Home Fear & Greed Pools Wallets Dictionary Advertise Facebook Twitter Telegram Reddit Youtube
Market Cap:
24h Vol:
Cryptocurrencies: 12805
Markets: 99556
CoinInsight360.com logo CoinInsight360.com logo
ENG
EST
RUS
TUR
DEU
CHI
KOR
ITA
USD
USD
AED
AFN
ALL
AMD
ANG
AOA
ARS
AUD
AWG
AZN
BAM
BBD
BDT
BGN
BHD
BIF
BMD
BND
BOB
BRL
BTN
BWP
BYN
BZD
CAD
CDF
CHF
CLF
CLP
CNH
CNY
COP
CRC
CUC
CUP
CVE
CZK
DJF
DKK
DOP
DZD
EGP
ERN
ETB
EUR
FJD
FKP
GBP
GEL
GHS
GIP
GMD
GNF
GTQ
GYD
HKD
HNL
HRK
HTG
HUF
IDR
ILS
IMP
INR
ISK
JMD
JOD
JPY
KES
KGS
KHR
KMF
KPW
KRW
KWD
KYD
KZT
LAK
LBP
LKR
LRD
LSL
LYD
MAD
MDL
MGA
MKD
MMK
MNT
MOP
MRU
MUR
MVR
MWK
MXN
MYR
MZN
NAD
NGN
NIO
NOK
NPR
NZD
OMR
PAB
PEN
PGK
PHP
PKR
PLN
PYG
QAR
RON
RSD
RUB
RWF
SAR
SBD
SCR
SDG
SEK
SGD
SHP
SLL
SRD
SSP
STD
STN
SVC
SYP
SZL
THB
TJS
TMT
TND
TOP
TRY
TTD
TWD
TZS
UAH
UGX
UYU
UZS
VES
VND
VUV
WST
ZAR
ZMW
ZWL
A company that is changing the way the world mines bitcoin

WallStreet Forex Robot 3.0
Market Cap
24h Vol
12805
Cryptocurrencies
60.38%
Bitcoin Share
CoinDesk 2025-02-04 06:14:14

Probe of Crypto.com, Kalshi’s Super Bowl Bets Is About the Nature of ‘Gaming’: Crypto Lawyer

Probe of Crypto.com, Kalshi’s Super Bowl Bets Is About the Nature of ‘Gaming’: Crypto Lawyer

The recent probe of Crypto.com and Kalshi's sports contracts all comes down to a single question — are event contracts premised on sports “gaming” within the meaning of the Commodities Exchange Act, said crypto lawyer Aaron Brogan. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) is probing the Super Bowl events contracts on Crypto.com and Kalshi, according to a Bloomberg report . "If sports does not constitute gaming, then, given the CFTC’s current legal posture, the CFTC likely does not have the power to prohibit Crypto.com and Kalshi from self-certifying these contracts," Brogan told CoinDesk. However, all of this is a bit more complicated than it seems on the surface. "This is a surprisingly thorny question, which was addressed in the Kalshi ruling," Brogan said, referring to the ruling from last fall that allowed Kalshi to move forward with its election betting contracts by confirming that they do not fall under the CFTC’s restricted categories. Brogan explained that the Judge in that ruling defined "gaming" as “playing games” or “playing games for stakes” and specifically cited past discussions in Congress during the writing of the Commodities Exchange Act, during which a lawmaker said the rule against gaming was meant to cover sports betting. "All that sounds bad for these contracts, but I am not wholly convinced," Brogan continued. "Judge Cobb’s finding here is dicta—non-binding—and the legislative history is only relevant where the law is ambiguous." Brogan also points to the Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of gaming as not “playing games” but “the practice or activity of playing games for stakes.” "At least in Merriam-Webster, this clearly means gambling, not sports, so I think these prediction markets would have colorable arguments if they had to go to the mats. Some judges might be receptive to this kind of textualist argument," Brogan said. And finally, there's the issue of the changing nature of the CFTC itself. Many believe that the appointment of Republican Caroline Pham as the Commission's Chair will lead to a more laissez-faire regulatory approach, Brogan said. "[The Democrats] had been highly skeptical of retail-oriented event contracts and fought hard against first PredictIt and then Kalshi in 2023 and 2024 to attempt to prevent them from offering election contracts," Brogan continued. But, how laissez-faire is still something up for debate. "If they’re probing into these post-inauguration Kalshi contracts, maybe they will still be hawkish on at least some event contracts," Brogan concluded.

Most Read News



Cryptohopper
Market Cap
24h Vol
60.38%
Bitcoin Share
304
Today News
Read the Disclaimer : All content provided herein our website, hyperlinked sites, associated applications, forums, blogs, social media accounts and other platforms (“Site”) is for your general information only, procured from third party sources. We make no warranties of any kind in relation to our content, including but not limited to accuracy and updatedness. No part of the content that we provide constitutes financial advice, legal advice or any other form of advice meant for your specific reliance for any purpose. Any use or reliance on our content is solely at your own risk and discretion. You should conduct your own research, review, analyse and verify our content before relying on them. Trading is a highly risky activity that can lead to major losses, please therefore consult your financial advisor before making any decision. No content on our Site is meant to be a solicitation or offer.