pull down to refresh

Not good. I listened to a The Rage reporter take solace in the fact that:
  1. Judge let him remain free until sentence
  2. Judge said that the charge he was convicted on was "most appealable", and raised interesting questions.
That doesn't comfort me much. Hanging your hat on an appeal is always a position you don't want to be in.
444 sats \ 1 reply \ @Scoresby 8h
Here's Coin Center's take:
Coin Center’s Seven Takeaways from the Storm Verdict:
▪️ 1. The sole conviction—unlicensed money transmission (18 U.S.C. § 1960)—turns mainly on legal/regulatory interpretation (“does this count as money transmission?”), not jury fact-finding.
▪️ 2. The court, at the motion-to-dismiss stage, discounted FinCEN’s stated guidance on what counts as “money transmission” in crypto and treated the category as broader than “control of customer funds.”
▪️ 3. With “money transmission” defined that broadly, the jury’s room to decide facts was narrow; the court’s interpretation largely dictated the outcome.
▪️ 4. DOJ’s prior “end regulation by prosecution” memo didn’t fully resolve §1960 issues left things open for continued prosecution; the DOJ dropped the failure-to-register theory but not the “knowingly transmitting criminal funds” theory. Coin Center’s view: both hinge on “transmitting” and are improper against developers excluded by FinCEN guidance.
▪️ 5. The BRCA (Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act), now attached to CLARITY and passed by the House, would confirm that non-controlling developers aren’t money transmitters. It can’t help Roman retroactively, but the Senate should pass it in upcoming market-structure debates.
▪️ 6. Coin Center fellow Michael Lewellen is suing DOJ for a declaration that publishing/maintaining his software isn’t unlicensed money transmission. Coin Center will continue supporting this effort to correct the legal interpretation.
▪️ 7. Coin Center is sorry Roman faces sentencing on a theory that contradicts the regulator’s guidance. He should appeal the denial of his motion to dismiss; Coin Center will assist however possible.
reply
That's good news about the pending legislation. Let's hope it passes.
reply
136 sats \ 0 replies \ @freetx 6h
These are the types of cases that we need some organized bitcoin-centric legal non-profit. Something we could donate sats to in order to fund the appeal.
It would do the entire industry good if these "money transmitter" laws are deemed not to apply to wallets
reply
This is pretty bad. From my understanding of the legal theory (mostly by talking to ChatGPT), even apps like Stacker.News could be implicated despite never actually being in control of customer funds. Even if all you do is control the interface that people use to directly transmit funds to each other, you could be classified as a money transmitter.
reply
Exactly. I'm torn between analyzing the decision as a lawyer would or just taking a @DarthCoin approach.
reply
193 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 8h
reply
As a layman I think the legal theory sounds extremely suspect. Are the makers of cash registers money transmitters? How about makers of leather wallets?
reply
75 sats \ 0 replies \ @nichro 8h
If you organize a game of holdem poker with friends are you a money transmitter
reply
1188 sats \ 4 replies \ @Scoresby 8h
I'd be curious for your thoughts in response to this:
Just caught @rstormsf outside the courtroom. I asked how he was feeling. In a quiet voice, but with a noticeable smile, he told me:
“It’s a big win. The ‘1960’ charge is bullshit and we’re going to fight it all the way. You know how President Trump said ‘fight, fight, fight’? We’ll do that too.”
He expressed relief at not being remanded to jail and mentioned his 5-year-old daughter as one of the reasons he plans to keep fighting the one charge he was convicted on.
He said he’s heading back to Seattle tomorrow.
reply
664 sats \ 2 replies \ @siggy47 OP 8h
For Roman, this was a good outcome. He isn't facing much time. For us, and I hate being selfish, this money transmission (1960) conviction could be bad if it's upheld on appeal. It could broadly be construed to affect non custodial wallets, and even lightning.
reply
36 sats \ 1 reply \ @Scoresby 8h
ugh. it's so frustrating to see laws (or decisions) like these that very clearly lead us down the path of losing freedom, but that aren't so dramatic that the mainstream population will care.
reply
That's for sure. I hope he gets a good appellate lawyer.
reply
After a nearly 4-week proceeding, the jury in US v. Storm found the Tornado Cash co-founder guilty on one count, and could not reach a decision on two others.
After a nearly 4-week proceeding, the jury in US v. Roman Storm found the Tornado Cash co-founder guilty on one count of conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money transmitting business under 18 US Criminal Code Section 1960, but could not reach a decision on the charges of conspiracy to commit money laundering and violate U.S. sanctions, resulting in a mistrial on those counts.
After the trial, Storm and his defense counsel reiterated their commitment to appeal the single conviction.
Judge Katherine Polk Failla rejected the prosecution's motion to take Storm into custody, commenting that there were many possibilities for appeal on the 1960 count. The count was impacted by shifting stances from the Trump Department of Justice, in the form of the Blanche memo.
The 1960 count carries a maximum potential sentence of 5 years, of which Storm would be likely to serve only a portion, even if his appeals failed.
Storm co-created the Tornado Cash privacy protocol with Alexey Pertsev and Roman Semenov, who are also his co-founders in the blockchain security and consulting firm Peppersec.
reply
It's another conspiracy charge just like the Scamourai one, prosecution with their dick in hand yet again, the fact they can't make anything stick on the two most egregious products in the space is a massive W.
Hipsters that will use this to doom and virtue signal should be mocked until they cry and then mocked again for crying.
reply
So the Judge held the jury hostage until they unanimously convicted an innocent man.
A crypto dev is now an unlicensed money transmitter? Or any open source dev, if their code finds its way into a node? Black day for this community, but it was naïve to think that state won't fight its separation from money.
reply
36 sats \ 0 replies \ @LAXITIVA 7h
Lol
reply
Exit the matrix. It's not easy, though.
reply
Sigh
reply
An appeal is not victory. Betting on it means you’re starting from a defensive stance.
reply
Yes. And the stakes are high here for us if he loses.
reply
36 sats \ 1 reply \ @Wumbo 9h
A Manhattan jury found Tornado Cash co-founder and developer Roman Storm guilty of charges related to conspiracy to run an unlicensed money business.
The jury convicted Roman on conspiracy to run an unlicensed money transmittal business, which carries a maximum sentence of up to five years in prison. No unanimity was reached on charges of conspiracy to commit money laundering nor on conspiracy to violate North Korea sanctions.
I didn't see which charge listed in your OP
reply
It was the money transmission charge.
reply
36 sats \ 0 replies \ @claos545 7h
Totally agree. When the "bright side" is that the appeal might work out, you're already deep in the hole. It’s hard to celebrate anything when the mere act of writing code, open source code, can land you in this kind of trouble. This sets a chilling precedent. Even if appeals win later, the damage to builders, privacy advocates, and the entire ethos of permissionless innovation is already being done.
reply
Some good news. Trump family is heavily invested in shitcoin defi. This decision would affect them. I hope he'll pressure DOJ and support the legislation.
reply
stackers have outlawed this. turn on wild west mode in your /settings to see outlawed content.