CoinDeskPolicyPublished on 2024-05-15Last updated on 2024-05-16

Abstract

Georgetown Law professor Christopher Brummer is leaping into crypto disclosure services as CEO of the new company, backed by Robinhood and a former PayPal chief.

  • The founder of DC Fintech Week, Christopher Brummer, is putting his regulatory policy expertise to work as the CEO of a new company, Bluprynt.
  • The firm will aide crypto customers in the emerging requirements for government disclosures.

Georgetown Law professor Christopher Brummer leads an annual event on emerging financial technology in Washington that became a top forum for crypto issues in recent years. Now he's joining the sector, founding Bluprynt to help the industry with its regulatory disclosures as rules begin to emerge around the world.

Following a $1.7 million early funding round, Brummer said the company is backed by Dan Schulman, the former PayPal CEO of PayPal; Jules Kroll, the founder of Kroll Inc.; Robinhood Inc. and others. Bluprynt intends to offer what it described as "quality, industry-grade disclosure solutions for digital assets and services."

“Transparency is the flywheel for liquidity in the space," Brummer said in a statement. "Without it, mainstream adoption, deep institutional involvement and government licensing will prove elusive.”

Advertisement
Advertisement

The business enters the cryptocurrency fray as Europe and Asian jurisdictions have moved forward with rules, but the U.S. remains well behind, still working on legislation to regulate the digital assets sector – and its future disclosure requirements.

Brummer is the founder of the popular DC Fintech Week, an annual policy event that in recent years threw increasing focus on crypto, blockchain and artificial-intelligence matters. He told CoinDesk he intends to retain his role as a professor and organizer of the conference.

Edited by Nikhilesh De.

Related Reads

The Full Story of How Crypto Unicorn Blockstream Is Mired in Serious Fraud Allegations

This article details serious allegations of fraud against Bitcoin infrastructure company Blockstream, founded by Bitcoin pioneer Adam Back. In June 2024, investigative account NatInfoSec published a report accusing Blockstream's mining note (BMN) program of potentially operating a multi-billion dollar scheme with Ponzi-like characteristics. The core allegations focus on Blockstream Mining Notes (BMNs), which offer investors fixed annual yields up to approximately 20% from Bitcoin mining. NatInfoSec's investigation raises several key issues: 1. **Suspicious Hashrate & Payout Capacity**: The analysis suggests Blockstream would need 20-45 EH/s of mining power to cover its BMN obligations, but its public dashboard shows only around 15 EH/s. Furthermore, no verifiable public evidence (e.g., grid connection records, import data) was found to support the massive mining operation required. 2. **Questionable Payout Source**: The BMN contract allows Blockstream to use Bitcoin from *any source* (Substitute Performance BTC) to fulfill investor payouts, raising concerns that payouts may not come from actual mining revenue. 3. **High-Risk, Fixed Returns**: Offering ~20% fixed yields in the volatile, cyclical Bitcoin mining industry is viewed as highly unusual and requires clear explanation. 4. **Undisclosed Criminal Record of Key Figure**: Christopher William Cook, a key figure in Blockstream's mining operations and CEO of spin-off Exacore, was found to have a federal felony conviction for mail fraud in 2008, a fact not disclosed in BMN offering documents. His background was also allegedly embellished. 5. **Potential Contagion to BSTR SPAC**: Questions were raised about whether these liabilities and Cook's record should have been disclosed in the SEC filings for Bitcoin Standard Treasury Company (BSTR), a separate Adam Back-associated firm planning a SPAC merger. The crypto community is divided. BitMEX Research validated Cook's criminal record and expressed concern over the high yields but found other evidence lacking or misleading, noting the legal separation between BMN, Blockstream, and BSTR. Blockstream defenders, like Samson Mow, argue the mining is real. Critics, however, emphasize the lack of independent, verifiable proof of the mining operation's scale and the true source of investor payouts. The article concludes that BMN remains shrouded in key unanswered questions regarding its actual size, the verifiability of its underlying mining assets and payouts, the source of its high yields, and the full role and disclosure concerning Chris Cook. Blockstream had not issued a comprehensive response at the time of writing.

marsbit1h ago

The Full Story of How Crypto Unicorn Blockstream Is Mired in Serious Fraud Allegations

marsbit1h ago

The Full Story Behind Encryption Unicorn Blockstream's Deep Entanglement in Serious Fraud Allegations

This article details allegations of serious fraud surrounding the crypto company Blockstream, founded by Bitcoin pioneer Adam Back. Investigation account NatInfoSec accuses Blockstream of raising billions through its Blockstream Mining Note (BMN) products, which offer high fixed yields of up to 20% from purported mining revenue. The core allegations are: 1) Blockstream's public mining hash rate (15 EH/s) appears insufficient to cover the massive payout obligations from sold BMN notes, raising questions about the true source of investor payouts. 2) Key executive Christopher William Cook, central to the mining operations, has a prior federal conviction for mail fraud, a fact not disclosed to investors. Cook's background and lavish lifestyle are highlighted as red flags. 3) The structure allows payouts from any source of BTC, not necessarily mining revenue, which critics argue gives it Ponzi-like characteristics. The controversy also touches on Bitcoin Standard Treasury Company (BSTR), a related entity planning a SPAC上市. Critics question whether BMN's liabilities and Cook's record should be disclosed in BSTR's filings. BitMEX Research offered a tempered analysis, confirming Cook's criminal record is likely true and the high yields concerning, but found other claims like insufficient抵押证据 less substantiated. Community debate centers on the need for verifiable proof of Blockstream's mining output and revenue. The article concludes that while fraud is not proven, BMN presents significant, unresolved questions regarding its actual scale, the source of its high fixed returns, the verifiability of its mining operations and payouts, and the full disclosure of associated risks and personnel backgrounds. Blockstream has not yet issued a formal response.

链捕手3h ago

The Full Story Behind Encryption Unicorn Blockstream's Deep Entanglement in Serious Fraud Allegations

链捕手3h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片