Developers who have no direct control, custody, or management authority over user assets shouldn't face the same regulatory burden as custodians—that's just rational policy design, not a radical take. The goal here is straightforward: modernize crypto regulation with actual common sense, ensuring digital asset oversight remains effective while maintaining robust AML and anti-financial crime protections. It's entirely possible to have sensible regulation and strong compliance controls simultaneously.

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 3
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
GasBanditvip
· 2h ago
Exactly, developers are not banks. Why should they be bound by the same strict rules?
View OriginalReply0
SilentObservervip
· 2h ago
Developers shouldn't be treated as custodians to be regulated in the first place. Isn't this logic a bit unclear...
View OriginalReply0
DegenDreamervip
· 3h ago
Someone finally said it. Developers are not banks, so why should they have the same regulatory standards?
View OriginalReply0
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
English
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)