CCIP Officially Launches on Mainnet

July 17, 2023

July 17, 2023

We are excited to announce that the Chainlink Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol (CCIP) has entered the Mainnet Early Access phase on the Avalanche, Ethereum, Optimism, and Polygon blockchains. Leading DeFi protocols in derivatives and lending are adopting CCIP, including Synthetix, which is live on CCIP mainnet, as well as Aave, with BGD Labs now integrating CCIP on mainnet into the protocol.

On July 20, CCIP will become available to all developers across five testnets: Arbitrum Goerli, Avalanche Fuji, Ethereum Sepolia, Optimism Goerli, and Polygon Mumbai.

Connecting a Multi-Chain World

Web3 is now a multi-chain landscape. There are hundreds of blockchains, layer-2 networks, sidechains, subnets, appchains, parachains, and other environments for developers and users to choose from. While the launch of new on-chain ecosystems has driven innovation and adoption, it has also fragmented applications, on-chain assets, and market liquidity across different, disconnected blockchains. Furthermore, existing cross-chain solutions are complex—generally involving a multitude of technology stacks across protocols and chains—and often insecure, with $2B+ stolen due to cross-chain exploits. This lack of interoperability results in slower innovation and is holding back the progress and mass adoption of Web3.

But solving this problem is very hard. It’s not just about building the right product. It’s about building a standard that the whole industry can embrace to interoperate and build on top of each other. Building a cross-chain standard requires security, flexibility, and community. Security because moving value across chains needs to be highly reliable. Flexibility because the standard needs to accommodate all the use cases that developers will come up with and all the chains they want to build on. And finally community, because this standard is only as valuable as the community that adopts it. Chainlink has already built the industry-defining secure standard for Data in Web3, and thanks to all our users and partners, has built an incredible community. For all these reasons, Chainlink is uniquely positioned to extend this standard to solving the cross-chain problem and unlock a new wave of innovation in Web3.

Just like Web2 needed TCP/IP to connect isolated islands of computer networks, Web3 needs an interoperability standard to connect islands of blockchain networks.

CCIP is the most secure, reliable, and easy-to-use interoperability protocol for building cross-chain applications and services. Not only are developers given the flexibility to build their own cross-chain solutions on top of CCIP using Arbitrary Messaging, but CCIP also provides Simplified Token Transfers—which enables protocols to quickly start transferring tokens across chains using audited token pool contracts they control without writing custom code and in a fraction of the time it would take to build on their own.

CCIP is powered by Chainlink decentralized oracle networks, which have a proven track record of securing tens of billions of dollars and enabling over $8 trillion in on-chain transaction value. Since CCIP is built on the same foundation as existing Chainlink services, it requires little-to-no additional trust assumptions. If a dApp already relies on Chainlink for Price Feeds, then relying on CCIP for cross-chain interactions is an obvious choice. CCIP also features additional safety mechanisms that go above and beyond other cross-chain solutions, such as customizable rate limits on token transfers and a separate Active Risk Management (ARM) Network that monitors the validity of all cross-chain transactions.

CCIP Architecture — CCIP connects applications across various public and private blockchains to enable an interconnected Web3.

Developers, applications, and enterprises can use CCIP to unlock a variety of use cases, such as:

Cross-chain tokenized assets: Transfer tokens across blockchains from a single interface and without having to build your own bridge solution.
Cross-chain collateral: Launch cross-chain lending applications that allow users to deposit collateral on one blockchain and borrow assets on another.
Cross-chain liquid staking tokens: Bridge liquid staking tokens across multiple blockchains to increase their utilization in DeFi apps on other chains.
Cross-chain NFTs: Give users the ability to mint an NFT on a source blockchain and receive it on a destination blockchain.
Cross-chain account abstraction: Build smart contract wallets with native CCIP capabilities to improve the user experience of making cross-chain function calls. For instance, enable users to approve transactions on any chain using a single wallet.
Cross-chain gaming: Create blockchain-agnostic gaming experiences that enable players to store high-value items on more secure blockchains while playing on more scalable blockchains.
Cross-chain data storage and computation: Employ data storage solutions that enable users to store arbitrary data on a destination chain and execute computations on it using a transaction on a source chain.

Market Leaders Are Using CCIP To Interact Cross-Chain

Cross-Chain Liquidity With Synthetix

Synthetix is a DeFi protocol that acts as a liquidity layer for an ecosystem of on-chain derivatives and financial instruments. One of its recent additions to Synthetix V3, the Synth Teleporter, provides users with a streamlined method for transferring Synth liquidity between chains. This feature operates by burning sUSD (the protocol’s unit of account) on the source chain, then minting an equivalent amount of sUSD on the destination chain.

