Albin Lang
February 4, 2025 15:48
The Ministry of Justice’s actions against Defi developers raises concerns about responsibility and management, and promotes more clear legal definitions and policy reform demands.
The Ministry of Justice (DOJ) has launched legal measures against distributed financial (Defi) developers, causing important debate in the cryptocien industry. According to A16Z Crypto reports, this movement questions the responsibilities of the distributed system and the appropriate assignment of management. DOJ’s actions have been criticized for incorrectly dominating and responsible for the prosecution of software developers based on the 1960 sections.
Understanding control with distributed system
The central problem is to focus on identifying the control level exercised by various entities in the distributed system. In conventional contexts such as car manufacturing, the driver is assigned to the driver instead of the car manufacturer when an accident occurs. This kind of thing is used to argue that software developers, such as automakers, create neutral tools and not to be accountable for how third -partys use these tools.
US V. In recent cases, such as storms and Rodriguez, DOJ prosecuted blockchain developers and compared their roles to the unauthorized remittance. Critics argue that this approach misunderstands the nature of the control of the distributed system, which is often not directly controlled by developers.
Legal definition and impact on the industry
The center of the controversy is the definition of the “remittance” business based on the US law section 1960. This definition traditionally contained an entity that accepts and sends currency or equivalent on the public. However, in distributed finance, users usually use the protocols that are no longer developed by developers to maintain the control of assets.
The lack of clarity of these legal definitions can lead to the industry, as DOJ’s wide interpretation can lead to further prosecutions of developers who create non -compromised software. As a result, a re -evaluation of the legal framework was required to reflect the reality of control and custody in the decentralized network.
Potential policy reform
Industry leaders and policy imgers have been required to cooperate in 2025 to improve legal definitions and match the technical nuances of distributed systems. Such reforms are considered essential to promoting innovation while protecting developers from excessive responsibilities. The similarity with the automotive industry emphasizes the stuffy effects that the responsibility of overload can give the technology advancement.
The need for clear and consistent interpretation in the context of digital assets and management is emphasized as an important issue for the future of the US cryptographic industry. If you cannot deal with these concerns, you may hinder the growth and development of innovative financial technology.
For an additional insight on the meaning of DOJ’s actions, see the entire A16Z Crypto article.
Image source: Shutterstock