3 key takeaways from the presentation include:
1. Privacy Compliance Under Regimes Like GDPR. A key feature of data stored on a blockchain is that it is immutable – once verified and entered on the chain, it cannot be altered or deleted. This has the potential to conflict with privacy regimes like GDPR that grant consumers a “right to be forgotten” or “right of erasure” of personal data, if such data is stored on a blockchain. On-chain encryption of such data may provide a quasi-solution, but counsel should closely explore with their clients the nature of data that may be stored on-chain. To the extent possible in light of the business needs of the blockchain application being discussed, companies should avoid on-chain recording of personally identifiable information or other data subject to such erasure requirements.
2. SEC Guidance on Cryptocurrency Offerings. Almost without exception, the SEC has determined that organizations’ initial sale of cryptocurrencies – an initial coin offering or “ICO” – constituted the sale of investments and needed to be a registered securities offering. However, in a landmark April 2019 No Action Letter, the SEC stated it would take no action against the unregistered cryptocurrency offering of Turnkey Jets, who planned to sell cryptocurrency tokens that could be used to purchase flight time on private jets. The SEC’s decision was based on the following features of the proposed offering: (1) the funds received from the token sale would not be used to develop the platform on which the token exchange would operate; (2) the tokens would be immediately exchangeable for purchasing air charter services; and (3) the tokens would be redeemable by Turnkey Jets for $1 each – the same price at which they were sold. These unique features distinguished the Turnkey Jets offering from the majority of ICOs that imply purchases will earn a return on their investments. Regardless, companies considering a cryptocurrency sale should carefully examine whether it should be a registered securities offering, given the SEC’s position that the answer has almost always been yes.
3. Should Your Organization Hold Cryptocurrency? Given the recent wave of ransomware attacks on private and governmental organizations by hackers demanding payment in cryptocurrency, many companies are considering whether to hold an emergency balance of crypto funds. Some believe that having such funds readily available will enable them to buy their way out of a potentially-crippling ransomware attack at a price far less expensive than the business interruption and public relations damage these attacks can generate. Regardless of your organization’s stance or the reason for holding cryptocurrency, there are best practices companies can employ to do so securely. For example, multi-signature wallets can help prevent internal theft by requiring passwords from multiple company officers before the wallet will release any funds. And such funds should almost always be held in a physical wallet device stored in a safe deposit box, rather than an online wallet. In-house counsel should consult with experts to determine the appropriate security features to employ under their company’s circumstances.
For more information, please contact Michael Breslin: firstname.lastname@example.org
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.