Securities

Expert Analysis

• Why Lawyers Shouldn't Accept Fees In Cryptocurrency: Part 2

  

  The legal industry has already begun to feel the impact of anti-bribery and anti-money laundering requirements. When involved with cryptocurrency trading and remittance, law firms face more than the risk of being perceived as organizations that support money laundering practices, says John Reed Stark of John Reed Stark Consulting LLC.

• Tips For Navigating The SEC Wells Process

  

  In a recent speech, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Enforcement Co-Director Steven Peikin imparted a few suggested “do’s and don’ts” for effective communication with the SEC during the Wells process. Despite the clear stance Peikin articulated for many of the issues, it pays to keep in mind that every situation is different, say attorneys with Proskauer Rose LLP.

• Why Lawyers Shouldn't Accept Fees In Cryptocurrency: Part 1

  

  Law firms are increasingly accepting cryptocurrency as payment for services. While this might seem innovative and forward-thinking, ironically it is much more of a throwback, says John Reed Stark of John Reed Stark Consulting LLC.

• Untangling The Web Of Cybersecurity Disclosure Rules

  

  Upon the occurrence of a cybersecurity incident, a U.S. public company needs to consider whether it has disclosure obligations under a number of overlapping, and potentially conflicting, regulations in multiple jurisdictions. This issue is now at the forefront with the EU General Data Protection Regulation taking effect, say attorneys with Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP.

• Breaking Down The 2nd Criminal Spoofing Trial: Part 2

  

  The criminal prosecution of Andre Flotron was ill-fated and suffered from a series of missteps and miscalculations by the government. However, it is now beyond any legitimate dispute that spoofing occurs, that it is illegal, that prosecutors are willing and able to charge spoofing as a criminal violation, and that it is possible to prove those charges in court, say attorneys with K&L Gates LLP.

• Breaking Down The 2nd Criminal Spoofing Trial: Part 1

  

  The recent acquittal of former UBS trader Andre Flotron in the second spoofing case to go to trial has resulted in comparisons to the spoofing-related conviction of Michael Coscia in 2015. But there are significant differences between the two cases that make such comparisons difficult, say attorneys with K&L Gates LLP.

• Ripple Labs Case Will Address Key Cryptocurrency Question

  

  Do cryptocurrencies that function primarily as a medium of exchange qualify as securities? An answer may be coming sooner than expected — not from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission but from a California federal court in Coffey v. Ripple Labs, says Christian Everdell, counsel at Cohen & Gresser LLP and a former assistant U.S. attorney.

• Impediments To Legal Industry's 'Inevitable' Future: Part 2

  

  I agree with the legal pundits speculating that NewLaw’s present and future disruptors will radically change the legal services industry, but that change may not come quite as rapidly as predicted. Regardless, now is the time for both the incumbents and the challengers to best position themselves for the eventual shakeup, says Craig Levinson, founder of Levity Partners.

• Dr Pepper Shines Spotlight On Delaware Appraisal Rights

  

  The Delaware Chancery Court recently held that appraisal rights are not available to the stockholders of Dr Pepper in connection with the company's proposed merger with Keurig Green Mountain, raising the question of whether the reverse triangular merger structure in this case will be utilized in other transactions to eliminate appraisal rights, say attorneys with Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson LLP.

• Defining A Shareholder's Bankruptcy Veto Power

  

  The Fifth Circuit's recent decision in Franchise Services of North America should give comfort to investors that seek to negotiate consent rights with respect to a bankruptcy filing. The fact that an investor also holds a claim against the company will not, in and of itself, invalidate a bankruptcy consent provision, say attorneys with King & Spalding LLP.