Connect with us

Rumors

US Government Complicates Kim Dotcom’s Divorce

Published

on

Mona Dotcom, somewhat recently estranged wife of Kim Dotcom, has petitioned the government that she has a 50% stake in the assets frozen and seized with the co-operation of New Zealand. Under New Zealand law, she would be entitled to her share of these assets if she could prove that she had no knowledge of the criminal activities of her husband. Since the prosecutors can prove that Mona had six Megaupload accounts with two of her personal e-mail addresses, they say it is very unlikely that she was not aware of the illegal nature of the business.

Also read: Goodbye Skype, Hello MegaChat: Kim Dotcom Reveals Encrypted Video Call and Chat

The government called into question the circumstances of Mona meeting her husband in November 2007, pointing out that he’d had a child with his previous wife just a few months before and did not divorce her until September 2008. Mona and Kim were married in September 2009, by which time, the government claims, much of the assets they’ve seized had already been acquired by Kim Dotcom.

Legitimizing Funds

KIm DotcomSince the raid on Kim Dotcom‘s mansion in January 2012, he has made an effort to legitimize his assets and create revenue streams to support his children. Mega, the file hosting service which is reportedly worth 35 million New Zealand dollars, is one such venture. While Dotcom personally has no stake in it at present, he was able to make sure a trust was set up for his then-not-estranged-wife and children, about 17% of the company. Mega uses cryptography to try to prevent the government or anyone else from knowing what is being hosted or shared, including the service provider.

The government says that Mona’s claim on the luxury vehicles Dotcom owns is unfounded because she doesn’t even drive, a rather odd strategy for discounting someone’s claim to property. To whit:

But Mona Dotcom cannot even drive. Without that ability, it would seem nearly impossible for her to establish that she had dominion and control over the vehicles.

Dominion and control is another aspect of New Zealand law the government is hoping won’t allow Mona Dotcom’s motion to go forward, but it’s important to remember that driving is not required to have dominion or control over a motor vehicle. Indeed, there are other wealthy people who also don’t drive but also own several vehicles. Is the government about to argue that these people do not have dominion and control over their vehicles, either?

Legalese

The government’s argument goes on to cite similar cases where a disenfranchised spouse had petitioned the government for their share of seized property back, and in some cases it has been determined that the spouse is not entitled to anything the criminal had before divorce proceedings begin. While it’s difficult to make out what the legalese is saying, it basically means that the government won’t interfere with alimony and child support with its seizures, but it will take everything from a married couple even when only one party is guilty of anything.

The motion, to strike Mona Dotcom’s claim down, was only filed on December 30th, so it will be some time yet before a decision comes out. It could be precedent setting, with the government eventually being forced to turn over half of what was seized from her estranged husband to Mrs. Dotcom.

Images from Wikimedia Commons and Shutterstock.

Important: Never invest (trade with) money you can't afford to comfortably lose. Always do your own research and due diligence before placing a trade. Read our Terms & Conditions here. Trade recommendations and analysis are written by our analysts which might have different opinions. Read my 6 Golden Steps to Financial Freedom here. Best regards, Jonas Borchgrevink.

Rate this post:

Important for improving the service. Please add a comment in the comment field below explaining what you rated and why you gave it that rate. Failed Trade Recommendations should not be rated as that is considered a failure either way.
0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5 (0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5)
You need to be a registered member to rate this.
Loading...

5 stars on average, based on 2 rated postsP. H. Madore has covered the cryptocurrency beat over the course of hundreds of articles for Hacked's sister site, CryptoCoinsNews, as well as some of her competitors. He is a major contributing developer to the Woodcoin project, and has made technical contributions on a number of other cryptocurrency projects. In spare time, he recently began a more personalized, weekly newsletter at http://ico.phm.link




Feedback or Requests?

Altcoins

EOS Price Analysis: EOS/USD Behavior Spells Potential Danger Following Voting Manipulation Allegations

Published

on

  • EOS has been under fire of late, following reports of a leaked document from a Huobi employee.
  • It indicates voter collusion between Huobi and Chinese EOS block producers.
  • EOS/USD has been on the move lower, as the price remains within a bearish pennant pattern.

Collusion Details

Huobi is one of the largest crypto-exchanges in the world, based in Singapore. There is a leaked spreadsheet that is doing the rounds, from an employee of Huobi. It appears to indicate of collusion, i.e. block producers voting for each other. Huobi is also said to have been receiving payments from other block producers.

Maple Leaf Capital, an investor of EOS, has further made the market aware of this collusion. Much attention has been on their Twitter account of late, after stating that “Recently, an internal excel document from Huobi (one of the BPs) is circulating in the Chinese community. This file documents the collusion, mutual voting, and pay-offs that occur amongst the Chinese BP community”. Details and documents were expressed via their twitter account.

The documents had revealed that Huobi voted for 20 BPs and 16 of them voted for Huobi in return. It was also believed from the details that Huobi was earning around 1,116 EOS per day from this alleged manipulative action.

