Nvidia Lands In Court Over Crypto Secret — Here Is What Investors Missed

bitcoinistPublicado em 2026-03-26Última atualização em 2026-03-26

Resumo

Nvidia faces a certified class action lawsuit over allegations it under-disclosed crypto mining revenue linked to its gaming GPU sales during the 2017–2018 period. Investors claim the company misled them by attributing significant revenue growth to gaming rather than cryptocurrency mining, creating a "revenue gap" between internal knowledge and public statements. After Nvidia’s CFO later acknowledged a revenue shortfall due to crypto-related inventory issues, the stock fell nearly 30%. The lawsuit, now moving forward, cites internal emails suggesting management was aware the stock price was artificially sustained by misleading disclosures. The case introduces legal and financial risks for Nvidia amid its current prominence in AI.

Nvidia is facing a certified class action over alleged under‐disclosure of crypto mining revenue.

A Crypto Scandal Resurrects Just In Time For Holy Week

After years of grueling legal back and forth between the giant gaming company and the American courts, a U.S. federal judge has certified a securities-fraud class action against Nvidia and CEO Jensen Huang over alleged under‐disclosure of crypto mining revenue in 2017–2018, according to a Wednesday order from Judge Haywood S. Gilliam Jr. in a California federal court. A class certification means the case can move ahead on behalf of a broad group of shareholders (the plaintiffs), raising the legal and financial stakes for Nvidia.

Investors claim Nvidia hid how much of its “gaming” GPU sales were actually driven by cryptocurrency miners, creating “revenue gaps” between public guidance and internal reality.

A Recap Of The Legal Battle

In order to properly understand this development, we must first go back to almost a decade ago, when investors sued the American tech company for the first time in 2018. Back then, the investors argued that $1 billion in crypto-linked GPU sales were misclassified or downplayed, with internal emails suggesting management knew the stock was “held high” by these statements.

It is important to remember that this happened in the context of the 2017–2018 mining boom, when Ethereum and other coins sent demand for Nvidia GPUs surging. Despite this, the company publicly emphasized gaming as the main growth driver.

The extent of Nvidia’s risk only became clear on November 2018, when CFO Colette Kress acknowledged that gaming revenue had fallen “short of expectations” because excess inventory built up during the crypto boom was taking longer than anticipated to clear. Gaming GPU prices were slower than expected to return to normal after the “sharp crypto falloff”, she claimed.

This disclosure not only triggered a roughly 28–29% share price crash, but also forward, in 2022, a $5.5 million SEC fine over inadequate crypto-mining disclosures in fiscal 2018, which the company already paid. Bitcoinist covered the story back then.

The lawsuit was first thrown out in 2021, then brought back to life on appeal, withstanding Nvidia’s unsuccessful attempt to get the U.S. Supreme Court to shut it down, and is now advancing as a certified class action.

And Now What?

Today, plaintiffs contend that a large portion of Nvidia’s crypto-fueled sales actually ran through its GeForce gaming GPUs, with most of that income booked under the gaming division, leaving the company heavily exposed to the boom‐and‐bust swings of the crypto market. Despite that, Nvidia had long insisted that the bulk of mining-related demand was captured in a distinct line item rather than in its main gaming segment and that crypto mining was a minor contributor to its overall business.

The judge highlighted an internal email from an Nvidia vice president, describing it as especially revealing:

The Court also notes that internal company emails support its conclusion here. Just before the November 2018 disclosure, NVIDIA’s then-VP of Investor Relations and Strategic Finance opined in response to a question from Huang that one reason “the market isn’t pricing in a bigger miss” following news that AMD had one or two quarters of post-crypto channel inventory was in part “because of comments we’ve made on . . . ring-fencing the crypto impact in OEM”

The newly certified class includes investors who purchased Nvidia shares between August 10, 2017 and November 15, 2018. A case management conference is set for April 21, when the judge is expected to lay out how the litigation will proceed.

It is notable that one of NVIDIA’s own VPs expressed the view that its stock price remained high because of the same types of earlier comments that Plaintiffs are pointing to, and the Court cannot conclude that there was no price impact in the face of such evidence.

For NVDA stock traders, a live, certified class action injects headline risk into one of the market’s most crowded AI plays, and any adverse ruling or settlement could weigh on multiples in a risk‐off tape. For crypto and mining‐adjacent names, the case is a reminder that opaque revenue accounting around mining cycles can come back years later, potentially tightening disclosure standards just as the sector eyes the next bull run.

