1. Home
  2. DeFi Education Fund

DeFi Education Fund

Crypto advocates file brief against SEC’s investor tracking database

The Consolidated Audit Trail would gather a monumental amount of data, and more than it is meant to when it exposes the identity of crypto wallet holders.

The DeFi Education Fund and the Blockchain Association jointly filed an amicus brief in a case brought by two individuals and the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA) against the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), its chairman Gary Gensler and the Consolidated Audit Trail (CAT). The complaint does not mention cryptocurrency or blockchain, but the organizations argue that the CAT could have a profound negative effect on crypto users.

The CAT is a database that was first proposed in 2010 and became operational in April. According to its website, the CAT “tracks orders throughout their life cycle and identifies the broker-dealers handling them, thus allowing regulators to efficiently track activity in Eligible Securities throughout the U.S. markets.”

The NCLA complaint against the CAT database. Source: Pacer

Read more

Analyst Benjamin Cowen Says Grand Finale for ‘Altcoin Reckoning’ Already Underway – Here’s His Timeline

Defi Education Fund on Chevron Doctrine Overruled: ‘It Opens a New Chapter in the Battle for Clear Regulations’

Defi Education Fund on Chevron Doctrine Overruled: ‘It Opens a New Chapter in the Battle for Clear Regulations’The Defi Education Fund, an organization focused on defending and bringing clarity to decentralized finance, pondered on what the recent overruling of the so-called Chevron doctrine might mean for crypto. The organization explained that this decision marks a new chapter in the battle for clearer regulations in the crypto environment, putting Congress at the forefront […]

Analyst Benjamin Cowen Says Grand Finale for ‘Altcoin Reckoning’ Already Underway – Here’s His Timeline

Beba and Defi Education Fund Sue the SEC Over Its Airdrop Policies

Beba and Defi Education Fund Sue the SEC Over Its Airdrop PoliciesTexas apparel company Beba and the Defi Education Fund (DEF) have announced a legal complaint against the U.S. SEC. They allege that the SEC has violated Administrative Procedure Act procedures by adopting an encompassing crypto policy without an official rulemaking process. Additionally, the plaintiffs seek to clarify that a token airdropped to its users does […]

Analyst Benjamin Cowen Says Grand Finale for ‘Altcoin Reckoning’ Already Underway – Here’s His Timeline

Crypto advocates file amicus brief to address users’ Fourth Amendment privacy rights

The amicus brief was filed to support an appeal against the Internal Revenue Service in relation to a 2017 court order where Coinbase was forced to hand over data from more than 14,300 of its users to the IRS.

Cryptocurrency advocacy group DeFi Education Fund (DEF) has urged a United States court to consider the unique aspects of blockchain technology when evaluating the privacy rights of cryptocurrency users under the Fourth Amendment.

DEF filed an amicus brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals (First Circuit) on Oct. 20, supporting James Harper’s appeal against the Internal Revenue Service as part of a fight to prevent the U.S. government from having unfettered access to a user's transaction history on cryptocurrency platforms.

Harper was one of 14,355 Coinbase users whose data was handed over by the cryptocurrency exchange to the IRS following a court order in 2017, which sparked a fight for stronger digital privacy rights.

DEF argued that the Fourth Amendment needs to be revised to rebalance law enforcement’s investigative powers and an individual’s right to financial privacy in the digital age.

“When old precedents meet new technology, courts must ‘assure preservation of that degree of privacy against government that existed when the Fourth Amendment was adopted.’”

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution serves to protect people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government.

DEF also pointed to the case of Carpenter v United States to argue that the Fourth Amendment limits the U.S. government’s capacity to obtain data from third-parties platforms like Coinbase.

The advocacy group further explained that because cryptocurrency transactions are traceable on public ledgers, it is possible to connect real-life identities to their pseudonymous addresses.

This impacted the livelihoods of all 14,355 users in the Coinbase case, DEF explained:

“The government’s request in this case therefore implicated every user’s every transaction, now and forever, including their ‘familial, political, professional, religious, and sexual associations.”

“It gave the government a “detailed, encyclopedic, and effortlessly compiled” synopsis of the lives of Harper and 14,354 others,” DEF added.

This degree of insight far exceeds what is attainable through traditional banking records, the lobby group argued.

Related: Blockchain privacy groups urge new US Congress to protect privacy rights

The DeFi Education Fund's mission is to educate policymakers about the benefits of decentralized finance and to achieve regulatory clarity for the DeFi ecosystem.

The final decision of Harper v Werfel and Internal Revenue Services is expected to set a precedent for digital privacy rights and law enforcement measures in the U.S.

