Is the token holder—often the holder of some form of digital currency—always free to choose which branch of the fork to take?
A blockchain is often envisioned as a record of a single continuous sequential series of transactions, like the links of the metaphorical chain from which the term “blockchain” derives. But sometimes the chain turns out to be not so single or continuous. Sometimes situations can arise where a portion of the chain can branch off into a new direction from the original chain, while the original chain also continues to move forward separately. This presents a choice for the current holders of the digital tokens on that blockchain about which direction they wish to follow going forward. In the world of blockchain, this scenario is termed a “fork.”
Robert A. Schwinger explores recent developments in this edition of his New York Law Journal Blockchain Law column.
Read the entire article, Blockchain law: The fork not taken.
Special thanks to associate Allison L. Silverman for assisting in the preparation of this article.
Publication
On 24 October 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) confirmed that the European Commission’s (the EC) 2009 decision, which imposed a (then record) €1.06 billion fine on Intel, was flawed as far as it found that loyalty rebates granted by Intel had anti-competitive effects.
Publication
The Dutch tax classification system for non-Dutch entities will undergo significant changes as of 1 January 2025.
Publication
In King Crude Carriers SA & Ors v Ridgebury November LLC & Ors [2024] EWCA Civ 719 the Court of Appeal held that the claimant sellers (the Sellers) were entitled to claim the deposits promised under sale contracts as a debt despite the defendant buyers’ (the Buyers) breach of contract, which had resulted in the non-fulfilment of a condition precedent to the payment of the deposits.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2023