BTC’s price drops slightly after reaching $71k yesterday, trading for around $69k today. Source: BTCUSD on Tradingview

Cover image from Perplexity, BTCUSD chart from Tradingview

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main reason Nvidia is facing a certified class action lawsuit?

ANvidia is facing a certified class action lawsuit over alleged under-disclosure of crypto mining revenue, specifically for hiding how much of its 'gaming' GPU sales were actually driven by cryptocurrency miners during 2017-2018.

QWhat significant financial penalty did Nvidia already pay related to this issue?

ANvidia paid a $5.5 million SEC fine in 2022 over inadequate crypto-mining disclosures in fiscal 2018.

QWhat was the key consequence of Nvidia's November 2018 disclosure about its gaming revenue?

AThe November 2018 disclosure, where CFO Colette Kress acknowledged gaming revenue fell short due to excess crypto-related inventory, triggered a roughly 28-29% share price crash.

QWhat time period does the newly certified class action cover for investors?

AThe newly certified class includes investors who purchased Nvidia shares between August 10, 2017 and November 15, 2018.

QWhat did an internal email from an Nvidia VP reveal, according to the judge?

AThe judge highlighted an internal email where an Nvidia VP opined that the company's stock price remained high because of comments they had made about 'ring-fencing the crypto impact', suggesting management was aware the market was being misled.

Leituras Relacionadas

Those Pre-Bitcoin PoW Protocols Have Recently Been Reimplemented

This article details a recent surge in replicating pre-Bitcoin Proof-of-Work (PoW) protocols, specifically focusing on Hal Finney's 2004 RPOW (Reusable Proofs of Work). Within five days in May 2026, multiple independent builders in the Bitcoin/cypherpunk community launched projects inspired by this early electronic cash proposal. The initiative began with Fred Krueger's `rpow2.com`, a centralized but auditable system that replaced RPOW's original IBM 4758 hardware with Ed25519 signatures. Initially a faithful replica, it later adopted Bitcoin-like features (21M supply cap, difficulty adjustment) and a controversial 5.24% founder allocation. This sparked rapid forks, including `rpow4.com` which incorporated full Bitcoin parameters, a prediction market (`rpowmarket.com`), and a DEX (`rpow2swap.com`). Concurrently, Mike In Space created a prototype of Wei Dai's 1998 b-money proposal (`b-money.replit.app`), pushing the historical exploration even further back. The article contrasts these centralized, server-dependent experiments with Bitcoin's core innovation of decentralized, trustless consensus. It also highlights a parallel development: the `HASH` project on Ethereum, which uses smart contract hooks to enable a purely fair-launch, browser-mineable PoW token with 0% allocations to team or VCs. The collective activity is framed as a meme-driven, educational exploration of cypherpunk history rather than a serious financial movement, with all projects heavily disclaiming any investment value.

marsbitHá 5m

Those Pre-Bitcoin PoW Protocols Have Recently Been Reimplemented

marsbitHá 5m

South Korean Exchanges 'Battle' Regulators, Challenging the Boundaries of Enforcement and Legislation

South Korea's cryptocurrency industry is engaged in a rare, direct confrontation with regulators. The Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), the primary anti-money laundering (AML) watchdog, has recently imposed heavy penalties on major exchanges like Upbit and Bithumb for alleged violations involving unregistered overseas VASPs and AML procedures. However, exchanges are now actively challenging these actions in court and through industry associations. In a significant shift, the Seoul Administrative Court ruled in favor of Upbit's operator, Dunamu, overturning part of an FIU-ordered business suspension. The court found the FIU's penalty criteria and justification insufficiently clear. Similarly, the court suspended the enforcement of a six-month business suspension against Bithumb pending a final ruling, citing potential irreversible harm to the exchange. Beyond legal battles, the industry is contesting proposed legislative amendments. The Digital Asset eXchange Alliance (DAXA) strongly opposes a draft rule that would mandate Suspicious Transaction Reports (STRs) for all crypto transfers over 10 million KRW (~$6,800). DAXA argues this "poison pill" clause violates legal principles and would overwhelm the STR system, increasing reports from 63,000 to an estimated 5.45 million annually for major exchanges, thereby crippling effective AML monitoring. This conflict highlights a structural tension in South Korea's crypto governance: comprehensive digital asset laws are still developing, while regulators rely heavily on AML enforcement. The industry's move from passive compliance to active legal and legislative challenges signifies a new phase, pressing for clearer rules and more proportionate enforcement. While short-term disputes may intensify, this clash could ultimately lead to a more mature and sustainable regulatory framework for South Korea's vibrant crypto market.