The Synth Teleporter employs Chainlink CCIP to burn and mint tokens across chains safely and accurately, ensuring security and reliability. This unique burn-and-mint model promotes higher capital efficiency without the need for liquidity pools. In doing so, Synth Teleporters enable Synthetix liquidity to flow toward areas with the highest demand, bypassing constraints associated with traditional token bridges.

“Security is critical when dealing with on-chain assets, which is why we leverage Chainlink CCIP for our cross-chain Synths Teleporter. As one of the first users of Chainlink Data Feeds, we’re thrilled to get first access to CCIP and all the functionality it unlocks for Synthetix.”—Kain Warwick, Founder, Synthetix

CCIP Synthetix integration — CCIP enables Synthetix to securely transfer tokens across different blockchains through a burn-and-mint model.

Cross-Chain Governance on Aave

Aave is a non-custodial liquidity protocol that allows users to borrow and lend assets on-chain. Aave previously used several different chain-native bridges to support its multi-chain governance mechanism and used Ethereum as the voting network. This cross-chain architecture made it expensive for participants to vote and created substantial development and maintenance costs. Once Chainlink CCIP became available, the Aave community voted to integrate the protocol because of its gas-efficient design, time-tested infrastructure, scalability to new networks, and ease of integration. Thus, BGD Labs, a Web3 development initiative, is integrating Chainlink CCIP into the Aave Governance V3 to future-proof the cross-chain system.

“We’re excited to leverage Chainlink CCIP for secure, reliable, and scalable cross-chain communication on the next iteration of the Aave protocol. With seamless integration into the cross-chain governance mechanism, CCIP is set to save valuable developer time that can be better spent enhancing the core features of Aave.”—Ernesto Boado, Co-founder, BGD Labs

CCIP Aave integration — CCIP enables Aave to implement approved governance proposals across different blockchains.

Cross-Chain Connectivity for Capital Markets

CCIP serves as a blockchain abstraction layer that allows enterprises to connect with and interoperate across any public or private blockchain environment directly from their existing backend systems. Swift and over a dozen financial institutions and financial market infrastructure providers have already begun exploring CCIP for instructing token transfers across public and private chains through existing Swift messaging infrastructure. The blockchain interoperability collaboration includes Australia and New Zealand Banking Group (ANZ), BNP Paribas, BNY Mellon, Citi, Clearstream, Euroclear, Lloyds Banking Group, SIX Digital Exchange (SDX), and The Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (DTCC).

CCIP Enterprise Abstraction Layer — A simplified architecture of how banks and FMIs are using CCIP via the Swift network.

Setting a New Standard in Cross-Chain Utility, Security, Reliability, and Developer Experience

Some of the notable features of CCIP that set it apart from other cross-chain solutions include:

Simplified Token Transfers

CCIP Simplified Token Transfers is a plug-and-play solution consisting of audited token pool contracts that handle the complexity of burning and minting or locking and unlocking tokens across chains while ensuring token sponsors maintain full control over their Token Pool contract. Simplified Token Transfers provide additional security features, such as Rate Limits, and enhance the composability around protocols’ native tokens so ecosystem partners can easily transfer and build new capabilities around a protocol’s token via a single CCIP interface.

Programmable Token Transfers

Token transfers can include additional instructions about their intended use to a receiving smart contract on a different blockchain, such as swapping or staking assets once they arrive at the destination chain. With programmable token transfers, messages (tokens + data) are one atomic cross-chain transaction, and the tokens can always be assumed available when the instructions passed are executed at the destination.

Active Risk Management (ARM) Network

ARM is a separate, independent network that continually monitors and validates the behavior of the primary CCIP network, providing an additional layer of security by independently verifying cross-chain operations for erroneous activity. The ARM Network utilizes a separate, minimal Rust implementation of the Chainlink node software, creating a form of client diversity for increased robustness while also minimizing external dependencies to prevent supply chain attacks.

CCIP powered by Chainlink — The cross-chain stack of CCIP.

Rate Limits

CCIP supports customizable rate limits on the amount of tokens able to be transferred within a given time period. Rate limits can be configured on a per-token per-lane level, and are set up in alignment with the token issuer. There are also aggregate rate limits across all tokens for a given lane to ensure every token’s rate limit can not be maximally abused. This feature is part of the heavily audited CCIP code base and is only available for CCIP Token Transfers and not arbitrary messaging.

Smart Execution

CCIP utilizes a gas-locked fee payment mechanism, referred to as Smart Execution, to help ensure the reliable execution of cross-chain transactions regardless of destination chain gas spikes. For developers, this means you can simply pay on the source chain and CCIP will take care of execution on the destination chain.

