Read the entire case bulletin. The crux of the case is not that privacy is illegal. Instead, the development team uses privacy technology to help carry out covert transfers of assets that the government considers illegal, thereby making profits in the process. No specific evidence of money laundering was published. The evidence is tweets and Twitter conversations, and branding materials.

nostr:note1u0j558xazfgad9r0cs69njt2sdgty3rkq5wwstzyruye6f590l2smcauk3

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Their first mistake was taking fees.

Do not take fees on services like this. Build neutral tools - maybe try to sell them if possible - and let users run their own services for themselves. Or for others if they want to take that risk on themselves.

Their accusations require concrete evidence, and the current tweet conversation evidence is not sufficient to prove it.

No disagreement there.

But it doesn't change my point.

No central server/service provider, no case at all. (Or rather, 10 million cases, some of which may be actually "legitimate")

yeah