Since the surfacing speculation, local Chinese newswires, Jinse, reported that Huobi has kept distance between itself and these reports of collusion, with other EOS block producers. Elsewhere, it was further covered by cnLedger in a tweet, that “Huobi denies having financial business with the nodes ($EOS BPs) in the leaked spreadsheet. However, they have not yet denied the authenticity of the leaked file. “Relevant information is still under further investigation”.

Technical review

EOS/USD price has been edging lower over the past three sessions, whether it is coincidental or not, there is evident pressure to the downside. Since 28th September it has fallen over 9%, after testing the upper part of a pennant pattern. It has been dictated by this trend since 7th August during a falling market; the price then went on to stabilize on 13th August. Since the relative mentioned stabilisation, EOS/USD has been moving within a sideways nature. This generally tight trading is being observed with some of its peers across the board. The textbook pattern does suggest another drop could very well be looming. This of course is not being helped by the negative attention around the EOS network that is currently trending.

EOS/USD daily chart

Support to the downside is eyed immediately at $5.40, which is where the 50DMA is currently tracking. This over the past few sessions have proven to be of some comfort for a softer price. Further south, eyes will be on the lower part of the pennant, to see of its strength. It is tracking at $5.12, a failure to hold could invite a quick retest of 13th August low, $4.17. Looking to the upside, resistance is seen just ahead at $5.95, the upper part of the mentioned pattern. A breach will likely see a test of the 100DMA $6.47, then the 23.6% Fibonacci, $6.84, which forced a price rejection on 1st September.

Disclaimer: The author owns bitcoin, Ethereum and other cryptocurrencies. He holds investment positions in the coins, but does not engage in short-term or day-trading.

Featured image courtesy of Shutterstock.

Important: Never invest (trade with) money you can't afford to comfortably lose. Always do your own research and due diligence before placing a trade. Read our Terms & Conditions here. Trade recommendations and analysis are written by our analysts which might have different opinions. Read my 6 Golden Steps to Financial Freedom here. Best regards, Jonas Borchgrevink.

Rate this post:

Important for improving the service. Please add a comment in the comment field below explaining what you rated and why you gave it that rate. Failed Trade Recommendations should not be rated as that is considered a failure either way.
1 vote, average: 5.00 out of 51 vote, average: 5.00 out of 51 vote, average: 5.00 out of 51 vote, average: 5.00 out of 51 vote, average: 5.00 out of 5 (1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
You need to be a registered member to rate this.
Loading...

4.5 stars on average, based on 29 rated postsKen has over 8 years exposure to the financial markets. During a large part of his career, he worked as an analyst, covering a variety of asset classes; forex, fixed income, commodities, equities and cryptocurrencies. Ken has gone on to become a regular contributor across several large news and analysis outlets.




Feedback or Requests?

Continue Reading

Articles

Trans-Fee Mining: Investigating FCOIN and The Future

Published

on

Trans-fee mining’ is a concept utilised by a growing number of projects and exchanges which has not received much in the way of critical attention recently from either mainstream financial or specialist cryptocurrency publications.

The Fall of F-Coin?

Thanks to a company called FCOIN, most of the news which has appeared has been negative. Statistical information regarding the exchange can be found at popular aggregate ranking website CoinMarketCap.

Despite positive coverage earlier this year from the likes of Forbes’ Andrew Rossow, David Hundeyin of our sister site CCN.com wrote more recently that the exchange had been “Accused of Crippling Ethereum Network for Cheap Publicity” with a supposed aim of gaining publicity.

These pundits are joined by community members such as Reddit poster u/ltcisking (along with a large amount of other concurring, Google-topping results), who recently wrote a post aimed at proving such allegations, entitled ‘One of the biggest scams to ever hit Crypto’.

Twitter has also seen its fair share of investor complaints as well, including the following…

As well as the replies to this post,

What is Trans-Fee Mining?

Due to the unusual circumstances in which the ‘trans-fee mining’ sits (being supported by a number of independent projects despite the reputation of FCOIN): it is a difficult methodology to describe.

It builds upon the concept of the ‘exchange token’: which is most often associated with coins such as BNB (Binance Coin), which can be used for staking towards a particular crypto in the exchanges ‘community coin of the month’ program.

The original FCOIN implementation appeared to build upon this vision at first. The token’s value is derived from the fact that it has a stable value, and that it can be used on-platform (like BNB) as a means of purchasing other tokens whilst offering regular returns on investment for long-term holders of the token.

What is FCOIN Doing Now?

FCOIN has issued various statements which appear to support the sentiment behind the claims which they have faced. These include a recent August 14th post, with the telling title ‘FCoin community referendum end and recent plan publicity’.

Highlights of the piece include new objectives such as

“1.Complete and publicize the destruction of the remaining unissued FT.
“2. Complete the delivery of all FT warrants and withdraw the FT warrants from the market…
“4. As of the end of the referendum, the previous trans-fee refund will remain unchanged (based on the price of the FT related trading pairs before the suspension), and then, all the trans-fee refund will be stopped (including all return plans based on FT issuance).
“5. We plan to establish an FCoin mechanism and an announcement cleanup team. The team untied and improved the current FCoin mechanisms and standardized the release of various mechanisms in the future, and made a unified interpretation.”

