Gate.HK ceases operations and withdraws license application in Hong Kong

Report: Asia Set to Dominate Web3 Gaming MarketA new report has revealed that Asia is poised to dominate the growing Web3 gaming market, accounting for as much as 80% of all players. The study, conducted by Japanese firm Pacific Meta and DappRadar, found that the region already accounts for 55% of the global gaming population, with 1.7 billion players.©Pexels/Lucie LizThe report identified that the role-playing genre is the most popular in Asia, with games such as Final Fantasy, Phantasy Star Online and Genshin Impact ranking highly.Legal restrictionsThe research noted that legal restrictions on gaming are prevalent across the region, with China only allowing gamers under 18 to play for one hour a day and blockchain games all but banned in South Korea. Despite these restrictions, the report argued that Nexon’s Web3 play with MapleStory Universe and Square Enix’s upcoming Web3 game Symbiogenesis are two examples of crypto games gaining traction in the East. Both games will use the Polygon blockchain, currently the most preferred network for Web3 gaming from a game studio perspective.The report also concluded that Web3 gaming is a “natural” fit for the Asian market because of the types of games to which the market is accustomed. It argues that as Web3 games become more focused on gameplay over financials, Western and Eastern audiences will come to expect similar experiences.A developing understanding of Web3 gamesTo better understand the market, Pacific Meta surveyed over 1,000 adults in Japan and found that 40% knew about blockchain games. Among those who knew about such games, nearly 57% said Web3 games “seemed interesting”, while roughly 10% said they did not seem interesting. Notably, about 33% said “neither”, suggesting they were perhaps unsure about Web3 games and hadn’t yet formed an opinion on them.When asked about the types of blockchain games they would be interested in, 773 out of the 1,030 surveyed said that they would like a game to be free-to-play, and that initial cost was an important feature to them. 538 said that they would like the game to be playable on a mobile phone. Player earnings, game quality, consoles, and famous IP scored lower on the list.Long road to mainstream adoptionThe report highlights that the nascent industry still has a ways to go before it sees mainstream adoption. Nevertheless, big brands such as Razer and FIFA are doubling down on Web3 gaming projects. With the Asian market poised to take a dominant role in Web3 gaming, developers will need to tailor their offerings to suit the preferences of the region’s gamers.The Web3 gaming market in Asia is enormous and is expected to dominate the global market, with Japan a key market for growth. Developers will need to focus on the role-playing genre and create free-to-play mobile games to appeal to gamers in the region. As the Web3 gaming market continues to grow, and blockchain technology advances, it is likely that we will see more games and platforms targeting Asian gamers in the coming years.

While South Korea’s central bank has opted not to accumulate Bitcoin (BTC) at a nation-state level, North Korea has become a major holder of the leading crypto asset, albeit in a very unconventional way. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea) is believed to currently be in possession of 13,518 BTC. That’s according to data compiled by the blockchain analytics firm Arkham Intelligence. Arkham has labeled the holding as belonging to the notorious North Korean hacking organization Lazarus Group. It’s been alleged by many observers over recent years that Lazarus is controlled by the North Korean government. Photo by Vasilis Chatzopoulos on UnsplashOn this basis, it would appear that North Korea now has a larger Bitcoin holding than the Bitcoin-friendly jurisdictions of Bhutan and El Salvador. The Kingdom of Bhutan holds 10,635 BTC through Druk Holdings and Investments (DHI), the commercial arm of the Royal Government of Bhutan.  Meanwhile, El Salvador holds 6,119 BTC. Bhutan has been accumulating Bitcoin as a consequence of Bitcoin mining activity carried out by the government in partnership with Singapore-based Bitcoin mining firm Bitdeer and others within the Asian country over recent years. El Salvador made a commitment to buy Bitcoin on an ongoing basis following its recognition of the digital asset as legal tender back in 2021. Based on Bitcoin pricing at the time of writing, Arkham’s data suggests that North Korea currently holds Bitcoin with an overall value of around $1.14 billion. It’s believed that North Korea’s overall holdings have been bumped up recently following a $1.4 billion hack of global crypto exchange Bybit last month. According to crypto data analysis firm Coin Metrics, the hack stands as one of the largest of all time.  Arkham’s data suggests that North Korea now has the third largest nation-state holding of Bitcoin, with the U.S. in first place, with 198,109 BTC, and the UK next with a holding of 61,245 BTC. Besides Bitcoin, the Lazarus Group is understood to be sitting on ETH, BNB, DAI and BUSD worth in the region of $30 million. In the immediate aftermath of the hack, the hackers moved to swap out some of the stolen Ether (ETH) for Bitcoin via the THORChain decentralized liquidity protocol. South Korea not building Bitcoin reserveWhile North Korea appears to have accumulated Bitcoin at the nation-state level through nefarious means, the Republic of Korea’s (South Korea) central bank has given an indication that it currently has no plans to accumulate Bitcoin.  According to a recent local media report, the Bank of Korea (BOK) responded in writing to a query from a Korean parliamentarian, outlining that there is no plan currently to develop a Bitcoin reserve or to stockpile Bitcoin at a national level.  The BOK is understood to have cited Bitcoin’s price volatility as a major concern. Additionally, the central bank outlined that Bitcoin doesn’t conform to the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) guidelines relative to foreign exchange reserve management.