Timelocked Upgradability

All on-chain security-critical configuration changes and upgrades to CCIP must either pass through a timelock smart contract, where proposed changes can be vetoed by a quorum of node operators securing CCIP, or explicitly approved by such a quorum without a timelock. This enables users and protocols depending on CCIP to inspect on-chain changes before they take effect. Any on-chain update that passes the timelock without a veto becomes executable by anyone. The community can run a timelock-worker to process executable upgrades. This approach to on-chain upgrades represents a step forward in the increased decentralization and robustness of the Chainlink Network.

Payment Model

As noted in the recent Chainlink Network in 2023 and Sustainable Oracle Economics blogs, we’re currently in the process of architecting enhanced payment models to support the monetization and long-term sustainability of Chainlink services. One of the primary goals is to reduce payment friction for dApps, enterprises, and end-users using Chainlink services so a greater amount of fees can directly support Chainlink’s various service providers over time.

With CCIP built to be the most secure and easy-to-use cross-chain solution, and the potential for fee payments to eventually originate across a multitude of independent blockchains, a low-friction payments solution for users is necessary for CCIP to quickly scale and support new blockchains. As such, CCIP supports fee payments in LINK and in alternative assets, which currently take the form of native blockchain gas coins and their ERC20 wrapped version. Payments made in alternative assets will be charged at a higher rate versus LINK payments.

We are working on an automated on-chain conversion mechanism where fee payments made in alternative assets are auto-converted into LINK. Before this conversion mechanism is deployed, payments made in alternative assets will be withdrawn to separate maintenance pools and replaced within the CCIP contracts with LINK based on the exchange rate at the time of payment. LINK will then be paid to service providers (e.g., node operators). After an on-chain conversion mechanism has been deployed, alternative assets residing in maintenance pools can be converted to LINK.

Fee payment premiums for CCIP Messaging will be a flat fee per message, while fees for using CCIP to enable token transfers will be a percentage of the value transferred. CCIP fees also include gas cost overhead. The premium portion of fees paid in alternative assets will have a surcharge of 10% versus LINK payments. Current CCIP premium fees are in line with industry standards within the cross-chain ecosystem, although these values are subject to change.

As Chainlink Staking expands over time to support more oracle services, such as CCIP, a portion of the user fees paid for those services are planned to be directed to stakers in exchange for increasing the service’s cryptoeconomic security.

CCIP Summer Is Here

We’re kicking off CCIP Summer in the runup to CCIP Mainnet General Availability, which will feature a global series of in-person and virtual CCIP events, workshops, and more. Look out for:

We are also beginning a phased onboarding process, where users that participated in the testing program are transitioned to Mainnet Early Access. This security-focused approach will enable us to closely monitor all aspects of CCIP and ARM Network and help ensure user success by providing hands-on support. We’ll also continue to work with various token sponsors and dApps to add support for more tokens to CCIP over time.

Solving the cross-chain connectivity problem will unleash an unprecedented wave of innovation in Web3. We look forward to building this standard with our community.

To get notified once CCIP is available on testnet on July 20, sign up here. If you want to learn more about CCIP’s underlying architecture and code, check out the CCIP developer documentation.

Link

Join the TheDinarian Community

To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today

thedinarian@thedinarian

February 17, 2025

The Dawn of DeFi: The Hidden War for a Decentralized Future

👉 DON'T FADE THIS ARTICLE~ Crypto Michael AKA "The Dinarian"

The below article is NOT financial advice, it is being broadcast for entertainment purposes only. You should DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH and NEVER invest any more than you are willing to lose. On that note, THIS ARTICLE AND THE UNDERLYING ASSET DISCUSSED COULD CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOR THE BETTER FOREVER! You SHOULD pay close attention as this MAY BE THE MOST IMPORTANT article you could ever have read, unless you were fortunate enough to read the Bitcoin whitepaper and had invested in it back in 2008. The asset I am about to present to you, COULD EASILY FLIP BITCOIN! ESPECIALLY WITH TODAYS ADMINISTRATION IN PLACE!
~ Namasté 🙏 Crypto Michael AKA "The Dinarian"

Attempted Theft of the World's Most Valuable Property, SEC Lawfare & The ETHgate Scandal

It is widely accepted that the media often spreads misinformation and hides any truth that challenge the establishments narratives. Well, this is one of those hidden truths...

Loans without Banks, Trades without Exchanges, Contracts without Lawyers. Peer to Peer Capital Markets disrupts traditional finance by removing middlemen and counter-party risk, enabling you to become your own bank by holding the keys to it all in your own privately held digital wallet.

To what lengths do you think the establishment would go to defend their control of the financial system? A system seemingly ripe with market manipulation, naked shorts, money laundering and regulatory capture.

