Alvin Lang
February 4th, 2025 15:48
The Justice Department’s actions against Defi developers raise concerns about responsibility and management, prompting a clearer legal definition and demanding policy reform.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) has launched legal action against Decentralized Financial (DEFI) developers, sparking important debate in the crypto industry. According to a report by A16Z Crypto, the move raises questions about the proper allocation of responsibility and management within a distributed system. DOJ’s actions have attracted criticism for potentially miscontrol and liability in the blockchain sector, particularly with regard to the prosecution of software developers under the 1960 section.
Understanding control in distributed systems
The central problem revolves around identifying the levels of control exercised by various entities within a distributed system. In traditional contexts such as automobile manufacturing, when an accident occurs, the driver is assigned responsibility rather than the car manufacturer. This analogy is used to argue that software developers like automakers should create neutral tools and that third parties should not be accountable for how they use these tools.
US v. In recent cases such as Storm and US vs. Rodriguez, DOJ has indicted blockchain developers and compared their role to the role of an unauthorized remittancer. Critics argue that this approach misunderstands the nature of control in distributed systems where developers often do not directly control software after deployment.
Legal definitions and industry impact
The central part of the controversy is the definition of a “remittance” business under section 1960 of the US Act. This definition traditionally included entities that accepted and sent currency or its equivalents on behalf of the public. However, in distributed finance, users typically use protocols that developers no longer deploy to keep control over their assets.
The lack of clarity in these legal definitions poses a threat to the industry as a wider interpretation of DOJs could lead to further prosecution of developers who create incompromising software. This called for a reassessment of the legal framework to better reflect the reality of control and custody in decentralized networks.
Potential policy reforms
Industry leaders and policymakers are expected to work together in 2025 to refine their legal definitions and match the technical nuances of distributed systems. Such reforms are considered essential to fostering innovation while protecting developers from excessive responsibility. The similarity with the automotive industry highlights the stifling effects that Overlord’s responsibility can have on technological advances.
The need for a clear and consistent interpretation of custody and management in the context of digital assets is highlighted as an important issue for the future of the US crypto industry. Failure to address these concerns can hinder the growth and development of innovative financial technologies.
For additional insight into the implications of DOJ actions, see the entire A16Z Crypto article.
Image source: ShutterStock
