►
Description
Join a cavalcade of regulatory specialists in the Web3 ecosystem as they discuss the regulatory landscape in Web3.
Panelists:
Chris Donovan, NEAR Foundation
Marc Goldich, Proximity Labs
Tuongvy Le, Bain Capital Crypto
Richard Muirhead, Fabric Ventures
Sarah Brennan, Delphi Research & Delphi Ventures
Moderator: Mya Shofany, NEAR Foundation
--
Join NEAR's community:
Website: https://near.org/
Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/nearprotocol/
Discord: https://near.chat/
Medium: https://medium.com/nearprotocol
Blog: https://near.org/blog/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/NEARProtocol
GitHub: https://github.com/near https://github.com/nearprotocol
Dev Docs: https://docs.near.org/
Create a wallet: https://wallet.near.org/create
Apps on NEAR: https://awesomenear.com/
Learn to Build On NEAR: https://www.near.university/
Grants & Funding: https://near.org/grants/
#Blockchain #FutureisNEAR #NEAR #nearprotocol
#nft #dao
A
A
So
one
of
the
first
topics
we
wanted
to
talk
about
and
hit
on
is
a
very,
very
controversial
right
now,
especially
in
web
3..
So
nfts
exciting
fun,
but
are
they
a
security
so
Mark
and
I
were
talking
about
this
a
bit
before
we
got
on
stage
and
I
wanted
him
to
kind
of
walk
you
guys
through
Dabber
labs
and
the
case,
the
some
of
the
rulings
that
recently
happened
and
also
maybe
we
could
hit
on
some
Emoji
talk.
I've.
A
C
Yeah,
so
this
this
is
a
case.
There
was
a
case
recently.
It's
a
putative
class
action,
which
means
it's
not
quite
a
class
action.
Yet
it
has
to
be
certified
by
the
court
before
it's
actually
class
action,
and
this
was
a
case
that
was
brought
by
a
private
individual
against
Dapper
Labs,
alleging
that
Top
Shot
moments
are
securities
and
that
they
they
are
unregistered,
Securities
and
and
bringing
an
action
based
on
that
allegation.
So
you
may
have
seen
recently
in
coindesk
the
block
and
very
various
other
crypto
news
outlets
about
this
decision.
C
C
What
happened
there
was
a
motion
to
dismiss
a
motion
to
dismiss,
basically,
which
is
filed
by
the
defendant,
is
to
basically
challenge
the
the
the
complaint
and
say
that
the
plaintiff
has
not
brought
a
claim
that
a
sufficient
relief
can
be
made
for
right.
So
what
happened
was
the
judge?
There
decided
that,
yes,
the
plaintiff
did
State
a
claim.
C
The
plaintiff
did
stay
enough
to
pass
this
very
preliminary
stage
in
the
litigation
and
what
the
the
news
outlets
really
really
you
know
attached
to
was
the
fact
that
well,
in
so
doing
the
judge
said
you
know
these
look
like
Securities,
they
could
be
Securities.
There's
a
plausible
claim
that
their
unregistered
Securities
so
look.
Are
they
going
to
be
deemed
Securities
we're
going
to
have
to
see
what
happens
with
that
case,
you
know
if
I
had
to
pontificate
I
would
say
it's
more
likely
than
not,
but
right
now,
they're,
not
Securities.
C
This
was
just
a
motion
to
dismiss
in
a
private
litigation
regarding
Security's
laws.
Now
Maya
mentioned
emojis
right
and
maybe
what
one
of
the
most
fun
things
about
this
case
and
cases
aren't
always
fun,
but
this
one
at
least
had
some
pictures
in
it
right
because
the
judge
looked
at
the
you
know
the
various
Communications
right
regard
from
Dapper
Labs
about
the
moments,
and
you
know
how
did
it
convey
what
these
moments
are?
C
Well
guess
what
there
weren't
that
many
at
least
allegations
regarding
what
Dapper
lab
said
regarding
these
moments,
you
know
being
Investments,
however,
they
did
tweet
a
lot
and
in
their
tweets,
they
used
emojis,
and
these
emojis
were
like
the
rocket
ship,
emoji
right
and
the
court
actually
did
a
pretty
thorough
analysis
and
stating
you
know
these
rocket
ship
emojis.