The Myth of Open Source

For context, in the realm of open source, major corporations can engage in Intellectual Property theft by using open source projects to gain insights, technology, or legal protections without fully reciprocating to the community. Companies might contribute code to an open source project, only to later use that same code in commercial products, extending it with enhancements, essentially using open source as a low-cost R&D resource. Patents are crucial here, serving as a defense mechanism. Although open-source licenses cover copyrights, they don't extend to patents, meaning that companies holding patents can enforce legal protections against unauthorized commercial use, ensuring that any commercial application of their patented technology within open-source software requires proper licensing or recognition. This protection has historically led to the hyper-growth of industries like mobile phones and the internet, where patented technologies could be safely shared and built upon, promoting innovation and market expansion.

Validating Inventorship

In fields such as technology, pharmaceuticals, and manufacturing, patents are vital for safeguarding new inventions, with Nikola Tesla's extensive patent portfolio serving as a testament to his contributions to science.

However, Tesla's revolutionary inventions, like the Wardenclyffe Tower which aimed at providing free wireless energy, faced fierce opposition due to their potential to disrupt established control over energy markets. Financially sabotaged by investors like J.P. Morgan, legally challenged through "the war of currents" by Thomas Edison's promotion of the less efficient Direct Current system, and undermined by media smear campaigns, Tesla's work was systematically suppressed. After his death, the FBI's seizure of his documents further suggests efforts to control or conceal his ideas that could disrupt centralized energy distribution, illustrating how innovation can be stifled to maintain existing power structures.

Could this type of suppression still be happening today?

The Genesis of Decentralized Finance

Reggie Middleton first introduced Distributed Finance what would later become known as Decentralized Finance (DeFi), in 2013 when he invented and patented technologies under the title "Devices, systems, and methods for facilitating low trust and zero trust value transfers." This included groundbreaking concepts like programmable Smart Contracts, Swaps, Tokenized Assets, NFTs, Stable Coins, Digital Wallets, and even underpin Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs).

https://patents.google.com/patent/US11196566B2/en?oq=US11196566+

Called by many as "The Most Valuable Property in the World", his patents US11196566B2, US11895246B2, JP6813477B2, JP7204231B2, JP7533974B2, & JP7533983B2 have been cited over 138 times by major financial institutions, underscoring their foundational role in the blockchain industry.

His patents cover:

Trustless Peer-to-Peer Value Transfers: Systems for enabling decentralized and secure value transfers between parties without the need for intermediaries. Applicable to cryptocurrency transactions, DeFi platforms, and digital payment systems.
Decentralized Financial Systems (DeFi): Methods and devices that facilitate decentralized trading, lending, borrowing, and yield generation. Impacting decentralized exchanges (DEXs) like Uniswap, SushiSwap, and similar platforms.
Smart Contracts: Implementation of self-executing contracts on blockchain networks, used to automate agreements and enforce conditions without intermediaries. Essential for platforms such as Ethereum, Cardano, and other Layer-1 and Layer-2 blockchain protocols.
Tokenized Asset Trading: Methods for creating, transferring, and trading tokenized assets, including cryptocurrencies, non-fungible tokens (NFTs), and digital securities. Platforms like OpenSea, Rarible, and asset tokenization platforms may fall within the scope.
Cryptographic Security and Wallet Systems: Systems for securing digital assets using cryptographic methods, including cold storage, multi-signature wallets, and multi-party computation (MPC). Potential overlaps with services offered by companies like Coinbase, Kraken, Gemini, and institutional custody providers.
Decentralized Identity and Verification Systems: Technologies for managing and verifying digital identities on decentralized networks, including for KYC (Know Your Customer) purposes. Likely touching on identity solutions like Civic, BrightID, and Blockstack.
Blockchain-Based Voting and Governance: Systems for implementing decentralized voting, governance, and consensus mechanisms, foundational to DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations). Relevant to governance platforms like Aragon, Snapshot, and MakerDAO.
AI Economic Agentic Computing: First introduced by the VeADIR Platform refers to the application of autonomous agents in economic systems, where software entities can make decisions, negotiate, and execute transactions independently. These agents use artificial intelligence to analyze market data, predict trends, and optimize economic activities like trading, resource allocation, and supply chain management. Used by OpenAi, Claude Sonnet, Meta and xAI.

The societal value of these patents to disrupt traditional financial models and fintech business practises, by essentially removing the banks as middlemen, create significant economic incentives to suppress his work.

True Decentralization

Current Decentralized Exchanges (DEXs) often fall short of being truly decentralized due to various practical and structural limitations. Although DEXs leverage blockchain technology and smart contracts to enable trading without a central authority, aspects like governance, liquidity, and user interface can introduce centralization. Governance tokens might be concentrated in the hands of a few, influencing decision-making unevenly. The frontend, controlled by developers, represents a centralized point of control or potential failure. Liquidity pools can be dominated by a handful of large providers, leading to centralized liquidity dynamics. Some DEXs implement regulatory compliance like KYC/AML, which inherently involves centralized oversight. The use of layer-2 solutions for scalability might also undermine decentralization if not fully autonomous.

