病毒式創作者Haliey Welch發起的Meme Coin $ Hawk的案例引發了加密貨幣世界的激烈辯論。

從創紀錄的估值到20分鐘內的崩潰，到SEC的無罪釋放，這個故事揭示了該行業的風險和監管歧義。

The case of the meme coin $HAWK, launched by the viral creator Haliey Welch, has sparked a heated debate in the crypto world. From the record valuation to the collapse in 20 minutes, up to the acquittal by the SEC, this story reveals much about the risks and regulatory ambiguities of the sector.

病毒式創作者Haliey Welch發起的Meme Coin $ Hawk的案例引發了加密貨幣世界的激烈辯論。從創紀錄的估值到20分鐘內的崩潰，到SEC的無罪釋放，這個故事揭示了該行業的風險和監管歧義。

The initial boom of $HAWK: a 500 Million meme coin (for 20 minutes)

$ HAWK的最初繁榮：5億個模因硬幣（持續20分鐘）

When Haliey Welch, known online as the “Hawk Tuah” meme girl, launched her $HAWK token, the market reacted with euphoria. In a few hours, the value of the coin reached an extraordinary capitalization of 500 million dollars.

當Haliey Welch（在線被稱為“ Hawk Tuah”模因女孩）推出了她的$ Hawk代幣時，市場對Euphoria做出了反應。在幾個小時內，硬幣的價值達到了5億美元的非凡資本化。

However, in just 20 minutes, the token lost over 95% of its value, crashing below 60 million. The plunge immediately triggered accusations of pump-and-dump, drawing the attention of U.S. regulators.

但是，在短短20分鐘內，令牌損失了其價值的95％以上，跌至6000萬以下。暴跌立即引發了對泵和點狀的指控，引起了美國監管機構的注意。

The SEC investigation: no charges for Haliey Welch

SEC調查：Haliey Welch沒有收費

Following the collapse, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) initiated an investigation to assess any violations of securities laws. On March 28, 2025, Haliey Welch officially announced that the investigation was closed, without any charges or financial penalties being brought against her.

崩潰後，證券交易委員會（SEC）發起了一項調查，以評估任何違反證券法的行為。 2025年3月28日，Haley Welch正式宣布，調查已關閉，沒有對她提出任何指控或經濟罰款。

“The investigation is closed and I will not face any charges or sanctions.”

“調查已關閉，我不會面臨任何指控或製裁。”

The SEC has determined that meme coins, not being considered securities, do not fall under its jurisdiction. Furthermore, no evidence of fraudulent conduct by Welch has emerged, who fully cooperated with the authorities throughout the investigative phase.

SEC已確定不被視為證券的模因硬幣不屬於其管轄範圍。此外，沒有出現過韋爾奇欺詐行為的證據，他們在整個調查階段與當局完全合作。

Meme Coin and regulation: the regulatory void

模因硬幣和調節：調節空隙

According to former SEC attorney Marc Fagel, the “no liability” formula is unusual for the agency and indicates a change in approach. The current administration seems to consider meme coins outside the regulatory perimeter of the SEC.

根據前SEC律師Marc Fagel的說法，“無責任”公式對該機構來說是不尋常的，並表示方法發生了變化。目前的管理似乎考慮了SEC的監管周圍之外的模因硬幣。

James “Metalawman” Murphy has also confirmed that the decision is not surprising: meme coins, as assets lacking investment contract characteristics, are not considered securities unless there is clear evidence of fraud.

詹姆斯·“ Metalawman”墨菲還證實，該決定並不奇怪：模因硬幣，因為缺乏投資合同特徵的資產，除非有明確的欺詐證據，否則不被視為證券。

David Sacks, head of the presidential task force on digital assets, has also proposed a new classification for meme coins, comparable to digital collectibles, similar to NFTs. A paradigm shift that, if adopted, could drastically reduce federal authorities’ intervention on this type of asset.

總統數字資產工作組主管David Sacks還提出了與數字收藏品相當的模因硬幣的新分類，類似於NFT。如果採用的話，範式轉變可能會大大減少聯邦當局對這類資產的干預。

What are meme coins really?

模因硬幣到底是什麼？

Today, the term “meme coin” is used to identify tokens often lacking real utility, launched by influencers or public figures with the goal of monetizing media attention.

如今，“模因硬幣”一詞被用來識別由有影響力的人或公眾人物發起的真正效用，以使媒體關注貨幣化。

Unlike the original projects like Dogecoin, which have built their own community and identity over time, the new meme coins tend to follow a lightning-fast dynamic: a token is created, promoted with viral memes and social media hype, there is an initial boom and then often a rapid bear.

與隨著時間的推移建立了自己的社區和身份的原始項目不同，新的模因硬幣傾向於遵循閃電般的動態：創建一個令牌，以病毒模因和社交媒體炒作來促進，這是最初的繁榮，然後經常是快速熊。

The case of $HAWK is not isolated. Even well-known figures like Donald Trump and Melania Trump have been linked to similar initiatives. In many cases, the technical management is entrusted to external teams, and the promoters defend themselves by invoking the lack of direct operational control.

$ HAWK的情況不隔離。即使是唐納德·特朗普（Donald Trump）和梅拉尼亞·特朗普（Melania Trump）等著名人物也與類似的舉措有關。在許多情況下，技術管理委託給外部團隊，發起人通過援引缺乏直接運營控制來為自己辯護。

Lessons from the $HAWK case

$ Hawk案的教訓

Here are some useful reflections for investors, creator, and regulators:

這是對投資者，創作者和監管機構的一些有用的思考：

1. Viralità non significa valore L’interesse sui social può spingere temporaneamente il prezzo di un token, ma senza fondamentali solidi, l'instabilità è inevitabile.

1

2. The absence of regulation does not equate to impunity Even if the SEC has not intervened, any criminal or civil liabilities could still be assessed by other authorities.

2。沒有法規也不等於有罪不罰現象，即使SEC尚未乾預，其他當局仍然可以評估任何刑事或民事責任。

3. Collaboration with entities can make the difference Welch chose to collaborate transparently with the SEC, a strategy that helped close the case without further consequences.

3.與實體的合作可以使韋爾奇選擇與SEC透明合作，這一戰略有助於解決案件而沒有進一步的後果。

4. More financial education is needed Many buyers of meme coins do not understand the risks associated with these volatile assets. The lack of awareness is fertile ground for abuses.

4。需要更多的金融教育，許多模因硬幣的買家不了解與這些波動性資產相關的風險。缺乏意識是濫用虐待的基礎。

Conclusion: cosa ci insegna il caso Welch

結論：韋爾奇案教給我們什麼

The $HAWB case does not close only with a non-indictment: it leaves behind deep questions about the nature and regulation of meme coins. Haliey Welch emerged legally unscathed, but the episode highlights the need for greater regulatory clarity, responsibility from the creators, and above all, information for investors.

$ hawb案並不僅僅因不調查而結束：它留下了有關模因硬幣的性質和調節的深刻疑問。哈利·韋爾奇（Haliey Welch）在法律上毫髮無損地出現，但這一集強調了對更大的監管清晰度，創作者的責任以及最重要的信息的需求。

As long as the sector continues to move in a gray area, events like this will be neither the first nor the last. And in this context, the line between innovation, aggressive marketing, and real risk remains as thin as ever.

只要該行業繼續在灰色區域移動，類似這樣的事件將既不是第一個也不是最後一個。在這種情況下，創新，積極的營銷和真正的風險之間的界限仍然像以往一樣薄。