Basically they're trying to eliminate DEXes and making them CEXes so the people that don't want to do KYC will have nowhere to run anymore because of this, I'm looking forward to the prices going down though, that's one thing that I think is a positive given how expensive it is to buy bitcoin right now, I'm welcoming any event that would lead bitcoin to dump in prices but overall this is still bad news for us I think, the anonymity and freedom that we're enjoying for a really long time seems to be thing that's slowly going away, I hope that in this case, the defendants would get the win though, let the DEXes live and they all should leave them alone.

What if SEC wins? We have been talking about this day may come if the SEC are looking for ways the so called decentralized exchanges has to make their customers to go through KYC before they can make use of their services just like what Jack Dorsey proposed when he has in mind to establish a decentralized exchange. It can be possible that the decentralized exchanges may later have no option.

I don't think the SEC will completely win here, but the SEC will have the opportunity to take a large fine from Uniswap and end the process with a peace agreement.

Decentralized exchanges already have projects of white lists and intermediaries for KYC. If the government wanted regulation, they would make clear rules and large decentralized exchanges would comply. But for some reason it seems to me that financial interests come first here.

I agree. This is where the main fault lies: their traditional regulatory framework does not work for crypto. The demands of the SEC that decentralized crypto apps must follow their outdated framework is unreasonable and unenforceable.

It will not affect anything, people who use Uniswap aren't privacy oriented users, they use Uniswap in order to buy cheap or newly listed shitcoins in order to flip their money. If the token they bought is listed on CEX, they will send the token to CEX and sell it on there.

So it's good to see Gary Gensler attacking wrong place.

Dude, the article above talk about Uniswap, a swaps that trade ERC20 tokens, this has nothing to do with Bitcoin!

Memcoins have a very small capitalization and are not yet interesting for SEC. Of course, there are large projects, but after news about some requirements from the SEC, the capitalization of such a project may decrease very sharply. And the SEC will become the subject of ridicule.
I think that when the SEC punishes all the large projects and they have nothing to do, then they can turn their attention to memcoins.

This is funny, does SEC thinks money could be laundered through a DEX that operates on ERC-20 tokens? Which are mainly shitcoins or the essence of the legal action is just to squeeze some money out Uniswap's pocket. If SEC wins, Pancakeswap will certainly be the next bus stop.

I do not think so, they might not be trading Bitcoin and other privacy coins but some of them value their privacy and if SEC wins the legal battle, Uniswap is going to lose some customers.

What worries me most is how long Uniswap can continue with the legal procedures. Uniswap Labs' annual revenue is around $20 million. Their revenue is less than PancakeSwap, and I do not think it is enough to go into the details of a long trial if there is serious evidence against them.

https://blockworks.co/news/top-defi-protocols-by-revenue

PancakeSwap and Maker seem to be in a better position.

Just to play devil's advocate here, is it truly a DEX if it has a Chief Executive Officer and Chief Operating Officer?  This is a company.  I don't believe that's the correct platform in which to pursue the notion of a decentralised exchange.  A DEX in its truest form should be purely a protocol, not a commercial entity.  Some open-source software a user can run which will connect them peer-to-peer to other users, nothing more.  Just like Bitcoin.  The moment you try and make it a business, you can (and probably will) be under the microscope of numerous regulatory bodies. 

Notice how Uniswap has "employees".  Bitcoin has "contributors".  Bitcoin is not a company and is therefore highly resistant to regulation.  Companies, by comparison, easily crumble under the weight of government pressure.



The moment they formed a company, they made it possible.  Uniswap Labs is a company.  Companies get regulated. 

They screwed up.

However, is there really an official CEO if the DEX is not a registered company? Hayden Adams is the founder and developer of the development company that created an open source software project very much similar to many projects in the cryptospace. I can however understand the argument if the DEX is centralized or decentralized very much similar to the argument if bitcoin presently is centralized or decentralized.

In any case, uncle Gary and the SEC's lawsuit will answer many questions and this will be a very exciting development for the cryptospace that will create very important predecents.