However, patents like US11196566B2 and US11895246B2 could pave the way for true decentralization by introducing innovations in blockchain interoperability and decentralized governance mechanisms. These patents potentially offer solutions for more evenly distributed control over exchange operations, enhancing the autonomy and distribution of decision-making, thus moving closer to genuine decentralization in the DEX ecosystem, which can be expanded to other industries like Healthcare, Supply Chain, or any other industry that trades value.

Who is Reggie Middleton?

Reggie Middleton, through his BoomBustBlog, became a notable figure in financial analysis, particularly for his early and accurate predictions regarding the collapses of Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns during the 2008 financial crisis. His blog was renowned for providing in-depth, contrarian insights into economic trends, investment opportunities, and corporate vulnerabilities. Reggie won the CNBC's stock draft consecutively for two years, and appeared on major financial news networks like CNBC, BBC and Bloomberg where he discussed market trends, his forecasts, and the implications of financial strategies adopted by major firms. His track record has undeniably positioned him as a significant voice in the financial commentary space.

Reggie's work gained public attention when he appeared on the Keiser Report and CNBC in 2014, premiering his innovations built on the Bitcoin blockchain called "Ultracoin", two years before Ethereum captured the crypto limelight.

His vision was to create sound markets for a financial ecosystem where loans could be issued without banks, trades executed without exchanges, and contracts enforced without lawyers, aiming to disintermediate traditional finance by removing the middleman that doesn't add value.

In 2014, Reggie pioneered a simple Apple trade using a Pure Bitcoin Wallet: The Ultracoin Client.

Ultracoin later renamed VERI short for “Veritaseum” meaning "of truth", was the

first to market in tokenizing precious metals, offering VeGold, VeSilver and even tokenized fiat currencies or so called "Stablecoins". Veritaseum also introduced VeRent creating yield through P2P lending, and the revolutionary VeADIR platform, an autonomous, blockchain-powered research platform that independently evaluates and acts on dynamic research in real-time, communicates in machine language, and operates by purchasing, analyzing, and distributing insights on various assets while allowing VERI token holders to access and trade this research.

In 2018 he created the worlds first Gold Denominated Blockchain Mortgage

with traditional written note, mortgage as well as a smart contract on a public blockchain, both of whom incorporate each other by reference. The transaction had traditional title insurance and the note was recorded with the county clerk. The mortgage was denominated in Veritaseum's VeGold product, a digital form of gold in bearer form, fully transferable and redeemable upon demand.

Merely a few examples of groundbreaking products offered by Veritaseum.

Coinbase's Challenge: The Patent Infringement Suit

Coinbase, a dominant force in the cryptocurrency exchange market, enlisted the services of Perkins Coie, one of the largest patent law firms, to contest the validity of Reggie Middleton's patents.

They launched an Inter Partes Review (IPR) at the Patent Trials and Appeals Board (PTAB), arguing that Middleton's patents lacked novelty. An overwhelming 85% of patents are invalidated through this process. However, Coinbase's challenge was denied along with the appeal, thereby upholding and strengthening the validity of Reggie's patents.

This IPR challenge came after Veritaseum sued both Coinbase and Circle USDC for $350 million each over patent infringement. Unfortunately, Reggie's patent attorney and close friend passed away during this suit, so the cases has been dismissed without prejudice, meaning they can be negotiated or the cases reopened at any time. This leaves Coinbase in a precarious position, especially if shareholders have not been properly informed of this risk.

This lawsuit details how Coinbase's infrastructure, specifically its Ethereum and Solana validator nodes, engage with client devices to facilitate transactions. Exhibit #3 meticulously outlines the patent's claims, detailing the roles of computing devices, the use of memory for key pair storage, network interfaces for transaction terms, and the generation and dissemination of transaction data records. It provides concrete examples such as the processing of NFT transactions on Ethereum and the management of transaction fees on Solana, supported by in-depth references to code and API interactions. Furthermore, the exhibit explains the verification of transactions through an external state, illustrating how Coinbase's technology aligns with the patent's principles for decentralized transaction processing without a central authority.

SEC's Intervention: A Turning Point

In 2019, with promising negotiations on the horizon with both the Jamaican and the Nigerian Stock Exchanges for digital asset platforms, Reggie's world was turned upside down.

The SEC accused Reggie of fraud, alleging he misled investors about the functionality of Veritaseum's VeADIR platform, which the SEC ordered to be shut down following a live demonstration. The SEC also made claims on the validity of Reggie's patent applications, which have since been approved by both the USPTO and the Japan Patent Office. Oddly enough, the SEC may actually infringe on these very patents through the disgorgement and storage of seized crypto tokens.

