Dfinity Foundation贏得訴訟，駁回了索賠

加利福尼亞州的一名聯邦法官駁回了集體訴訟，聲稱出售未註冊的證券。

A federal judge in California has dismissed a class-action lawsuit that accused the Dfinity Foundation of selling unregistered securities and artificially inflating the Internet Computer Protocol (ICP) token prices, reports Bloomberg.

據彭博社報導，加利福尼亞州的一名聯邦法官駁回了集體訴訟，該訴訟指控Dfinity基金會出售未註冊的證券並人為地誇大了互聯網計算機協議（ICP）代幣價格。

The lawsuit, which was filed in August 2021 by investors who purchased ICP tokens after May 10, 2021, is being defended by the Dfinity Foundation, the creators of the Internet Computer Protocol. It was brought on behalf of all those who bought the token in the United States following the launch of public trading of ICP tokens by the decentralized open-source blockchain in February 2017.

該訴訟是由2021年8月在2021年5月10日之後購買ICP令牌的投資者提起的。在2017年2月，由分散的開源區塊鏈推出ICP代幣後，代表所有在美國購買了代幣的人。

According to court documents, the suit was "time-barred" as it was filed more than three years after the offering of ICP tokens began, and also missed the statute of limitations for filing claims of fraud.

根據法院文件，該訴訟是在ICP代幣申請開始後三年以上提起的，該訴訟是“有時的”，而且還錯過了提出欺詐索賠的限制法規。

The case was initially handled by the controversial law firm Roche Freedman, now known as Freedman Normand Friedland LLP, and later taken over by Selendy Gay PLLC. It focused on claims that Dfinity and its executives sold ICP tokens without registering them as securities, and also artificially inflated the asset's market and token prices.

此案最初是由有爭議的律師事務所Roche Freedman（現稱為Freedman Normand Friedland LLP）處理的，後來由Selendy Gay PLLC接管。它的重點是說，dfinity及其高管在沒有註冊為證券的情況下出售了ICP令牌，並且人為地膨脹了資產的市場和代幣價格。

The lawsuit also alleged that Dfinity founders and executives, including CEO Dominic Williams, necessarily knew about the alleged token distribution issues by virtue of their positions. However, Judge James Donato rejected that argument, stating that a company being found to have committed a wrongdoing does not necessarily mean that any of its employees were aware of such wrongdoing.

該訴訟還聲稱，包括首席執行官多米尼克·威廉姆斯（Dominic Williams）在內的Dfinity創始人和高管一定會因其職位而知道所謂的令牌分配問題。但是，法官詹姆斯·多納托（James Donato）拒絕了這一論點，稱發現一家犯有不當行為的公司並不一定意味著其任何僱員都知道這種不當行為。

This brings attention to the high standard needed to prove violations of securities laws, which includes knowledge and intent. For fraud claims to succeed, plaintiffs must demonstrate that misleading statements were made and that the defendants had a deliberate intent to deceive investors. Without solid evidence to support these claims, courts are unlikely to rule in favor of investors.

這引起了人們對證明違反證券法的高標準的關注，其中包括知識和意圖。對於欺詐要求成功的聲稱，原告必須證明發表了誤導性陳述，並且被告有意欺騙投資者。沒有支持這些主張的可靠證據，法院不太可能裁定投資者。

Judge Donato's decision to dismiss the case was based on the statute of repose, which sets a strict time limit for filing claims, in contrast to the statute of limitations, which is often based on when the plaintiff first becomes aware of the violation.

多納託法官決定駁回此案的決定是基於“休養法”，該法規與法規相比，該法規規定了對提出索賠的嚴格限制，該法規通常是基於原告首先意識到違法行為的何時基於的。

The ruling comes after a fractious battle in court, with investors granted a final opportunity to amend their complaint by April 8. If they fail to meet the deadline, the case may be permanently dismissed under federal civil procedure rules.

該裁決是在法庭上進行的一場艱難的戰鬥之後進行的，投資者獲得了在4月8日之前修改其申訴的最終機會。如果他們未能達到截止日期，則該案可能會根據聯邦民事訴訟規則永久駁回。