Binance, Kraken Face Legal Action For Delisting Bitcoin SV Over CSW’s Satoshi Claims

by

As an analyst with a background in law and extensive experience in the cryptocurrency market, I believe that the ongoing legal action against Binance and Kraken is a significant development that could potentially set important precedents for future regulatory decisions in the crypto space. The allegations of collusion among exchanges to delist Bitcoin SV based on fraudulent claims, as well as the violation of competition law, are serious concerns that demand a thorough investigation.

Binance and Kraken are expected to confront a legal dispute in London this week during a three-day court proceeding initiated by BSV Claims Ltd. The lawsuit stems from these exchanges’ decision to remove Bitcoin SV (BSV) from their platforms back in 2019. The delisting ensued following contentious assertions by Craig Steven Wright (CSW) that he is Satoshi Nakamoto, the anonymous pioneer behind Bitcoin (BTC).

Binance & Kraken Brace For Legal Showdown

BSV Claims Ltd asserts that the reason for Bitcoinswap’s delisting was built on deceitful allegations and collusion between cryptocurrency exchanges, significantly affecting BSV’s value and market fluidity. In their opinion, these actions were both unwarranted and a breach of fair competition practices. They identified the infringement of Article 101 of the European Union’s Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and Section 2 of the United Kingdom’s Competition Act 1998 as the specific violation.

Additionally, the focus of this situation is on a string of tweets between April 12 and April 19, 2019. These messages, known as the “Collusive Tweets,” saw crypto exchanges such as Binance and Kraken announcing their plans to remove BSV from their listsings.

As a researcher studying the events surrounding cryptocurrency exchanges in 2019, I came across a significant period from mid-April to late June. During this timeframe, certain exchange platforms carried out delisting actions for Bitcoin SV (BSV). These announcements, made earlier, were then executed. Notably, BSV Claims Ltd has accused these exchanges of colluding in an anticompetitive agreement intended to skew competition within the cryptocurrency market.

Robert Buckland, the MP candidate for Swindon South in the upcoming UK election, has found himself embroiled in controversy due to his advisory position with BSV Claims Ltd. Buckland earns £5,000 every three months for providing six hours of advice monthly. However, this arrangement has drawn scrutiny from BitMEX Research, who labeled it a “frivolous” case in a recent post on their platform.

Insight Into Judgement Against CSW

Additionally, Justice Mellor’s recent decision revealed that Wright’s assertions of being Satoshi Nakamoto were based on deceitful documents, introducing a complex layer to the ongoing case. Consequently, the forthcoming hearing will explore if the exchanges’ actions to remove BSV from their platforms were driven by these misrepresentations and whether they collaborated to damage BSV’s market standing.

BSV Claims Ltd contends that the worth of the blockchain technology supporting BSV and other digital currencies is significant. They highlight the advantages, including smart contracts and secure data preservation, which this technology provides. Furthermore, they believe that the delisting was unjust as it adversely affected BSV’s reputation and market value by undermining its technological potential.

As a researcher looking into the claims made by Wright regarding his role in the creation of Bitcoin, it’s important to acknowledge his self-proclaimed status as a polymath, with allegations of penning the Bitcoin White Paper and coding its initial version. However, upon closer examination, the court uncovered extensive instances of dishonesty and forgery on Wright’s part when attempting to substantiate these claims.

The latest ruling brings Wright’s dishonesty to light, demonstrating how he intermingled truths with falsehoods. Furthermore, it brought attention to the frequent employment of intricate terminology to cloud the matter. When presented with proof contradicting his assertions, Wright responded by fabricating more lies and avoiding responsibility.

As an analyst, I’d highlight that the court unearthed several instances of dishonesty on Wright’s part. One such instance was his sworn testimony stating that he received the Bitcoin White Paper in 2008, which was later proven false. Furthermore, the court discovered that Wright’s fabrications were riddled with inconsistencies and easily exposed, leading them to conclude that his efforts to establish himself as Satoshi Nakamoto were fraudulent.

Furthermore, Wright’s wrongdoings have extended across various legal systems, involving the United Kingdom and Norway, as well as past instances such as the Kleiman lawsuit. The ruling provides an account of Wright’s deliberate attempts to mislead the court, representing a grave violation of the judicial process.

Read More

2024-06-03 18:40