Bitcoin Global News (BGN)
October 25, 2018 -- ADVFN Crypto NewsWire -- Since this March,
Coinbase has been battling it out in court in an attempt to clear
their name from the charge that they let employees trade Bitcoin
Cash before it was actually listed publicly. What you may not know
at this time is that the original complainants against Coinbase on
this subject were a group of investors from its GDAX exchange which
has been recently re-branded as Coinbase Pro.
To quickly recap, the specifics of this complaint include the major
allegation that Coinbase gave tips to certain inside individuals
before the launch was set to happen, so that these individuals
could trade Bitcoin Cash in advance, anticipating the typical,
initial Coinbase jump in the asset’s price. Part of their evidence
for this complaint appears to be the fact that Bitcoin Cash prices
went up just before December 20, when it went live on the
exchange’s platforms.
The precise law that the accusers say has been violated is
reportedly California’s Unfair Competition Law, which seems to
include specific provisions like anything that constitutes an
“unfair advantage over customers,” being “unfair competition.”
Therefore, in a general sense, if these allegations can be proven,
they would seem to fall under this law’s scope.
According to an article released today by Coindesk, as of this
week, the lawsuit has already been dismissed by one District Judge,
on the basis that it is not definitively clear on what it is basing
its claims on in a legal sense. In short, the citing of the
specific California Law that we mentioned above, does not seem to
have been enough for this particular judge. Even so, there is hope
for the accusers. Reportedly, Jeffrey Berk, who is representing the
investors, was able to get the ability to amend the complaint,
which means that he can change the laws his argument is based on
and if they are different and make sense to the case, he can then
argue it again, with new legal foundations.
After the decision, Berk as quote as saying that he definitely
plans to do so. Coinbase representatives apparently refused to say
anything on the subject.
What is perhaps even more striking is that at the same time that
the judge effectively denied Berk’s claim, he also denied
Coinbase’s motion to force arbitration, which would mean Berk and
his group would be required to settle with the company in private,
outside of court. As the saga moves forward, keep in mind that not
only can Berk argue his claim again, Coinbase can also try to force
arbitration again. Furthermore, what works in favor of Coinbase’s
course of action so far is that one legal expert was quoted by
Coindesk as saying that most cases like this which reach this
stage, end up in arbitration.
If you are interested in reading the latest court order, check out
our link here, courtesy of Coindesk.
By: BGN Editorial Staff