Despite Veritaseum's cooperation with the SEC over a two-year period, along with a detailed response addressing the SEC's allegations, and not one token holder claiming to be defrauded, these allegations still led to a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) that froze millions in assets, destroying the company's operations, and forcing a consent judgment "neither confirming or denying the allegations". The SEC would top it all off with a gag order that barred Reggie from publicly discussing the matter.

Keep in mind, the SEC is claiming jurisdiction by calling Utility Tokens "Digital Asset Securities" but recently SEC Commissioner @HesterPeirce stated:

"...by using imprecise language we've been able to suggest the token itself is a security, apart from that investment contract, which has implications for Secondary Sales, it has implications for who can list it...

We've fallen down on our duty as a regulator not to be precise. So, tucking into a footnote that yes we admit that now that the TOKEN ITSELF IS NOT A SECURITY, that is something we should have admitted long ago and then started wrestling with the difficult questions."

This calls into question if the SEC even had jurisdiction to bring forth this case to begin with. The Veri Community would later challenge the SEC's unproven allegations against Reggie with

a Dossier supporting the Vacating or Setting Aside of this case, and suggesting possible misconduct by the SEC.

Allegations of SEC Misconduct:

Misrepresentation of Facts: Assertions that the SEC deliberately mischaracterized the
functionality of the VeADIR platform, along with the patents and their value, by labeling them as lacking novelty and part of fraudulent activities.
Misleading Evidence: The SEC's use of declarations from Patrick Doody and Roseann Daniello, which contained misleading information about the personal ownership of a Kraken account used to misappropriate funds. Doody would later correct his statement, but the SEC did not update the court with this new information, potentially misleading the judicial process.
Conflict of Interest: Doody's undisclosed financial interests in the digital asset space through Lily Pad Capital LLC could suggest a bias in his testimony, which was pivotal in obtaining the TRO.
Coercion and Intimidation: Witnesses like Lloyd Cupp and John Doe provided affidavits claiming coercion by SEC attorneys to alter their testimonies, pointing towards witness tampering and intimidation.

FOIA Responses: The SEC's FOIA department initially denied any communications with Kraken, only later admitting to subpoena issuance, suggesting an attempt to obscure facts.
RICO Allegations: A 95 page RICO Dossier, supported by extensive evidence, alleges that the SEC's actions could resemble an organized crime syndicate, with systemic coercion, misrepresentation, and procedural misconduct aimed at Reggie Middleton.
Bar Complaint: The Veri community lodged a Bar Complaint against the SEC's Lead Attorney
over the use of misleading evidence, coercion and intimidation of witnesses.

Summary Articles of the B ar Complaint and RICO Dossier

Comparisons with the SEC Misconduct in the DEBT Box Case

The DEBT Box case shares a troubling parallel with the Veritaseum case. In both cases a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) freezing funds was issued using dubious evidence which suppressed the ability to defend themselves. This behavior was already admonished by five US Senators

in a letter to Commissioner Gary Gensler in which the SEC presented misleading claims in this now high-profile cryptocurrency case.

"Regardless of whether Commission staff deliberately misrepresented evidence or unknowingly presented false information, this case suggests other enforcement cases brought by the Commission may be deserving of scrutiny. It is difficult to maintain confidence that other cases are not predicated upon dubious evidence, obfuscations, or outright misrepresentations."

Given the similarities in alleged procedural misconduct between the cases, it raises systemic questions about the SEC’s litigation approach in cryptocurrency matters.

This parallel underscores a potential agency-wide issue that could involve either implicit biases against crypto companies or an explicit strategy to pursue aggressive, potentially misleading tactics in court.

Is The Fox Guarding the Hen House?

In a significant development, the Attorney Grievance Committee (AGC) has decided to forward a complaint against SEC attorney Jorge Tenreiro to the SEC's Office of General Counsel (OGC) for investigation. This controversial move suggests a potential conflict of interest, given that the OGC is part of the SEC, the very agency where Tenreiro was recently promoted to Chief Litigation Counsel. The complaint, filed by the Veri community, accuses Tenreiro of misconduct including alleged coercion, witness tampering, and misrepresentation during SEC investigations. The Veri Community argues that this decision undermines the integrity of the legal process, as the OGC's role is to provide legal advice and defend the SEC, not to independently investigate its own employees. This raises questions about the impartiality and transparency of the disciplinary process for attorneys, especially when it involves high-profile figures like Tenreiro.

"As noted in re Rowe, 80 N.Y.2d 336 (1992), the public’s confidence in the legal profession depends on transparent and impartial disciplinary processes. Delegating oversight to the SEC, where Mr. Tenreiro remains a senior official and where the OGC has a clear institutional stake, jeopardizes this confidence and risks the appearance of protectionism.”