marsbitHá 58m

South Korean Exchanges 'Battle' Regulators, Challenging the Boundaries of Enforcement and Legislation

marsbitHá 58m

After 50x Storage Surge, Justin Sun Always Looks to the Next Decade

Sun Yuchen, known for his controversial stunts like a $30 million lunch with Warren Buffett (canceled due to a kidney stone) and eating a $6.2 million duct-taped banana, is often overshadowed by a significant fact: his decade-long track record of spotting major investment trends. In 2016, he famously advised young people to invest in Bitcoin, Nvidia, Tesla, and Tencent instead of buying property. A hypothetical $20,000 investment in Nvidia and Tesla from that list would now be worth over 50 million RMB. His latest major call was on November 6, 2025, predicting a "50x storage opportunity" tied to the AI boom, which materialized with Sandisk's stock surging nearly 50-fold by 2026. Looking ahead, Sun now focuses on the next frontier: Physical AI. He identifies four key areas: 1. **Embodied AI/Robotics**: He sees this reaching its "iPhone moment," with companies like UBTech and Galaxy General leading in commercialization. 2. **Drones**: Viewed as the first commercially viable form of Physical AI, revolutionizing sectors from warfare (e.g., AeroVironment's Switchblade) to logistics. 3. **Spatial Computing**: Beyond VR, it's about AI understanding physical space, a foundational technology for robotics and autonomous systems, exemplified by Apple's Vision Pro. 4. **Space Exploration**: After a 2025 suborbital flight with Blue Origin, Sun advocates for space as the ultimate frontier, discussing blockchain's potential role in space asset management and data transactions. His investment philosophy involves betting on entire, inevitable trends rather than single companies. For robotics, he sees Tesla (the body/manufacturer) and Nvidia (the brain/AI platform) as complementary plays. In defense drones, he highlights companies making tanks obsolete (AeroVironment) and those augmenting fighter jets (Kratos). For space, he participated in Blue Origin's flight and anticipates SpaceX's potential IPO to redefine the sector's valuation. Sun Yuchen's vision frames the next two decades not as a revolution in information flow (like the internet), but in the fundamental operation of the physical world through AI-powered robots, autonomous systems, and spatial intelligence, ultimately extending human and AI activity into space. While many still focus on conventional assets, he continues to look toward the next technological horizon.

marsbitHá 1h

After 50x Storage Surge, Justin Sun Always Looks to the Next Decade

marsbitHá 1h

The Billionaires Behind the Most Expensive Midterm Election in History

"The Most Expensive Midterm Elections and Their Billionaire Backers" This analysis details the unprecedented scale of spending in the 2026 midterm elections, highlighting the key billionaire donors shaping the political landscape. Jeff Yass, founder of Susquehanna International Group, has contributed over $81 million, ranking third among individual donors behind George Soros ($102.6M) and Elon Musk ($84.8M). Yass is a major donor to Trump's MAGA Inc. and supports school choice and various candidates. Overall, federal committees have raised over $4.7 billion this cycle, with political ad spending projected to reach $10.8 billion. Republican-aligned groups are significantly out-raising their Democratic counterparts. "Dark money" from undisclosed sources continues to grow. The core stakes involve control of Congress and policy direction for Trump's final term. Donors are also motivated by specific issues: Sergey Brin and Chris Larsen are funding opposition to a proposed California wealth tax and supporting crypto-friendly policies. Other top donors include OpenAI's Greg Brockman and his wife Anna ($50M total to MAGA Inc. and an AI-focused PAC), Richard Uihlein ($45.3M to conservative causes), venture capitalists Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz (each over $44M to crypto/AI PACs and MAGA Inc.), Miriam Adelson ($42.6M to GOP leadership PACs), Paul Singer ($33.9M), and Diane Hendricks ($25.8M to MAGA Inc.). The article notes that the peak fundraising period is still ahead, with major primaries approaching.

marsbitHá 1h

The Billionaires Behind the Most Expensive Midterm Election in History

marsbitHá 1h

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片