These
graphs
that
are
going
up,
they
all
are
very
indicative
of
you
know
a
communication
that
these
are
investments
that
will
rise
in
value
and
it
will
profit
right.
C
So
this
was
really
the
first
time.
I
think
that
we've
seen
any
Court.
You
know
look
at
emojis
and
you
know
go
into
this
great.
You
know
great
length
about
how
they
can
convey
something
that
and
make
it
such
that
one
prong
of
the
Howie
test
could
be
satisfied
not
by
words
but
by
emojis.
So
you
know
we
should
all
be
a
little
bit
more
careful
I
think
with
our
emoji
usage,
but.
A
I
was
going
to
say
Mark
also
I,
think
it
depends
on
the
context.
Obviously
you
know
if
it's
related
to
a
financial
instrument
or
if
you're
talking
about
a
product
that
is
related
to
some.
You
know
the
higher
yields
Etc,
then
it
makes
sense
to
opt
out
of
using
those
emojis.
But
if
you're
just
saying
a
random
statement,
that's.
C
You
know
people
are
very
reactive.
So
after
this
decision
you
know
I
know
lawyers
in
the
space
who
who
looked
at
this-
and
they
said
oh
I-
was
right.
I,
you
know
I
told
my
team
never
to
use
rocket
ships,
you
know
and
don't
use
rocket
ship
emojis
and
we
have
a
ban
on
you
know
the
the
chart
go
up.
You
know
and
rocket
ships
well,
I
think
that's
a
little
overreaction.
Then
you
know
I.
Don't
think
that
anyone
should
really
ban
the
use
of
any
emojis
internally
in
any
business.
B
So,
as
you
guys
probably
know,
last
month,
the
SEC
sued
Kraken
and
they
entered
entered
into
a
settlement
where
Kraken
agreed
to
shut
down
permanently,
it's
staking
as
a
service
program
and
pay
a
fine.
So
this
is
the
first
SEC
enforcement
action
involving
staking
so
here
they
allege
that
the
staking
service
that
Kraken
provided
to
customers
was
a
type
of
investment
contract
that
should
have
been
registered
under
the
Securities
laws.
B
You
know
some
of
whatever
asset
you're
staking
whatever
asset
associated
with
the
protocol
that
you're
taking
on
is
so
that's
self-staking,
I,
think
that
is
fine,
there's
nothing
in
the
sec's
order
to
suggest
that
that
might
violate
the
Securities
laws
but,
of
course,
staking
as
a
service
these
these
programs
that
Kraken
provided
and
that
other
centralized
custodial
platforms
provide
like
coinbase
like
binance
and
others.
It's
very
different.
B
Well,
it's
not
very
different,
but
it's
different
in
the
sense
that
you
know
if
you're,
a
customer
you're
handing
over
your
assets
to
this
provider
and
they're
staking
it
on
your
behalf.
Kraken's
program
was
you
know
it.
It
was
run
in
a
particular
way
and-
and
there
are
certain
features
of
it-
that
the
SEC
pointed
to
to
say
that
in
particular,
it's
satisfied
the
efforts
of
others
prong
of
the
Howie
test.
B
You
I
believe
to
withdraw
your
stake
assets
at
any
time,
as
opposed
to
say
you
know
your
ability
to
to
unstake
your
assets
being
dependent
on
you
know,
whatever
the
lock
up
parameters
of
the
protocol
are,
so
those
are
the
kinds
of
things
that
the
SEC
cited
to
say.
Actually,
this
is
very
different
than
self-staking
Kraken.
B
A
E
E
A
A
D
Well,
I
think
that
in
that
case,
the
only
thing
that
I'll
say
is
I
think
that
there
is,
in
my
opinion,
a
little
bit
of
redundancy,
because
I
think
DF
has
handled
that
really
well
they're
the
regulator
on
the
scene.
They
have
like
a
permissive
regime
where
there
was
like
boundaries
of
behavior
that
they
had
allowed,
and
so
in
that
case
they
like
stepped
outside
of
it,
and
they
came
in
and
said
you
don't
do
that
and
it
like
handled
it
and
then
what
we
we've
had.
C
A
But
I
do
want
to
open
up
the
discussion
a
little
bit
more
and
expand
to
other
jurisdictions.