Magazine: Best and worst countries for crypto taxes — Plus crypto tax tips

Analyst Benjamin Cowen Says Grand Finale for ‘Altcoin Reckoning’ Already Underway – Here’s His Timeline

DeFi group petitions to stop ‘patent troll’ targeting DeFi protocols

The DeFi Education Fund says a patent owned by True Return Systems is being used to try to profit from lawsuits against decentralized protocols.

A decentralized finance (DeFi) advocacy body has petitioned the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to review a patent owned by a company it has accused of being a a “patent troll” — a firm that aims to profit from patent lawsuits.

In a Sept. 11 blog post, the DeFi Education Fund (DEF) said on Sept. 7 that it filed an over 90-page petition to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in a bid to cancel a patent owned by True Return Systems.

Granted in 2018, the patent lays claim to a process for “linking off-chain data to a blockchain,” DEF legal chief Amanda Tuminelli said in a Sept. 11 X (Twitter) post.

Tuminelli claimed True Return tried to sell its patent as a nonfungible token (NFT). After no buyer, it filed suit against the DeFi protocols MakerDAO and Compound Finance in October.

“Clearly [True Return’s] goal was to name defendants who could not answer the complaint so [it] could get a default judgement,” Tuminelli said.

She claimed True Return would try to enforce the court’s ruling against token holders and repeat the process with other protocols “that either can’t challenge them in court or don’t have the resources to do so.”

DEF claimed True Return’s tech in the patent isn’t new at the time it was granted and claims to highlight similar existing tech such as the InterPlanetary File System (IPFS) along with the decentralized storage platforms Sia, Storj and Swarm.

True Return Systems acknowledged Cointelegraph’s request for comment but did not immediately provide a comment.

Related: SEC’s Gary Gensler to hold firm on crypto enforcement in Senate hearing

DEF said it launched the petition with USPTO to defend the ability to use and develop open source software, to stop any potential plans by True Return to sue crypto projects and help MakerDAO and Compound’s legal defence.

True Return has three months to optionally respond to the petition, after six months the USPTO must make a decision if it will move forward with reviewing the patent where it has 12 months to decide if the patent should be cancelled.

Magazine: Hall of Flame: Crypto lawyer Irina Heaver on death threats, lawsuit predictions

Analyst Benjamin Cowen Says Grand Finale for ‘Altcoin Reckoning’ Already Underway – Here’s His Timeline

60 Organizations Launch Campaign Urging US Congress to Protect Privacy

60 Organizations Launch Campaign Urging US Congress to Protect PrivacyOn Wednesday, 60 organizations involved in cryptocurrencies, open-source and free software, and human rights and privacy-preserving projects launched a new campaign calling on the 118th U.S. Congress to protect privacy. The groups, including Fight for the Future, Electric Coin Co., and the Tor Project, insist that Congress needs to deliver policies dedicated to standing up […]

Analyst Benjamin Cowen Says Grand Finale for ‘Altcoin Reckoning’ Already Underway – Here’s His Timeline

‘DeFi Education Fund’ defends controversial $10.2M UNI liquidation

The DeFi Education Fund has defended its shock liquidation of $10 million in UNI, claiming the move was necessary to “begin its work and fund future operations.”

The DeFi Education Fund (DEF), an organization funded by Uniswap to spearhead lobbying and educational initiatives in support of the decentralized finance sector, has defended its sudden move to liquidate half of its UNI treasury earlier this week.

The organization said it needed to convert the funds into stable assets to weather crypto market volatility.

In May, the DEF was conceived in a Uniswap governance proposal from the Harvard Law Blockchain and Fintech Initiative, with the entity being formed earlier this month after the vote passed with a treasury of 1 million UNI tokens, worth more than $18 million at current prices.

Despite indicating the UNI would be sold over the course of years, on July 12, the fund suddenly announced it had organized for half of its war chest to be liquidated into USDC by market maker, Genesis Trading.

Adding to community concerns DEF committee member, Larry Sukernik liquidated Larry Sukernik liquidated 2,612 UNI (worth approximately $50,000) around the time of the fund’s $10 million sale.

Responding to widespread backlash from the crypto community, DEF published a blog on July 14 seeking to justify its large sell-off.

The organization said “the vast majority of DEF’s expenses will be dollar-denominated,” and that diversifying half of the funds into a stable asset “provides the DEF with a sustainable budget to weather any market downturns.”

Claiming that time is against the industry as regulators circle, DEF states it sold the UNI fund to “begin its work and fund future operations.”

