Ryder Ripps ordered to pay Yuga Labs $1.6M in copyright lawsuit

October 27, 2023 Coin Telegraph

Ryder Ripps ordered to pay Yuga Labs .6M in copyright lawsuit

The NFT artists were also ordered to cover Yuga Labs’ legal fees after determining the trademark infringement constituted an “exceptional case.”

A United States district court judge has ordered nonfungible token (NFT) artists Ryder Ripps and Jeremy Cahen to pay Bored Ape Yacht Club creator Yuga Labs a total of $1.57 million in disgorgement and damages, along with legal fees, bringing an end to the long-running “copycat” NFT lawsuit.

The Oct. 25 order follows an April 21 partial summary judgement granted in favor of Yuga Labs after the firm claimed that Ripps and Cahen, the defendants, violated copyright laws by making copycat versions of its Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC) collectibles.

District court Judge John Walter awarded Yuga Labs $1.37 million after concluding the NFT firm was entitled to a disgorgement of the defendants’ profits. An additional $200,000 was awarded in statutory damages relating to cybersquatting violations.

Yuga Labs v. Ryder Ripps et al - Notes from the Court's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

Yuga is awarded $1,375,362.92 in Ds profits, $200,000 in statutory damages, and attorneys' fees and costs (amount TBD). A permanent injunction is also issued against Ds.

1/ pic.twitter.com/2dTiuWpZSA
— NeerMcD.eth (@NeerMcD) October 26, 2023

Yuga Labs has also been entitled to recover attorney fees and costs from the NFT artists after the judge determined the trademark infringement constituted an “exceptional case.”

“A trademark case is generally considered exceptional for purposes of awarding of attorneys’ fees when a party has taken positions that can be characterized as “malicious, fraudulent, deliberate or willful,” the judge noted.

Judge Walter also knocked back the defendants’ argument that the copycat BAYC versions were “satire” and “parody” — ruling that the defendants intentionally infringed Yuga’s BAYC trademarks with a bad faith intent to profit from them.

He also noted the defendants continued to market and promote their copycat BAYC versions after the partial summary judgement was delivered against them in April.

Yuga Labs filed the lawsuit against the two artists in June 2022.

In an Oct. 16 hearing in a United States appeals court, Ripps and Cahen’s lawyers tried to argue the lawsuit should be thrown out on the grounds of free speech under California’s anti-SLAPP statute. However, the three-judge panel didn’t appear persuaded by the lawyer’s arguments.

BAYC is one of the most valuable NFT collectibles on NFT marketplace OpenSea.

*BAYC collectibles currently listed on OpenSea. Source: OpenSea*

Since April 2021, it has amassed 1.32 million Ether (ETH) or $2.38 billion in trading volume with an average floor price of 27.4 ETH ($49,200), according to OpenSea.

Magazine: Digital artist OSF gives fans a pledge of ‘art until I die’: NFT Creator

Coinbase supports new court action to remove Tornado Cash ban

April 6, 2023 Coin Telegraph

Alexey Pertsev

The motion is part of a broader effort to restore internet privacy rights for U.S. citizens.

The United States Treasury faces a renewed legal challenge that aims to overturn the decision to sanction the crypto mixer Tornado Cash from six individuals backed by cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase.

A motion for a partial summary judgment was filed on April 5 in a Texas District Court, the Coinbase-backed plaintiffs moved for the U.S. Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) to settle for the first two counts from its original complaint filed in September 2022.

If granted, it would see the Judge rule on some of the factual issues while leaving others for the trial.

The counts claimed OFAC exceeded its statutory powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) and violated the Free Speech clause under the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment.

A few months ago, Coinbase backed a legal challenge to sanctions imposed by the US govt against Tornado Cash. Today the plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment, asking the court to reopen TC for all. Their arguments are simple but powerful. 1/10 https://t.co/xSngWKxM3x
— paulgrewal.eth (@iampaulgrewal) April 5, 2023

The plaintiffs firstly claimed OFAC breached a section of the IEEPA that allows the Treasury to take action against the property in which a foreign country or foreign national has an interest.

The motion argued that as the provision only allows the pursuit of property-related action against a foreign “national” or “person,” it doesn’t apply to open-source software.

To strengthen its claim, the plaintiffs argued the 20 or so smart contracts that provide the functionality to Tornado Cash should not be considered property under IEEPA because they cannot be owned:

“An immutable smart contract is incapable of being owned, it is not property and the Department lacks authority under IEEPA and the North Korea Act to prohibit transactions with those smart contracts.”

“No one has the right to alter them. No one has the right to delete them,” they added.

