NFTs

Subscribe to NFTs via RSS
US Cryptoasset Regime Tracker Microsite 2025_3to2

Online resource provides a single source to track legislative and regulatory developments related to blockchain, cryptocurrencies, and digital assets.

By Stephen P. Wink, Yvette Valdez, and Zachary Fallon

Latham & Watkins has launched the US Crypto Policy Tracker, a new online resource that provides up-to-date information, analysis, and source links on the latest legislative and regulatory developments in the rapidly evolving blockchain, cryptocurrency, and digital asset landscape in the United States.

Since the new administration took office…

Fintech.Picture1

Understanding NFTs as commodities calls for a more nuanced analysis than what their “non-fungible” label might suggest at first glance.

By Yvette D. Valdez

The appropriate regulatory characterization of cryptocurrencies and digital assets for US legal purposes has spawned many pages of analysis and occupied many hours of industry, law firm, and regulatory consideration. Significant amounts of commentary, and later government and judicial attention, have been devoted to determining whether fungible cryptocurrencies and digital assets constitute securities for purposes of…

Virtual-Currency-B-Single

In its second action involving NFTs, the SEC targets an offering tied to fundraising and promises of future value.

By Ghaith Mahmood, Nima H. Mohebbi, Stephen P. Wink, Douglas K. Yatter, Adam Zuckerman, Luca Marquard, and Deric Behar

On September 13, 2023, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a cease-and-desist order (the Order) against Stoner Cats 2, LLC (SC2) for an alleged unregistered securities offering relating to SC2’s sale of $8.2 million worth of non-fungible tokens (NFTs). The SEC alleged that the NFTs were issued to the public to finance the production of a web-based animated series by the same name.

SC2 agreed to a settlement that includes a civil monetary penalty of $1 million and ceasing and desisting from violating the Securities Act of 1933. SC2 neither admitted nor denied any wrongdoing as part of the settlement, which does not include any allegations of misleading or fraudulent statements.

The SEC obtained this settlement a few weeks after its first enforcement action against an NFT issuer (for more information, see this Latham post). This second action may signal a meaningful escalation in the area of NFTs.

Online internet Shopping

In its first enforcement action involving NFTs, the SEC focused on issuer marketing that promised outsized returns on investment and platform building.

By Ghaith Mahmood, Nima H. Mohebbi, Stephen P. Wink, Douglas K. Yatter, Adam Zuckerman, and Deric Behar

On August 28, 2023, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a cease-and-desist order (the Order) against a Los Angeles media and entertainment company (the Company) for an unregistered securities offering relating to its sale of $29.9 million worth of non-fungible tokens (NFTs)[1]. The company agreed to a settlement that includes disgorging $5 million, paying another $1 million in fees and penalties, and ceasing and desisting from violating the Securities Act of 1933. Notably, the settlement does not include fraud charges.

Ethereum’s transition to proof of stake presents opportunities and pitfalls for certain digital assets and tokens built on the network.

By Jenny Cieplak, Ghaith Mahmood, Yvette D. Valdez, Stephen P. Wink, Adam Fovent, and Justin Tzeng

After years of development, the Ethereum blockchain appears poised to make its much-anticipated transition from a proof-of-work (PoW) consensus mechanism to a proof-of-stake (PoS) model. This change has been described as one of the most significant upgrades in the…

Bitcoin Association for BSV will release software to facilitate court orders to freeze stolen or lost coins, while some courts recently authorised service proceedings by tokenised airdrop.

By Christian F. McDermott, Andrew C. Moyle, and Nara Yoo

Earlier this year, in Tulip Trading Ltd (TTL) v. Bitcoin Association for BSV (Bitcoin Association) and others, the UK High Court held that bitcoin software developers do not owe a duty of care to bitcoin owners who have lost their…

The latest analysis of “smarter contracts” provides helpful guidance on the opportunities and potential legal and practical risks in adopting these technologies.

By Christian F. McDermott, Andrew C. Moyle, and Nara Yoo

LawtechUK’s latest analysis of so-called smarter contracts in the UK, set out in its Smarter Contracts Report (the Report), seeks to identify how technology is transforming contract practices, and to explore future opportunities and innovation. The Report defines a “smarter contract” as a legally binding digital…

A new Article 12 and amendments to Article 9 regarding “controllable electronic records” would govern transactions and security interests in digital assets.

By Lawrence Safran and Deric Behar

On July 13, 2022, the Uniform Law Commission (in partnership with the American Law Institute) approved amendments intended to modernize the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). The amendments principally cover transactions involving emerging digital asset technologies such as virtual (non-fiat) currencies, non-fungible tokens (NFTs), and digital assets with embedded payment rights, although a…

The SFC issued a statement to clarify its regulatory approach in relation to non-fungible tokens and remind investors of related risks.

By Simon Hawkins, Farhana Sharmeen, Adrian Fong, Gen Huong Tan and Shirley Wong

On 6 June 2022, the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) issued a statement drawing attention to the risks associated with investing in non-fungible tokens (NFTs) and summarising the legal and regulatory requirements applicable to NFTs.

This follows recent guidance from Hong Kong’s banking, securities, and insurance regulators to financial institutions looking to undertake virtual asset activities (see Latham’s Client Alert Hong Kong’s New Crypto Regulatory Framework to Facilitate Greater Institutional Participation). Together, the statement and guidance demonstrate that the regulators are continuing to look closely at the digital asset space.

The Court held that software developers do not owe a duty of care to bitcoin owners who lost their private keys.

By Christian F. McDermott, Andrew C. Moyle, and Nara Yoo

In Tulip Trading Ltd (TTL) v. Bitcoin Association for BSV and others, TTL claimed that personal computers of its CEO, Dr. Craig Wright, were hacked and the encrypted private keys to two addresses holding around 111,000 bitcoin (currently worth over £3.6 billion) belonging to TTL were stolen. TTL also claimed that the hackers deleted copies of the keys, preventing Dr. Wright and TTL from accessing the digital assets at those addresses.

TTL brought action against 16 core developers (Developers) that allegedly control the software in respect of the four relevant digital asset networks (Networks), consisting of one “original” network and three subsequent blockchain copies. In this case, the Court looked at the extent of the Developer’s liability to TTL for the stolen/lost keys.