The VeriDAO has submitted a response letter to the AGC along with creating a PDF generator
to help the estimated 100 complainants and anyone else interested in requesting the AGC to reconsider this action.

Legal and Judicial Trials

The legal battles would only continue for Reggie. The case of Hall v. Middleton, in which Hall, a 1% shareholder sued Reggie, raises concerns of judicial bias and procedural mishandling. In this case, Reggie was denied Due Process and barred from presenting crucial evidence or calling witnesses due to his former attorneys' "Office Failures" that missed deadlines to submit evidence without the knowledge of Reggie or the firm Brundidge & Stanger that outsourced his counsel as detailed in their affirmations.

"In my many years of practice it is a rare instance where I have witnessed an attorney intentionally not file critical documents as required by Court Order without the permission or knowledge of his client, who had an established and fully developed attorney client-relationship with said attorney, and then misrepresent that the requirements of the Court Order were being satisfied. This is one of those instances and I hope not to see another."
~ Carl Brundidge

The judge ruled that Reggie must:

Pay a $1M fine to his company Veritaseum Inc., in which he owns 99%
The plaintiff was awarded costs of $495k against Veritaseum Inc.
The Judge ordered Patents (filed before the creation of Veritaseum Inc.) to be assigned to the company without compensation.

Attorney's "Office Failures":

Sheridan England missed critical deadlines, resulting in the striking of exculpatory evidence. England’s inaction or inadequate defense exacerbated Middleton’s legal vulnerability, directly leading to adverse outcomes.

Judge Schecter’s Conduct:

Ignoring Exculpatory Evidence: Despite knowledge of its existence, Schecter struck Middleton’s post-trial memorandum.
Procedural Bias: The judge’s decisions systematically favored Hall, including allowing him to collect attorney fees from Middleton personally, contrary to the principles of derivative law.
Forced Patent Transfers: Schecter’s order to transfer patents to an underfunded entity (Veritaseum) which were court restrained by the same judge, rendering them defenseless against attacks and IP theft.

This ordeal was compounded when Reggie was held in Contempt for using personal funds (while Veritaseum’s funds were court-restrained) to successfully defend his patents against an IPR challenge by Coinbase in the PTAB of the USPTO in an attempt to invalidate these patents. The Forced Patent Expropriation to Veritaseum without compensation or the ability to defend them could be seen as coordinated as it benefited very large competitors seeking to avoid licensing fees or infringement claims, or possibly even IP Theft.

Judicial Complaint: A formal complaint has been filed with the NYS Commission on Judicial Conduct by the Veri Community.

ETHgate: The Broader Conspiracy Allegations

Parallel to Middleton's struggles, "ETHgate" emerged, involving allegations by Ethereum co-creator @StevenNerayoff. Nerayoff claimed a government conspiracy aimed at controlling or monopolizing cryptocurrency development by targeting key figures. This narrative suggested that by attacking innovators (like Reggie Middleton as the Veri Community contends), the SEC might have indirectly cleared a path for Ethereum, which, despite its decentralized claim, benefited from a regulatory environment less scrutinized than its competition.

The term "ETHgate" encapsulates the belief that Ethereum's "Free Pass" from regulatory scrutiny might not just be due to its technological merits but also due to strategic regulatory maneuvers, where attacking smaller or less established DeFi projects could safeguard larger, more influential platforms like Ethereum.

Back in 2021, @JohnEDeaton1 from @CryptoLawUS explained XRP's side of Ethereum's "Free Pass". More recently, further SEC RICO Claims are insinuated in "RIGGED from the start" a documentary by @Fruition_News , along with posts by @KuwlShow and the XRParmy involving the SEC, Ethereum, a16z, and Consensys surrounding the Bill Hinman speech. Active FOIA requests by @EleanorTerrett seek to shed light on meetings between Hinman and Ethereum members.

Given the SEC protection of ETH and the high probability of Ethereum infringing on Reggie Middleton's patents as meticulously detailed in Exhibit #3 of the Coinbase case, is it ridiculous to believe Reggie Middleton could have been targeted?

Community Support: The Backbone of Resilience

Despite the SEC's narrative labeling them as "The Defrauded," the Veritaseum community rallied around Reggie.

SmartMetal with embedded NFT avalaible through VeriDAO.io

Financially devastated and with his funds frozen, Reggie faced foreclosure and was threatened with jail time after contempt charges for defending his patents using personal funds. In a remarkable show of support, the Veri Community rallied, raising an impressive $149,000 in less than two weeks to cover the fine while the case is under appeal.

