Advertisement
New Zealand markets open in 9 hours 39 minutes
  • NZX 50

    11,946.43
    +143.15 (+1.21%)
     
  • NZD/USD

    0.5959
    +0.0022 (+0.38%)
     
  • NZD/EUR

    0.5557
    +0.0011 (+0.20%)
     
  • ALL ORDS

    7,937.50
    -0.40 (-0.01%)
     
  • ASX 200

    7,683.00
    -0.50 (-0.01%)
     
  • OIL

    83.15
    +0.34 (+0.41%)
     
  • GOLD

    2,340.10
    +1.70 (+0.07%)
     
  • NASDAQ

    17,526.80
    +55.33 (+0.32%)
     
  • FTSE

    8,099.10
    +58.72 (+0.73%)
     
  • Dow Jones

    38,460.92
    -42.77 (-0.11%)
     
  • DAX

    17,994.82
    -93.88 (-0.52%)
     
  • Hang Seng

    17,284.54
    +83.27 (+0.48%)
     
  • NIKKEI 225

    37,628.48
    -831.60 (-2.16%)
     
  • NZD/JPY

    92.6760
    +0.5610 (+0.61%)
     

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