Advertisement
Canada markets closed
  • S&P/TSX

    22,167.03
    +59.95 (+0.27%)
     
  • S&P 500

    5,254.35
    +5.86 (+0.11%)
     
  • DOW

    39,807.40
    +47.29 (+0.12%)
     
  • CAD/USD

    0.7383
    -0.0003 (-0.05%)
     
  • CRUDE OIL

    83.11
    -0.06 (-0.07%)
     
  • Bitcoin CAD

    95,607.22
    -445.55 (-0.46%)
     
  • CMC Crypto 200

    885.54
    0.00 (0.00%)
     
  • GOLD FUTURES

    2,254.80
    +16.40 (+0.73%)
     
  • RUSSELL 2000

    2,124.55
    +10.20 (+0.48%)
     
  • 10-Yr Bond

    4.2060
    +0.0100 (+0.24%)
     
  • NASDAQ

    16,379.46
    -20.06 (-0.12%)
     
  • VOLATILITY

    13.01
    0.00 (0.00%)
     
  • FTSE

    7,952.62
    +20.64 (+0.26%)
     
  • NIKKEI 225

    40,369.44
    +201.37 (+0.50%)
     
  • CAD/EUR

    0.6836
    -0.0007 (-0.10%)
     

E-Gold Claims US Officials Buried Key Report in 2008 Landmark Crypto Ruling

A defunct digital currency project that was a precursor to bitcoin has claimed the U.S. government suppressed crucial evidence in a 2008 landmark case that has since shaped the cryptocurrency industry.

  • E-Gold’s former directors filed a petition Tuesday for a writ of coram nobis – in which the court changes the original judgment upon discovery of a fundamental error – at the District of Columbia court.

  • Founded in 1996, E-Gold allowed users to trade digital units backed by precious metals – at its peak, the company held around $85 million in gold.

  • The U.S. government charged E-Gold with being an unlicensed money transmitter in 2007; the project’s directors pleaded guilty in 2008.

  • The ex-directors now claim in court that the federal government unlawfully concealed a 2006 review from Florida’s Office for Financial Regulation (OFR) so they “could make an example” out of E-Gold.

  • Per the filing, the OFR review said E-Gold did not count as a money transmitter, as the gold-based asset was closer to a commodity than a fiat currency under state law.

  • E-Gold’s former directors claim the court’s judgment would have been substantially different had they been allowed access to the OFR review

  • The E-Gold case effectively extended the definition of “money transmitter” in the U.S. to include any system that stored and transferred value.

  • Many crypto businesses subsequently have had to be regulated as money transmitters in individual states if they want to operate legally in the U.S.

See the full filing below:

See also: Lessons From the First Digital Gold Boom

Related Stories