They funded legal battles largely through donations and more recently with innovative means like NFT silver rounds called SmartMetal using Reggie's patented technologies, underscoring their belief in his vision. The first minted round was auctioned off for an astonishing $14,000 won by "M S"

"There is no better witness to the veracity of any defense than the alleged defrauded defending the alleged fraud at their own expense"
~ The Veri Community

This community support was not just financial but also moral, with efforts such as an Amicus Brief in the case against XRP, a No Action Letter (NAL) seeking clarity on secondary market sales of tokens, a Bar Complaint against the SEC's newly promoted Chief Litigation Counsel, and the @dao_veri's

#ProjectSunlight The SEC RICO Revelation.

A Call for a New Regulatory Paradigm

Reggie Middleton's saga is emblematic of the challenges faced by pioneers in the blockchain and DeFi arenas. His patents, now granted, underscore their foundational nature, yet the path to their recognition was marred by legal battles, suggesting a systemic issue where the regulatory framework might not fully comprehend or support emerging tech. His resilience, supported by an unwavering community and the validation of his intellectual property, underscores the need for a regulatory environment that fosters rather than stifles innovation. As blockchain technology continues to evolve, Reggie's story serves as a critical reference for balancing innovation with legal and ethical governance, ensuring that the future of finance remains open to all, not just those with the resources to navigate the legal maze.

For more information visit https://veridao.io/

I know what everyones question is, "HOW CAN I GET MY HANDS ON THE $VERI TOKEN BEFORE EVERYTHING GETS REVERSED AND RELEASED BACK TO THE COMMUNITY?"

Your in luck: Mark is a trusted source, longtime Veri Vet that beta tested the VeADIR platform. Simply follow the thread below. I highly advise picking up a few, and tuck them away! This is the token that could literally FLIP BITCOIN $100k and beyond!

The information provided in this video, including but not limited to documents regarding legal matters, is for informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal (or any other) advice, and no warranties or representations are made regarding the accuracy, completeness, or fitness of the information for any specific purpose. VeriDAO and its operators do not act as attorneys or legal, financial or technical professionals or advisors and are not responsible for any actions taken or decisions made based on the content provided. Users should seek independent legal counsel for any legal advice or guidance. By watching this video, you agree that VeriDAO and its operators shall not be held liable for any damages or legal consequences arising from the use or misuse of the information contained herein.

Link

Disclaimer:

The content provided in this document is intended strictly for informational and educational purposes only. This document constitutes a research opinion and should be regarded as such. All claims, statements, allegations, and opinions contained within are based on publicly available information and are allegations unless and until proven in a court of law. The authors expressly disclaim any representation or warranty regarding the truthfulness, accuracy, completeness, fitness for a particular purpose, or durability of the information contained herein.

The authors of this document are not licensed attorneys or legal professionals and do not claim to provide legal, financial, or professional advisory services. Nothing in this document should be construed as legal advice, legal opinion, or any form of licensed advisory counsel. If you require legal assistance or professional advice, you are strongly encouraged to consult a licensed attorney or qualified expert in the relevant field. The authors are laypersons presenting research-based opinions, and as such, this document should not be relied upon to make any decisions of legal, financial, or professional significance.

The authors make no guarantees, express or implied, regarding the completeness or reliability of the information presented. No warranties of any kind are offered regarding the accuracy, validity, timeliness, or completeness of any information within this document. The information may contain errors or inaccuracies, and any use of it is entirely at your own risk.

Furthermore, this document may contain statements of belief, criticism, or commentary, and all such statements are offered solely as opinions protected under the principles of free speech. The authors disclaim liability for any interpretation that may be construed as libel, slander, or defamation, as the document aims to present alleged facts and subjective opinions for educational research purposes only. All statements about individuals, organizations, or entities should be understood as unproven allegations, and readers are urged not to interpret them as established facts.

The authors will not be liable for any damages, losses, or legal consequences that arise from the use, misuse, or reliance on the information provided herein. No responsibility is assumed for any actions or decisions that any party may make based on this document. The reader assumes full responsibility for any and all consequences that may arise from using the information contained in this document.

By accessing and using this document, you agree that neither the authors nor any affiliated parties shall be held liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special, consequential, or punitive damages resulting from your use of this information. The authors reserve the right to update or revise the information in this document at any time without notice, but they are under no obligation to do so.

Finally, any statements regarding individuals, entities, or organizations are not intended to malign, defame, or harm the reputation of those mentioned. Any resemblance to real individuals or incidents is purely coincidental, unless otherwise explicitly stated, and the authors urge readers to exercise caution and discernment when interpreting the information presented.

This document is a work-in-progress, part of an ongoing investigative process, and should not be treated as definitive or final. Readers are encouraged to independently verify the information and seek professional advice before acting on any information herein.

Read full Article