We
have
Chris
and
he
specializes
in
UK
law
as
well,
and
would
love
to
hear
about
what's
happening
there.
I
know.
On
a
on
a
positive
note,
the
UK
is
asking
for
the
industry
to
respond
to
a
crypto
consultation
and
they
have
three
specific
chapters
in
the
consultation
that
hit
on
D5
and
I
wanted
Chris
to
kind
of
talk
to
us
about
it
a
little
bit
and
share.
E
Market
in
a
minute,
I
know
there's
a
lot
of
strong
thoughts
about
that,
but
in
the
UK,
things
definitely
feel
more
optimistic.
I
think
there
is
a
bit
more
good
faith:
interaction
from
lawmakers
and
Regulators.
The
new
prime
minister,
Rashid
sunak,
is
quite
keen
on
our
space
in
general
and
I
think
he
views.
You
know
that
there's
a
lot
of
opportunity
to
encourage
developers
and
and
users
of
the
technology
to
the
jurisdiction
so
to
Maya's.
E
Think
one
of
the
most
significant
things
about
the
consultation
and
how
it's
been
structured
is
that
you
know
the
approach
that
they've
taken
is
essentially
look
if
you're
doing
something
from
a
centralized
perspective
with
digital
assets.
It
looks
a
lot
like
a
Trad
fire,
equivalent
they're
going
to
regulate
that,
and
you
know
I
think
a
lot
of
people
would
think
that's
fair
and
reasonable.
But
what
the
proposal
also
says
is
well
look
if,
if
you're
decentralized,
we
we
recognize
that.
Actually,
that
probably
requires
a
different
approach
right.
We
can't.
E
E
You
know
point
is
in
the
right
direction
and
so
to
Maya's
point
it's
a
great
opportunity
for
everyone
here
who
you
know
who
takes
this
stuff
seriously
and
wants
to
try
and
push
regulation
in
a
helpful
and-
and
you
know,
engaged
Direction
to
to
you
know
to
make
a
contribution,
and
so
the
foundation
is
going
to
be
submitting
a
response
to
that.
Consultation
lacks
punk
as
well.
E
That
I
know
a
few
of
us
up
here
are
involved
with,
are
also
going
to
do
the
same
thing,
and
you
know
there's
a
really
good
opportunity
to
you
know
to
advocate
for
a
disclosure
based
regime.
I
think
in
particular
would
be
a
really
fantastic
thing
to
try
and
Achieve
and
I
think
in
in
the
UK,
because
there's
a
real
desire
to
embrace
the
technology.
I.
A
Yeah
I
actually
really
loved
the
way
they
worded
some
of
the
questions
within
the
questionnaire
they
were
asking.
What
do
you
think
as
an
industry?
The
regulatory
challenges
are.
What
do
you
think
is
the
path
to
decentralization,
so
they're,
really
giving
us
a
very
big
opportunity
here
to
influence
that
and
yeah
yeah.
E
One
thing
I
was
going
to
add
is
which
is
a
great
thing
to
see.
You
know
they
explicitly
stayed
in
the
paper
that
they
don't
want
to
regulate
developers
right,
which
again
is
not
something
that
is
necessarily
a
view
that
shot
in
the
U.S
right
now
and
one
other
thing
that
I
wanted
to
mention.
I
was
talking
to
Sarah
about
before
we
came
up
on
the
stage
is
you
know,
LAX
Punk
have
put
out
an
amazing
regax,
Safe,
Harbor
proposal
and
I.
Think
that's
something
that
you
know
we.
E
D
What
we
thought
that
looked
like
and
then,
if
you
wanted
to
do
a
token
issuance
and
you
had
not
hit
the
Safe
Harbor
you'd
sort
of
opt
into
a
Securities
offering
wrapper
and
it'd
be
an
exempt
reporting
regime.
And
if
you
did
an
issuance,
we
go
through
it
kind
of
in
depth
like
what
we'd
like
to
see
you'd
get
to
offer
to
retail.
We
talk
about
the
disclosures
that
we'd
like
to
see.
A
F
I'm
sure
they
would
be
in
general,
but
I
just
wanted
to
First
say
like
this
is
probably
the
longest
I've
sat
listening
to
lawyers
without
being
overly
tempted
to
interrupt
them
on
a
call
or
elsewhere,
but
actually
I'm
feeling
very
comfortable
in
the
company
of
so
many
of
my
parents
about
both
of
the
ways.
