CFTC探索超级碗赛事合同，crypto.com和kalshi

最近对Crypto.com和Kalshi的体育合同的调查都归结为一个问题 - 活动合同是在《商品交易法》含义中以体育“游戏”为前提

The recent Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) probe into the Super Bowl events contracts offered by Crypto.com and Kalshi has sparked discussions about the legal definition of "sports gaming" within the Commodities Exchange Act, according to crypto lawyer Aaron Brogan.

据加密律师亚伦·布罗根（Aaron Brogan）称，最近对Crypto.com和Kalshi提供的超级碗赛事合同的商品期货交易委员会（CFTC）调查引发了有关《商品交流法》中“体育游戏”法律定义的讨论。

The probe stems from a broader CFTC investigation into the legality of event contracts, which was initiated following the massive success of PredictIt's political prediction markets, Brogan said in an interview with CoinDesk.

Brogan在接受Coindesk采访时说，该探测源于对事件合同的合法性的更广泛的CFTC调查，该调查是在预测的政治预测市场取得了巨大成功之后开始的。

"The recent probe of Crypto.com and Kalshi's sports contracts all comes down to a single question — are event contracts premised on sports 'gaming' within the meaning of the Commodities Exchange Act?" Brogan said.

“最近对Crypto.com和Kalshi的体育合同的调查都归结为一个问题 - 事件合同是在《商品交易法》含义中以体育'游戏'为前提的吗？”布罗根说。

The CFTC is specifically interested in determining whether Crypto.com and Kalshi are self-certifying these contracts without the Commission's approval, which would be illegal if sports events are deemed to constitute "gaming" under the Commodities Exchange Act, Brogan explained.

Brogan解释说，CFTC特别有兴趣确定Crypto.com和Kalshi是否未经委员会的批准，是否正在自我认证这些合同，如果根据《商品交易法》认为体育事件认为构成“游戏”，这将是非法的。

However, the legal definition of "sports gaming" is surprisingly complex and has been the subject of much debate, particularly in the context of Kalshi's election betting contracts, Brogan said.

但是，“体育游戏”的法律定义令人惊讶地复杂，并且一直是辩论的主题，尤其是在卡尔西（Kalshi）的选举博彩合同的背景下。

In a ruling last fall, a judge defined "gaming" as "playing games" or "playing games for stakes," and cited discussions during the drafting of the Commodities Exchange Act, where a lawmaker stated that the rule against gaming was intended to cover sports betting, Brogan explained.

在去年秋天的一项裁决中，法官将“游戏”定义为“玩游戏”或“玩游戏游戏”，并引用了《商品交流法》的起草期间的讨论，议员们说，对游戏规则旨在涵盖。布罗根解释说，体育博彩。

"All of that sounds bad for these contracts, but I am not wholly convinced," Brogan said.

布罗根说：“所有这些对这些合同听起来都不利，但我并没有完全相信。”

The judge's finding on the gaming definition is dicta, or non-binding, and the legislative history is only relevant if the law is ambiguous, Brogan explained.

Brogan解释说，法官对游戏定义的发现是dicta或无约束力的，而立法历史只有在法律模棱两可的情况下才有意义。

Additionally, Merriam-Webster defines gaming as "the practice or activity of playing games for stakes," which suggests that these prediction markets would have strong arguments if they had to go to court, Brogan said.

此外，梅里亚姆·韦斯特（Merriam-Webster）将游戏定义为“赌注游戏的实践或活动”，这表明，如果这些预测市场不得不去法庭，他们将会有很大的争论。

"At least in Merriam-Webster, this clearly means gambling, not sports, so I think these prediction markets would have colorable arguments if they had to go to the mats," Brogan said.

布罗根说：“至少在梅里亚姆·韦伯斯特（Merriam-Webster），这显然意味着赌博，而不是运动，因此，我认为如果这些预测市场必须去垫子，这些预测市场将具有可着色的论点。”

Some judges might be receptive to this kind of textualist argument, especially given the changing composition of the CFTC, Brogan explained.

Brogan解释说，一些法官可能会接受这种文字主义论点，尤其是考虑到CFTC的组成不断变化。

Many believe that the appointment of Republican Caroline Pham as the Commission's Chair will lead to a more laissez-faire regulatory approach, Brogan said.

布罗根说，许多人认为，任命共和党卡罗琳·帕姆（Caroline Pham）为委员会主席将导致更高的自由放任监管方法。

"The Democrats had been highly skeptical of retail-oriented event contracts and fought hard against first PredictIt and then Kalshi in 2023 and 2024 to attempt to prevent them from offering election contracts," Brogan said.

布罗根说：“民主党人对零售业的活动合同非常持怀疑态度，并与首先预测的斗争，然后在2023年和2024年与卡尔西（Kalshi）进行了艰苦的战斗，以防止他们提供选举合同。”

But, how laissez-faire is still something up for debate, especially in the post-inauguration period, Brogan explained.

但是，Laissez-Faire仍然是辩论的事情，尤其是在国会后时期，Brogan解释说。

"If they're probing into these post-inauguration Kalshi contracts, maybe they will still be hawkish on at least some event contracts," Brogan concluded.

布罗根总结说：“如果他们正在调查这些会议后卡尔西合同，也许至少在某些活动合同上仍然是霍克什。”