Dfinity Foundation赢得诉讼，驳回了索赔

加利福尼亚州的一名联邦法官驳回了集体诉讼，声称出售未注册的证券。

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.

据彭博社报道，加利福尼亚州的一名联邦法官驳回了集体诉讼，该诉讼指控Dfinity基金会出售未注册的证券并人为地夸大了互联网计算机协议（ICP）代币价格。

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.

该诉讼是由2021年8月在2021年5月10日之后购买ICP令牌的投资者提起的。在2017年2月，由分散的开源区块链推出ICP代币后，代表所有在美国购买了代币的人。

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.

根据法院文件，该诉讼是在ICP代币申请开始后三年以上提起的，该诉讼是“有时的”，而且还错过了提出欺诈索赔的限制法规。

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.

此案最初是由有争议的律师事务所Roche Freedman（现称为Freedman Normand Friedland LLP）处理的，后来由Selendy Gay PLLC接管。它的重点是说，dfinity及其高管在没有注册为证券的情况下出售了ICP令牌，并且人为地膨胀了资产的市场和代币价格。

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.

该诉讼还声称，包括首席执行官多米尼克·威廉姆斯（Dominic Williams）在内的Dfinity创始人和高管一定会因其职位而知道所谓的令牌分配问题。但是，法官詹姆斯·多纳托（James Donato）拒绝了这一论点，称发现一家犯有不当行为的公司并不一定意味着其任何雇员都知道这种不当行为。

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.

这引起了人们对证明违反证券法的高标准的关注，其中包括知识和意图。对于欺诈要求成功的声称，原告必须证明发表了误导性陈述，并且被告有意欺骗投资者。没有支持这些主张的可靠证据，法院不太可能裁定投资者。

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.

多纳托法官决定驳回此案的决定是基于“休养法”，该法规与法规相比，该法规规定了对提出索赔的严格限制，该法规通常是基于原告首先意识到违法行为的何时基于的。

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.

该裁决是在法庭上进行的一场艰难的战斗之后进行的，投资者获得了在4月8日之前修改其申诉的最终机会。如果他们未能达到截止日期，则该案可能会根据联邦民事诉讼规则永久驳回。