FWIW this is the important part, not the fact that he was allegedly sending himself money.
It wasn't buying an equity, it was buying a token that was the same price as the equity. Buying the token had no effect on the upward price of the equity. I can see why the SEC is protective of that, for sure.
The bigger issue is that Mirror was hacked and nobody knew about it, for seven months. https://rekt.news/mirror-rekt/
Sounds like a derivative to me. That is also a type of security.
To be clear, I wasn't trying to debate the nature of if it is a security or not.
So if you make a financial product that encompasses two different derivatives it would be a synthetic derivative.
It’s mostly a meaningless term as far as regulation goes.
Since the SEC is going after Do Kwon, it tells us that they are not letting him get away with his exit scam. That is the point. After this, I will expect more regulations [0] to come forward and will especially impact Tether. That would be interesting.
Not only that, this will wipe out the useless token projects with no use or utility but the compliant cryptocurrencies like the ones in ISO 20020 with continue to survive.
These cryptocurrencies are not all going to be as the critics keep saying; 'totally destoryed' 100% banned entirely and instead they will continue to co-exist with the current system rather than 'overthrow' it. It's here to stay I'm afraid.
[0] https://www.pymnts.com/cryptocurrency/2022/push-to-regulate-...