SEC 在加密貨幣行業的過度擴張遇到阻力

美國證券交易委員會對加密產業的持續打擊面臨波場創辦人孫宇晨和監管機構訴訟中其他被告的進一步批評。被告因 SEC 缺乏管轄權和監管指導而主張駁回，強調了其區塊鏈產品與傳統證券發行的不同以及 SEC 對代幣角色的狹隘解釋。他們強調在 TRON 代幣推出之前缺乏明確的監管指導方針，並斷言 SEC 將其範圍擴大到主要是外國產品的嘗試太過分了。

SEC's Expansive Reach in Crypto Industry Faces Mounting Resistance

SEC 在加密產業的廣泛影響力面臨越來越大的阻力

Amidst heightened scrutiny of the cryptocurrency industry, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has come under fire for its aggressive enforcement actions. The latest salvo in this regulatory battle has emerged in a lawsuit filed by the SEC against Tron Foundation, its founder Justin Sun, and various other defendants. In a motion to dismiss the case, the defendants have vehemently criticized the SEC's overreach and lack of regulatory guidance, highlighting the need for clear and proportionate regulatory frameworks in the burgeoning digital asset space.

在加密貨幣行業受到嚴格審查的情況下，美國證券交易委員會（SEC）因其激進的執法行動而受到批評。這場監管之爭的最新一波攻勢是美國證券交易委員會對波場基金會、其創始人孫宇晨和其他幾位被告提起的訴訟。在駁回案件的動議中，被告強烈批評 SEC 的越權行為和缺乏監管指導，強調在蓬勃發展的數位資產領域需要明確且相稱的監管框架。

The SEC's Case: Alleged Unregistered Securities Offerings

美國證券交易委員會的案件：涉嫌未經註冊的證券發行

Last year, the SEC initiated legal proceedings against Justin Sun and his affiliated entities, accusing them of selling unregistered securities through the issuance of Tron (TRX) and BitTorrent (BTT) tokens. The SEC further alleged that Sun and several celebrity endorsers, including Lindsay Lohan, Jake Paul, and Austin Mahone, engaged in fraudulent activities by promoting the crypto assets without proper disclosure.

去年，美國證券交易委員會對孫宇晨及其附屬實體提起法律訴訟，指控他們透過發行 Tron (TRX) 和 BitTorrent (BTT) 代幣出售未經註冊的證券。美國證券交易委員會進一步指控 Sun 和包括 Lindsay Lohan、Jake Paul 和 Austin Mahone 在內的幾位名人代言人在沒有適當披露的情況下通過推廣加密資產來從事欺詐活動。

Defendants' Motion for Dismissal: A Multi-Pronged Attack

被告的駁回動議：多管齊下

In their motion to dismiss, the defendants have mounted a multifaceted attack on the SEC's case, raising concerns about the agency's jurisdictional overreach, selective enforcement practices, and lack of regulatory clarity.

在駁回動議中，被告對 SEC 的案件進行了多方面的攻擊，引發了對該機構管轄權越權、選擇性執法行為以及缺乏監管透明度的擔憂。

Jurisdictional Arguments:

管轄權論點：

The defendants contend that the SEC lacks personal jurisdiction over the foreign defendants and that its attempts to assert authority over products and activities primarily conducted outside the United States are excessive. They argue that the SEC's rationale for jurisdiction, based on alleged contacts with the U.S., is strained and fails to establish a substantial nexus between the defendants and the alleged violations.

被告辯稱，美國證券交易委員會對外國被告缺乏屬人管轄權，並且其試圖對主要在美國境外進行的產品和活動主張權威的做法是過度的。他們認為，美國證券交易委員會基於所謂與美國的接觸而提出的管轄權理由是緊張的，並且未能在被告與涉嫌違規行為之間建立實質聯繫。

Selective Enforcement and Regulatory Uncertainty:

選擇性執法和監管不確定性：

The defendants further criticize the SEC for its inconsistent and selective enforcement of securities laws in the digital asset space. They point out that the SEC's guidelines prior to the launch of TRX addressed activities distinct from those at issue in the lawsuit. They argue that the SEC's subsequent enforcement actions have largely focused on secondary market transactions, which were not explicitly covered by earlier guidance.

被告進一步批評美國證券交易委員會在數位資產領域對證券法的不一致和選擇性執行。他們指出，SEC 在 TRX 推出之前的指導方針所涉及的活動與訴訟中涉及的活動不同。他們認為，美國證券交易委員會隨後的執法行動主要集中在二級市場交易上，而早期的指導意見並未明確涵蓋這些交易。

The defendants also emphasize the lack of clear regulatory guidance from the SEC on the classification and regulation of digital assets. They assert that the SEC's "narrow reading" of tokens as exclusively investment vehicles ignores the broader technological context and governance structures of blockchain projects.

被告也強調美國證券交易委員會對數位資產的分類和監管缺乏明確的監管指導。他們聲稱，美國證券交易委員會將代幣「狹義解讀」為專門的投資工具，忽略了區塊鏈項目更廣泛的技術背景和治理結構。

Failure to Plead Fraud with Particularity:

未能特別說明詐欺行為：

The defendants contend that the SEC's complaint fails to meet the legal requirement to plead fraud with particularity. They argue that the SEC has failed to provide factual allegations and identify the specific role of each defendant in the alleged violations. Instead, the complaint lumps all defendants together under the label "Sun Defendants" without providing sufficient detail to substantiate the claims.

被告辯稱，美國證券交易委員會的投訴不符合具體指控詐欺的法律要求。他們認為，美國證券交易委員會未能提供事實指控，也未能確定每個被告在涉嫌違規行為中的具體角色。相反，起訴書將所有被告歸類為“太陽被告”，但沒有提供足夠的細節來證實指控。

Lack of Fair Notice:

缺乏公平通知：

Finally, the defendants argue that the SEC's complaint fails to provide fair notice of the specific conduct that the agency alleges to be unlawful. They assert that the SEC's vague and general allegations do not provide them with adequate information to effectively defend themselves.

最後，被告辯稱，美國證券交易委員會的投訴未能公平地告知該機構所指控的非法行為。他們聲稱，美國證券交易委員會的模糊和籠統的指控沒有為他們提供足夠的資訊來有效地為自己辯護。

Conclusion: A Call for Clarity and Proportionality

結論：呼籲明確性和相稱性

The defendants' motion to dismiss highlights the growing frustration within the cryptocurrency industry over the SEC's aggressive enforcement tactics and lack of clear regulatory guidance. The case serves as a reminder of the urgent need for a balanced and proportionate approach to regulating digital assets, one that fosters innovation while protecting investors.

被告的駁回動議凸顯了加密貨幣行業對美國證券交易委員會激進的執法策略和缺乏明確監管指導的日益不滿。該案例提醒人們迫切需要採取一種平衡且相稱的方法來監管數位資產，這種方法既要促進創新，又要保護投資者。

As the SEC continues its crackdown on the crypto industry, it is imperative that the agency provides clear and comprehensive regulatory frameworks that strike a balance between protecting investors and stifling innovation. The outcome of the Tron Foundation lawsuit will undoubtedly have far-reaching implications for the future of digital asset regulation in the United States and beyond.

隨著美國證券交易委員會持續打擊加密貨幣產業，該機構必須提供清晰、全面的監管框架，以在保護投資者和抑制創新之間取得平衡。波場基金會訴訟的結果無疑將對美國及其他地區數位資產監管的未來產生深遠影響。