The Need to Distinguish Between Security and Non-Security Virtual AssetsWith the recent enactment of the Virtual Asset User Protection Bill in South Korea, there is a need to lay out criteria for determining whether virtual assets qualify as securities, says Kim Ja-bong, a senior research fellow at the Korea Institute of Finance, in his report titled “The Implications of Determining Which Virtual Assets Constitute Securities and Investor Protection” released on Saturday.Photo by Shubham Dhage on UnsplashThe implications of the Virtual Asset User Protection ActThe Virtual Asset User Protection Act — which will take effect in July of next year — aims to protect customer assets, establish regulations against unfair trading practices, and enforce penalties. Notably, it will target virtual assets that are not securities, deeming it necessary for regulators to determine if virtual assets qualify as securities or not in order to enforce the bill. Assets with characteristics of securities will fall under the jurisdiction of the Capital Markets Act.Therefore, if the Virtual Asset User Protection Act does not provide sufficient investor protection, issuers may be incentivized to issue non-security assets rather than security assets to avoid the regulations of the Capital Markets Act. This further necessitates the act of distinguishing between virtual assets that are securities versus those that are not.Determining if a virtual asset is a security or notThere are two approaches to do this, according to Kim: the passive approach, which avoids considering a virtual asset as a security whenever possible, and the active approach, which treats a virtual asset as a security whenever applicable.He argues that it is better to focus on whether an investment contract qualifies as a security if it is considered an investment contract, rather than simply selecting a specific approach.Furthermore, the nature of virtual assets renders them unbound by national borders, so it is necessary to establish assessment criteria that correspond with international standards, such as those used in the US and Europe.This is especially important because if the criteria differ from international standards, there is a risk of domestic investors suffering damages due to an issuer’s pursuit of regulatory arbitrage between countries.Equitable recognition and potential for security tokensAccording to Kim, the importance of determining whether virtual assets are securities lies in ensuring that security tokens receive the same recognition and trading treatment as traditional securities such as stocks. With such a measure, security token offerings can serve as an efficient and reliable method for raising funds. Although there may be concerns that such a regulation may hinder the development of virtual assets, it may well be an opportunity for security tokens to be qualified and trusted as high-quality financial instruments just like existing securities, Kim claims.Even for virtual assets that are not considered securities, there are many types of assets that are financial in nature, such as e-money tokens — therefore, it is necessary to actively protect investors in non-security virtual assets through financial regulations such as reinforcing disclosure obligations, which is being done in the EU through the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA).Empowering regulators for enhanced investor protection and market integrityKim underscored that investor protection and healthy growth of the virtual asset market are made possible mainly through expanding regulators’ authority to protect economic interests and prevent damages. The author also suggested institutional reforms that grant regulators substantial authority, which would enhance their ability to protect investors effectively and provide compensation for damages.He added that regulators should also have the authority to enforce liability for damages or impose civil penalties for unfair trading practices conducted using classified information.