A third-party entity called “Eeon” has intervened in the ongoing lawsuit between the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Binance, representing the interests of Binance’s customers. According to Eeon, both the SEC and Binance’s attorneys have not adequately represented the customers’ interests, prompting Eeon to seek representation on their behalf.
Eeon argues that the customers are not ordinary users but rather stakeholders, investors, and owners of cryptocurrency held by Binance and its subsidiaries. They assert that their interests were not adequately considered in the case. Furthermore, Eeon contends that cryptocurrencies should be classified as commodities rather than securities since they are primarily used for personal and household purposes, rather than commercial activities. The absence of specific regulations for this emerging commodity category limits the SEC’s jurisdiction over cryptocurrencies, as highlighted by Eeon.
Additionally, Eeon claims that Binance has been controlling customers’ crypto assets by blocking access and withdrawals without proper notice. They allege that the actions taken by the SEC have worsened the situation for investors instead of protecting their interests. Eeon accuses the SEC of wrongly accusing customers of money laundering. Consequently, Eeon seeks a court order to grant customers access to their frozen assets on Binance platforms.
Eeon also argues that offshore fund transfers are a common and accepted practice, distinct from money laundering. They emphasize that various entities engaged in international money transfers, such as e-commerce platforms, freelance services, consulting firms, small export companies, and travel agencies, should not be associated with money laundering activities.
In their counterclaim, Eeon demands compensation from both Binance and the US SEC. They seek 20% of the daily value of withheld funds per customer, totaling $1000 per day. Additionally, Eeon proposes that both Binance and the US SEC share equal responsibility for paying penalties, with $500 assigned to each party.
Cointelegraph has reached out to Binance for further information on this case, but no feedback has been received at the time of this publication.