Maybe
that's.
F
F
How
do
you
know
that
that's
actually
kind
of
working
properly
as
a
kind
of
a
process,
and
they
said
well
all
of
these
people
here
we
know
they're
all
from
the
same
Village
as
us,
so
we
can
trust
them,
and
my
point
about
that
is
that
what
we
need
here
and
what
we're
experiencing
and
the
way
in
which
you
know
compliance
and
regulation
is
unfolding-
is-
is
a
fundamentally
different
trust
model.
We're
going
from
that.
If
I
can
call
it
village-based
trust
model
to
you
know
we
could
you.
F
You
knew
your
bank
manager
to
something
that
was
based
on
centralization
and
and
protection
of
privacy,
most
of
the
time
of
data,
and
then
you
identified
who
people
were,
and
we
also
need.
We
need
to
move
to
a
different
regime
for
this.
You
know
the
decentralized
world
and
that's
non-trivial,
but
any
anytime,
there's
something
that's
non-trivial.
F
You
know,
and
you
know,
and
we
like
to
say
actually
at
fabric
we
we
look
for
found
vendors
who
are
kind
of
on
the
border
between
relentlessness
and
recklessness
and
and
obviously
we've
seen
a
little
bit
of
recklessness
in
the
last
last
year
and
and
I
think
you
know
we'll
continue
to
there'll
be
opportunity
at
that.
That
point
for
people
to
tap
into
and
they've
been,
maybe
picking
up
on
some
of
the
points
about
whether
you
regulate
developers
or
you,
regular
businesses
and
so
forth.
F
One
way
it's
been
summarized
I
think
a
little
bit
it's
a
bit
of
a
bit
sound
bitey
is,
like
you
know,
don't
regulate
the
protocols,
regulate
the
apps
and
and
there's
also
been
a
sort
of
a
claim
that
if
we
want
to
see
come
to
fruition
this
kind
of
global
nation
which
is
quite
borderless
and
that
we
can't
put
any
of
this,
the
smarts
into
the
protocols,
I'm,
not
sure
I.
Personally,
actually
it's
the
beginning
of
it
was
a
long
game
debate.
I'm,
not
sure.
F
That's
true,
I
think
that's
exactly
where
the
opportunity
is
to
build
some
great
systems
that
are
able
to
marry
up
the
technology,
with
indisputable
facts
and
with,
however,
different
regions
and
apps
need
to
adapt
to
deliver
compliance
systems.
That's
pretty
complex,
but
that's
the
opportunity
for
entrepreneurs
I.
A
Think
also
our
industry
has
been
you
know,
keeping
those
things
in
mind,
because
some
of
the
things
Regulators
think
about
are
like
privacy,
security
and
as
we're
building
and
as
these
young
entrepreneurs
are
building.
A
lot
of
the
technology
is
aimed
to
build
a
secure
network.
It's
aimed
to
have
privacy
but
I.
Think
there's
like
a
disconnect
in
conversation,
often
between
like
the
regulators
and
the
industry
itself,
but
I
I
really
liked
your
in.
Like
your
input
on
that
and
there's.
F
F
E
Much,
but
there
is
a
also
quite
a
big
geopolitical
competitive
element
to
what's
going
on
right
now
as
well
right,
because
a
lot
of
different
jurisdictions
are
just
selling
to
get
into
the
the
pole
position
to
attract
our
space
in
a
positive
way
and
I.
Think
the
UK
right
now
is
seeing
that
as
a
really
big
opportunity
for
them
and
they're
kind
of
the
next
Paradigm
of
innovation
right
and
I.
I.
C
C
Yes,
the
U.S
is
not
fostering
Innovation,
you
know
full
stop
and
IT
projects
are
leaving
they're
doing
out
of
necessity.
No
competent
team,
that's
in
Defy,
is
going
to.
You
know,
make
their
protocol
available
to
the
US
there's
going
to
be
geofencing
and
Geo
geoblocking,
the
us
as
well
as
sanctioned
countries.
So
it's
a
sad
State
of
Affairs,
but
it
isn't
reversible.
