Companions at Davis Polk, Joe Hall and Zach Zweihorn, dispute Aaron Kaplan’s assertion that his company, Prometheum, has came all the device in which through a legally compliant capability to navigate the crypto landscape within the US. Kaplan’s claims, they suggest, misread or misrepresent the law.

Kaplan’s proposal, that itemizing tokens simply involves an updated Impact ATS, is rejected by Hall and Zweihorn, who recount here is rarely any longer ample. They also justify on the token sale route of, explaining that a checkbox on Impact D doesn’t automatically classify a token as a security.

Additional no longer easy Kaplan’s argument, they disagree with the realizing that tokens phase of a Impact D filing can even be traded after a one-year freeze, highlighting capability impacts on network fashion and technical feasibility factors, especially for Ethereum-basically basically based tokens.

Despite Prometheum’s claims of having resolved these complexities, Hall and Zweihorn live doubtful, emphasizing the necessity for more sophisticated and tailor-made law.

WATCH THE FULL INTERVIEW HERE