Hayden Adams, Founder of Uniswap, Commends Decision Regarding ‘Based’ Scam Tokens

Crypto News– In a significant legal development, U.S. Southern District of New York Judge Katherine Polk Failla’s comments have earned praise from Hayden Adams, the visionary behind Uniswap. The occasion was the complete dismissal of a class action lawsuit that had alleged Uniswap’s liability for scam token sales on its decentralized exchange platform.

Hayden Adams, Founder of Uniswap, Commends Decision Regarding ‘Based’ Scam Tokens

Notably, Judge Failla, who is simultaneously overseeing the Securities and Exchange Commission’s case involving Coinbase, ruled in favor of Adams, Uniswap Labs, the Uniswap Foundation, as well as prominent investors Paradigm, Andreessen Horowitz, and Union Square Ventures. She emphasized that the software itself cannot be held responsible for user losses or damages caused by third parties. This landmark decision was documented in a filing made on Tuesday.

Echoing the sentiments of the court, Adams expressed his motivation, stating that he has held similar beliefs for years and finding validation in the U.S. legal system’s alignment with these ideas. One of the court’s salient observations was that “it defies logic that a drafter of computer code underlying a particular software platform could be liable for a third-party’s misuse of that platform [as] smart contracts are self-executing, self-enforcing code.” Moreover, the court highlighted the existing gaps in cryptocurrency regulation that hinder legal recourse.

Due to the protocol’s decentralized nature, the identities of the scam token issuers are basically unknown and unknowable, leaving Plaintiffs with an identifiable injury but no identifiable defendant

Judge Failla

Adams further highlighted the court’s stance that the concerns raised by the Plaintiffs should be directed to Congress, noting that cases of this nature usually pertain to roles such as lawyers and underwriters that decentralized exchanges were purposefully designed to eliminate. The court’s analogy, drawing a parallel to holding a self-driving car developer accountable for a third party’s use of the car for unlawful activities, resonated with the defense’s arguments.

This legal triumph marks a turning point not only for Uniswap but also for the broader decentralized technology landscape, reinforcing the understanding that the responsibility for misuse or misconduct lies with individuals rather than the code itself.