The
way
I
see
it
reversing
is
by
looking
at
the
UK
and
and
looking
at
the
EU
and
seeing
what
they're
doing
they
are
trying
to
Foster
Innovation.
C
They
are
trying
to
have
this
true,
come
in
and
talk
mentality
and
what's
going
to
come
out
of,
that
is
a
more
hospitable,
jurisdiction
for
teams
to
operate
in
and
and
for
projects
to
be
built
in,
and
it
will
be
some
time
before
it
happens,
but
the
U.S
will
wake
up
will
realize
that
they
lost
an
opportunity
and
that
point
they'll,
probably
change
course.
But
at
this
point,
in
my
opinion,
that's
not
the
direction
things
are
going.
F
D
D
F
E
C
C
We
always
should
just
go
back
to
base
principles
and
look
at
what
is
this
technology?
What's
it
there
for
it
started
as
dissident
Tech
it'll
always
be
dissident
Tech,
it's
a
feature,
not
a
bug.
There
are
obviously
mainstream
use
cases.
There
are,
you
know,
amazing
things
that
can
be
done
with
this
technology,
but
it
it
started
as
distant
Tech,
and
you
know
we
should
always
go
back
to
decentralization.
C
You
know
this
premise
that
you
know
users
should
be
able
to
access
this
technology
without
an
intermediary.
They
should
be
able
to
run
this
technology
locally
front
ends,
aren't
really
front
ends.
They
are
on
your
computer.
You
know,
you're
running
it
locally
and
I
think
that
that
is
where
this
space
is
headed.
That's
where
the
space
should
have
always
been
headed
and
sometimes
times
it
takes
a
hostile
environment
to
to
survive
and
to
find
the
right
path
forward
and
I.
C
Thinking
about
these
issues
and
putting
together
this
great
work,
product
and-
and
hopefully
you
know-
it'll-
be
acknowledged
and
adopted
in
some
form-
and
you
know
we've
seen
with
Hester
purse
and
some
and
some
other
policy
makers
they've
excited
it
and
as
an
example
and
that's
nice
to
see,
but
we
would
really
love
to
see
it
adopted.
We'd,
really
love
to
see
these.
The
policy
statements
and
the
different
policy
works
that
we're
putting
out
to
be
to
be
viewed
and
utilized
and
I.
C
Think
what
you
know
UK
and
the
EU
are
doing-
is
great,
because
they're
they're
actually
asking
for
this
to
be
done,
so
we're
happy
to
and
Chris
has
been
Monumental
in
this
for
Lex
Punk
and
in
connection
with
Lex
punk
I'm
working
on
some
pieces
that
that
are
directly
related
to
to
that
effort.
So
it's
just
it's
just
great
to
see.
You
know
when,
in
these
environments,
not
only
does
the
technology
Thrive
but
I,
think
the
people
do
as
well.
B
Ahead
and
comment
to
what
Mark
was
saying,
so
all
I
wanted
to
say
is
you
know
like
as
an
American
what
makes
and
working
in
this
industry.
The
thing
that
makes
me
really
sad
is
that
I
feel
like
the
US
is
really
squandering
like
its
first
mover
Advantage,
which
is
a
really
huge
thing
when
it
comes
to
any
kind
of
like
technological
innovation
or
just
innovation
in
general.
A
B
E
F
Near
is
the
boss
and
for
those
who
know
their
Bruce
Springsteen
kind
of
born
in
the
Ukraine,
maybe
can
you
can
kind
of
twist
it
around
a
little
bit
and
not
that
we
want
to
get
into
the
geopolitics,
but
I
think
there
are
a
lot
of
I
would
argue.
Maybe
Europe
actually
was
the
first
to
both
have
and
then
squander
its
first
move
of
advantage
in
this
space.
F
You
know
whether
it
be
arguably
Bitcoin-
and
you
know
many
nurses-
oh
we've
Chi
analysis
you
know
near
and
but
putting
that
to
one
side.
I
think
that
you
know
we
need
to
trust
in
the
power
of
protocols
as
a
field
of
innovation,
but
also,
ultimately,
I
think
we'll
see
that
what
people
perceive
as
the
kind
of
Achilles
heel
of
this
space
will
turn
out
to
be
its
greatest
capability.