co-Founder of the defunct crypto hedge fund Three Arrows Capital (3AC) has successfully obtained a restraining order against BitMEX Co-Founder and former CEO, Arthur Hayes, in a Singaporean court.Photo by Monstera on PexelsNo communication “by any means”Crypto publication CoinDesk stated on Wednesday that it had seen a copy of the court order, which was originally issued on May 5. According to the details of the order, Hayes is prohibited from “making any threatening, abusive or insulting communication that would cause the Applicant harassment, alarm or distress.”Additionally, the former CEO of crypto trading platform BitMEX is forbidden from using “threatening, abusive or insulting words” in relation to Su Zhu. The order, which was issued by Judge Sandra Looi Ai Lin, clarifies that the BitMEX Co-Founder is not permitted to publish “any identity information” relative to Zhu or to communicate with him “by any means.”$6 million owedIt’s an understatement to say that Zhu, alongside fellow 3AC founder Kyle Davies, are not on Hayes’ list of favorite people in recent times. Following the 3AC collapse, Hayes has maintained that he is owed $6 million by the duo. Since the collapse of the hedge fund, Hayes has been tweeting out at the pair, calling them out relative to his claim that the duo have a debt obligation to him to the tune of $6 million.While both Hayes and Zhu have blemishes on their records, Hayes is much better regarded within the crypto community than Zhu. The BitMEX Co-Founder narrowly avoided a prison sentence in 2022 with the much lesser sanction of six months home detention being applied. That arose due to federal charges brought against him on the basis that he didn’t implement anti money laundering (AML) compliance procedures and checks at BitMEX while he was CEO of the firm.Despite this failure, Hayes remains popular within the crypto space, with his insightful commentary being lauded given that since he left BitMEX he has taken to writing blog articles relative to crypto and the broader economic situation. However, blog site Medium has taken to disabling access to his most recent blog article. The blog page states that the post “is under investigation or was found in violation of the Medium Rules.”Lacking a welcomeIn contrast with Hayes, commentary relative to the 3AC duo of Zhu and Davies has lacked warmth. Neither of the duo had jumped on social media for a number of months following the collapse of 3AC. More recently they have both tried to rehabilitate themselves, with many commentators within the space seeing it as a cynical move.In February the duo launched Open Exchange, more commonly known as OPNX, a trading platform for crypto-related bankruptcy claims. At that time, Hayes tweeted out that he interpreted the news as the return of the crypto bull market.Earlier this month, OPNX claimed that it had the backing of several credible entities in the crypto space. However, immediately afterwards, a number of those firms clarified that they had nothing to do with the startup.Meanwhile, crypto-focused venture capital investor Michael Arrington tweeted out his disdain in relation to the 3AC founder’s successful fund raise:“Three f***ing arrows dip****s successfully raising a new fund is the saddest bulls**t I’ve heard in a long time.”The regulator in Dubai has also failed to roll out the red carpet for the duo’s new venture. In April, it issued an investor alert in relation to OPNX. Subsequently, it has followed up with a formal written reprimand issued to Zhu and Davies, given that the business is not registered with the regulator although operating out of Dubai.

Chinese Court Recognizes Virtual Assets as Legal PropertyAccording to a recent report published by the People’s Courts of the People’s Republic of China, a Chinese court has recognized the legal status of virtual assets, having analyzed their attributes within the framework of Chinese criminal law.The court unequivocally stated that virtual assets are considered legal property under the current legal policy framework and are thus protected by law.The People’s Courts of the People’s Republic of China exercise judicial power independently, free from interference by administrative or public organizations. They have responsibility for adjudicating civil, criminal, and administrative cases.Photo by Christian Lue on UnsplashProperty classificationLocal news source Odaily News reported on the development on Friday, indicating that the report, titled “Identification of the Property Attributes of Virtual Currency and Disposal of Property Involved in the Case,” explicitly recognized the economic attributes of virtual assets, leading to their classification as property.This declaration is particularly significant in light of China’s sweeping ban on decentralized cryptocurrencies. Despite this ban, the report argues that virtual assets held by individuals should enjoy legal protection within the existing policy framework.Furthermore, the report proposed recommendations for addressing crimes involving virtual assets. It emphasized that in cases where money and property are involved, confiscation should be based on the integration of criminal and civil law. The approach taken aims to strike a balance between safeguarding personal property rights while also addressing broader social and public interests.Contentious approach to cryptoWhile China has been making every effort to promote its central bank digital currency (CBDC) and the development of blockchain and metaverse-related technology within the country, its stance on decentralized cryptocurrencies has been contentious at best.Its approach in that respect has been marked by a blanket ban on crypto-related activities such as mining and trading and the prohibition of foreign crypto exchanges from serving customers within mainland China. Nevertheless, Chinese courts have consistently taken a more nuanced view without necessarily contradicting the government’s approach.Differing interpretationsThe divergence between national policy and court rulings first emerged in 2019 when the Hangzhou Internet Court found that Bitcoin is a form of virtual property, and on that basis, it is safeguarded by the law from the point of view of property rights. In May 2022, a Shanghai court affirmed that Bitcoin qualifies as virtual property and, as such, falls under the purview of property rights.Global issueIt’s not just the Chinese courts that are grappling with the issue of clarifying property rights relative to virtual assets. In April of this year, a case in Hong Kong involving defunct crypto exchange Gatecoin resulted in the courts determining that cryptocurrency is property and that on that basis, it’s “capable of being held in trust.”In July a Singaporean court determined that cryptocurrency is capable of being held in trust and on that basis, it should be recognized as property. Earlier this year, the High Court of Justice in London recognized non-fungible tokens (NFTs) as property.The report from the People’s Court reaffirms the legal status of virtual assets as protected property under Chinese law. This development highlights the ongoing divergence between China’s regulatory policy and the judicial interpretation of virtual assets, signaling a potential evolution in the country’s approach to cryptocurrencies.