The post also emphasizes the discretion over fund management afforded to DEF, quoting the Uniswap proposal as saying:

“Due to the dynamic and somewhat unpredictable state of global policy proposals, we believe the grant-making committee should have considerable discretion to allow for flexibility and speed.”

The foundation also rejects claims the sale had a significant impact on the UNI markets, asserting the sale represented less than 5% of daily UNI trade volume, and that UNI’s subsequent drawdown after the sale was in line with the broader crypto meta-trend.

In reference to concerns over Larrk Sukernik’s liquidation of UNI, a new policy means that DEF members will no longer be allowed to make UNI transactions within a seven-day window of DEF treasury activity in future. The post also emphasizes that Sukernik’s transaction occurred after the sale had already been completed.

Further, the DEF will hire a full-time policy director tasked with managing the organization’s annual budget, which is set to be published within the next 90 days. The organization also plans to use the Tally Failsafe tool, which will allow Uniswap governance to block transactions and revoke funds from the DEF. Failsafe is currently being audited.

Related: Uniswap v3 launches Optimistic Ethereum layer two scaling in alpha

The blog failed to placat DeFi Watch founder, Chris Blec, who responded on Twitter with a lengthy list of lingering concerns, including how the fund’s committee member were chosen and how UNI token holders can be assured funds will be appropriately disbursed in future.

Medium blogger ChainCatcher also emphasized the concentration of votes supporting the fund’s creation among Uniswap’s top backer, also noting it strange that only UNI holders should bear the expense of political lobbying for the broader political sector.

Analyst Benjamin Cowen Says Grand Finale for ‘Altcoin Reckoning’ Already Underway – Here’s His Timeline

Concern as Uniswap-backed ‘DeFi Education Fund’ dumps $10M worth of UNI

The recently formed DeFi Education Fund has come under fire for abruptly announcing it had liquidated half of the 1 million UNI tokens donated to it through UNI governance.

The controversial Uniswap-funded DeFi Education Fund has liquidated half of its donated funding into stablecoins, attracting condemnation from many in the crypto community.

On June 12, the fund tweeted that it was selling 500,000 UNI to Genesis Trading for 10.2 million USDC in an over-the-counter (OTC) trade, despite the Uniswap proposal for the fund indicating it would liquidate the 1 million UNI over four to five years.

In May, the student organization, Harvard Law Blockchain and Fintech Initiative, launched a governance proposal advocating for the creation of the fund and allocation of 1 million UNI (worth roughly $18 million at current prices) to the entity to support educational initiatives and policy lobbying for the decentralized finance sector.

At the start of this month, the proposal was passed and the UNI tokens were transferred to the fund.

The incident has reignited concerns regarding the centralization of Uniswap’s governance process, and called into question the transparency and motives of the fund.

Blockchain sleuths were able to identify that Larry Sukernik, one of the multi signers behind the education fund, had sold 2,612 UNI just a few hours prior to the OTC deal. On Twitter, Sukernik defended the trade, stating the UNI he sold was from a grant he'd only received a few weeks earlier.

Related: Cointelegraph Consulting: The race between Uniswap DEXs

Speaking to Cointelegraph, DeFi Watch founder, Chris Blec, emphasized that Harvard Law had made it clear “the intent was to to gradually sell the 1m UNI over a 4-5 year period, and not dump large amounts at once.”

“The Fund then just sold 50% of the 1m UNI for USDC without explanation. They still haven't explained why, despite hundreds of people asking them today,” he added.

On July 13, Blec posted a governance thread demanding transparency regarding the fund, expressing concerns regarding the voting process surrounding the proposal, the creation of the fund, and the possible role of Uniswap investor, Andresson Horowitz (a16z), in influencing the events.

“The DeFi Education Fund committee members, the Uniswap core team and its investors (including a16z) have refused to answer any specific questions posed to them about the fund’s origins, who came up with the idea, how future policy will be derived, and more,” Blec wrote, noting that a letter he sent to Andressen Horowitz had been “willfully ignored.”

“After the vote finished and the Fund was created, I sent a new set of questions on June 29 to a16z, as it appeared that the vote only won due to governance delegates using voting power given to them by a16z. These questions were also willfully ignored.”

Blec also called for Sukernik to stand down from the fund’s committee, telling Cointelegraph: “Even if it was unintentional, the appearance of a member of this committee selling UNI tokens from his own account just hours before triggering a massive 500K UNI sale is exactly the type of behavior that would trigger a regulator.” 

“It would send the right message if Sukernik resigned from the committee and allowed someone else to take his place.”

Analyst Benjamin Cowen Says Grand Finale for ‘Altcoin Reckoning’ Already Underway – Here’s His Timeline