The second main argument put forth is that by banning the open-source code, OFAC is violating the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment under the U.S. Constitution.

The plaintiffs noted OFAC has authority to take action against “crypto thieves” like North Korea’s Lazarus Group, but a “total prohibition is thus grossly disproportionate” as money laundering only accounted for 0.05% of crypto transactions in 2021.

“To ban all uses of Tornado Cash is akin to banning the printing press because a tiny fraction of users might publish instructions on how to build a nuclear weapon,” they added.

The motivation behind the motion is part of a broader effort to restore internet privacy rights for U.S. citizens, the plaintiffs explained. It is the most recent filing since the individuals first sued the U.S. Department of Treasury in September.

The six plaintiffs behind the filing are Joseph Van Loon, Tyler Almeida. Alexander Fisher, Preston Van Loon, Kevin Vitale and Nate Welch. The filing details most of the group had previously interacted with Tornado Cash.

The legal battle comes as Alexey Pertsev, the creator of Tornado Cash, faces his own in The Netherlands. He has been held since Aug. 18 on a series of money laundering charges.

Magazine: Unstablecoins: Depegging, bank runs and other risks loom

Ripple, SEC case heads for conclusion after ‘summary judgment’ filed

September 19, 2022 Coin Telegraph

Brad Garlinghouse

Ripple argued that XRP profits came from “market forces of supply and demand” rather than any contract between Ripple and XRP token holders.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Ripple Labs have both called for a federal judge to make an immediate ruling on whether Ripple’s XRP sales violated U.S. securities laws.

In separate motions filed on Sept. 17 by Ripple and the SEC, both have called for a summary judgment in the U.S. District Court Southern District of New York.

Summary judgments are submitted to the courts when a party involved believes there’s enough evidence at hand to make a ruling without the need to proceed to trial.

Both parties have called on Judge Analisa Torres to make an immediate ruling as to whether Ripple’s XRP sales violated U.S. securities laws. Ripple has argued that the SEC has run out of answers to prove XRP sales constituted an “investment contract," while the SEC has held strong on its beliefs that it does.

Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse in a Twitter post on Sept. 17 said the filings made it clear that the SEC “isn’t interested in applying the law.”

“They want to remake it all in an impermissible effort to expand their jurisdiction far beyond the authority granted to them by Congress,” he said.

Today's filings make it clear the SEC isn’t interested in applying the law. They want to remake it all in an impermissible effort to expand their jurisdiction far beyond the authority granted to them by Congress. https://t.co/ooPPle3QjI
— Brad Garlinghouse (@bgarlinghouse) September 17, 2022

Meanwhile, Ripple general counsel Stuart Alderoty noted that “after two years of litigation” the SEC is “unable to identify any contract for investment” and “cannot satisfy a single prong of the Supreme Court Howey test.”

In its motion for summary judgment, Ripple claimed that the SEC’s case “boils down to an impermissibly open-ended assertion of jurisdiction over any transfer of an asset."

The motion also argued that the SEC cannot establish that XRP token holders could not “reasonably expect profits” based on Ripple’s efforts as there were no contract obligations between Ripple and XRP token holders.

On the other hand, the SEC’s own motion for summary judgment argued that there can be an “investment contract” without a contract, any rights granted to the purchaser, and without any obligations to the issuer.

But Ripple argued in its motion “that is not and should not be the law, because without these essential features there is nothing to which the Howey test can sensibly be applied.”

Ripple instead pointed to profits coming from “market forces of supply and demand,” something that the SEC “conceded” according to the Ripple motion.

The significance of this admission was highlighted by U.S. Attorney Jeremy Hogan in a Sept. 17 post on Twitter, stating that “these concessions are perfect for a summary judgment.”

Community reaction

The filing of the Ripple and SEC motions brought about mostly positive sentiment from the XRP community, with one Twitter user believing “the end is near”:

The end is near….Better make sure those bags are packed!!! #XRPArmy #xrpthestandard #Tothemoon https://t.co/9aUEex67V0
— Paul Macrae (@PaulMac_1975) September 18, 2022

The motion for summary judgment comes nearly two years after the SEC sued Ripple, former CEO Christian Larsen and current CEO Brad Garlinghouse in Dec. 2020 for allegedly raising $1.3 billion through unregistered securities sales through XRP.

If the court executes the summary judgment, the court ruling will have a profound impact on determining which cryptocurrencies constitute a security under U.S. securities laws.

The XRP token rose to highs not seen since July following the motion filing — reaching nearly $0.40, but has fallen slightly since then and is currently priced at $0.34, according to CoinGecko.

Summary Judgement