At best, this may be an admission of fault, and at worst: an ambiguous and uninformative piece of messaging which fails to outline the situation with a strong brand or executive voice.

This comes in addition to a couple of announcements regarding ‘compensation planning’ with regards to investors who had “participated” in the fundraising of the ‘GU’ and ‘QOS’ tokens through their service.

The latter included the assurance that this process “compensation plan is an initiative taken by the platform to protect the interests of community user” concluded with the damning statement that:

“The FCoin platform has informed the QOS project parties and urged them to conduct self-examination of market price fluctuations and recent media reports as soon as possible. It is not excluded to take delisting and other related measures. The specific plan will be subject to the subsequent announcement. During this period, QOS will be temporarily suspended.”

Torch-bearers of Trans-Fee Mining?

Various claims of discrepancy against FCOIN’s actions as a company however, have not discouraged many projects which are attempting to build their own version of trans-fee mining. Whether or not they have been inspired by the short-lived success of FCOIN’s implementation is yet to be confirmed!

One of the most recent organisations which has decided to foray into this difficult and all-but-controversial territory is BitMart, an exchange founded by current CEO Sheldon Xia. Their approach is branded ‘Mission X’, and utilises their proprietary ‘BMX’ token.

“All transaction fees from the BMX market will go directly to the users who supported the project. In addition, successful projects will enter BitMart’s main trading markets.

“This program gives users the ability to decide which projects they want to be listed on the exchange, creating a self-regulated market.”

The platform piqued this writer’s attention upon noticing a disparity between public consensus and professional news coverage. Whilst the latter has published next to nothing with regards to the platform, a quick search of social media and communities such as forums seem to illustrate a positive and transparent image.

CoinEx was recently reported to have achieved unprecedented growth following the release of their token – however, like FCOIN have been called out for discrepancies. This time regarding the faking of volume metrics.

Final Thoughts

It appears that trans-fee mining as a concept is a long-way from earning this writer’s confidence, however it must be noted that there are many promising aspects. Time will tell whether talent will shine through or if trans-fee mining will fade out at the hands of opportunists.

What is important to note is that it is not the technology or idea, but the hands that are operating the machine incorporating it.

This writer cannot directly recommend the concept in its current state, but believes that the original idea is solid and if implemented in a viable way: would thoroughly warrant the full attention of any potential investor.

Until then, watch the community and keep an eye on the media – as well as word-of-mouth as this flawed-yet-promising idea is if nothing else, highly interesting!

Featured image courtesy of Shutterstock.

Important: Never invest (trade with) money you can't afford to comfortably lose. Always do your own research and due diligence before placing a trade. Read our Terms & Conditions here. Trade recommendations and analysis are written by our analysts which might have different opinions. Read my 6 Golden Steps to Financial Freedom here. Best regards, Jonas Borchgrevink.

Rate this post:

Important for improving the service. Please add a comment in the comment field below explaining what you rated and why you gave it that rate. Failed Trade Recommendations should not be rated as that is considered a failure either way.
0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5 (0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5)
You need to be a registered member to rate this.
Loading...

4.5 stars on average, based on 12 rated posts




Feedback or Requests?

Continue Reading

Politics

Viral Disinformation Warning: Fake News Are Taking over Facebook

Published

on

Like! Facebook

Today’s news: Brad Pitt and Harrison Ford voted for Donald Trump, the Republican President-elect of the US, because the liberals want to take away their money; Melania Trump filed to divorce her husband, Donald Trump; Donald Trump himself said to People Magazine that Republicans are the dumbest group of voters; All the news above are fake, but trending on the social networks.

(more…)

Important: Never invest (trade with) money you can't afford to comfortably lose. Always do your own research and due diligence before placing a trade. Read our Terms & Conditions here. Trade recommendations and analysis are written by our analysts which might have different opinions. Read my 6 Golden Steps to Financial Freedom here. Best regards, Jonas Borchgrevink.

Rate this post:

Important for improving the service. Please add a comment in the comment field below explaining what you rated and why you gave it that rate. Failed Trade Recommendations should not be rated as that is considered a failure either way.
0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5 (0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5)
You need to be a registered member to rate this.
Loading...

Giulio Prisco is a freelance writer specialized in science, technology, business and future studies.




Feedback or Requests?

Continue Reading

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

A part of CCN

Hacked.com is Neutral and Unbiased

Hacked.com and its team members have pledged to reject any form of advertisement or sponsorships from 3rd parties. We will always be neutral and we strive towards a fully unbiased view on all topics. Whenever an author has a conflicting interest, that should be clearly stated in the post itself with a disclaimer. If you suspect that one of our team members are biased, please notify me immediately at jonas.borchgrevink(at)hacked.com.

Trending