The CompCoin fraud trial of Alan Friedland began on January 31st. Friedland agreed to the charges against him after three days of the CFTC presenting its evidence, which included the testimony of five witnesses.
Final approval of Friedland’s CFTC settlement is still pending. He is already burying Friedland’s agreement, despite this. The launch of BuilderDefi and the CFTC settlement of Friedland at the same time has led to uncomfortable questions from investors. BuilderDefi investor Friedland explained that BLDR’s coin price will fluctuate and that losses are possible; Please understand that my intent is not to offend you in any way.
Since I was only recently granted access to this room, I’m not going to try to be… As a result of this statement, which was made twenty, fifteen minutes after he had said that he had just dealt with the CFTC or some court case, and then he’s like, “Hey man, don’t risk anything that you may lose, this may fluctuate.”. Oh but we’re totally, you know, confident that this is going to work,” they continued. As an investor, that absolutely terrifies me to death.
Participants in the webinar questioned Friedland’s CFTC settlement while he was talking about BuilderDefi. “One of my 2014 blockchain projects, a very promising one, was the subject of litigation against my firm and then against me, and I recently settled the case. I run my own business. I’ve worked in the financial sector for a long time. As a cryptocurrency advocate, I was subjected to a slew of unfair regulations. We made a formal complaint and appeared in front of the authorities numerous times. Unable to carry on our business because of their actions, I agreed to settle for a monetary settlement. It’s worth noting that the CFTC took action against Friedland for soliciting investments totaling $1.6 million in CompCoin.”
Friedland’s charges were not based on any new legislation enacted by the CFTC. Since 1936, the Commodities Exchange Act has existed. CompCoin investors were told that ART, an artificial intelligence trading platform, would generate revenue. When Friedland began promoting CompCoin as an investment opportunity, he did not disclose that ART had only been tested in a theoretical environment. In addition to the $1.6 million that Friedland stole from investors, the CFTC requested that Friedland pay a civil penalty and interest on the stolen funds. As an entrepreneur, Friedland had nothing to do with the case.
One of Friedland’s business partners, Duane Noble, was promoting TradeGenie when NRGY launched. [21:20] An algorithm that connects to TD Ameritrade accounts and automatically trades stocks is our first app. [22:14] TradeGenie will be the name of the product. TradeGenie is thought to be ART’s new name. However, there was no such thing as TradeGenie. NRGY and/or BuilderDefi may still have a role in it, but the details are still under wraps.
A little more than two hours into the webinar, Friedland returned to his pending CFTC settlement; “It was completely unjust. It’s a slap in the face. Regulations are referred to as such because they are the job of the regulators. Regulators and innovators like me are fighting back against their efforts to stifle progress. Then again, I’m not the only one who’s been targeted… simply because they are attempting to alter the current state of affairs At the same time, it’s finished. That was taken care of by me. It was enough of a waste of my time to be at odds with the federal government. They’ve hired a slew of knowledgeable legal counsel. With their staff, they had nine attorneys. They’ve mastered the art of stomping. They’ve mastered the art of intimidation. Okay? In the end, I think I earned their respect by fighting with them. They asked, “Hey, do you want to settle?” in the middle of the trial. And I was like, y’know, it’s just the right thing to do..” It was purely a matter of business acumen. Fighting with the government is a waste of time and effort that could be better spent creating something new. That’s a waste of time and money. Not because of money. Many details need to be unearthed. To begin, Friedland is correct in stating that investor losses are not a “revolutionary change.” Being a business maverick by soliciting $1.6 million from your investors under false pretenses of theoretically generated profits isn’t something you should brag about.”
The Commodity Exchange Act considers you a scammer. Friedland wasn’t being “attacked” by the CFTC when it filed a lawsuit against him; rather, it was holding him responsible for breaking the law. Fighting the government isn’t an option. Over two years ago, the CFTC filed suit against Friedland. Every step of the way, Friedland fought the government. Friedland then pulled the plug after preparing for trial and spending the money on attorneys who prepared a defense for the jury. When Friedland was quoted before the trial, he claimed that US regulators “botched this up extremely badly.”
A jury was given three days to deliberate after that, and the CFTC was given the opportunity to present its case. He had already engaged in conflict with the government. Sitting back and watching his attorneys present his case was all that was required of him during the trial. Friedland, on the other hand, jumped at the first opportunity to settle after hearing the evidence against him for three days. If you’d been fighting a case for two years, would you give up if you felt confident that you’d win at trial?
Friedland’s CFTC settlement is a far cry from the rosy picture he paints for potential BuilderDefi investors in his marketing materials. Because some people can’t accept the simple fact that they broke the law and take responsibility, Friedland has decided to make a spectacle out of it. This leaves only one question unanswered: why did Friedland agree to a settlement on the eve of presenting his case to the jury? The rest of the information was gleaned from openly available court documents. That TradeGenie was dropped (or temporarily shelved) to confuse the CFTC is my personal suspicion.
Art to CompCoin is what TradeGenie is to NRGY/BuilderDefi. Friedland remains unregistered with the CFTC, which means that the regulator could file an identical lawsuit over the same conduct. Because BuilderDefi is offering a passive ROI opportunity of 5 percent per week, the SEC has jurisdiction over it. Based on statements from his partners, BuilderDefi and Friedland are not SEC-registered and do not intend to be. Instead, they plan to use a tactic known as “synthetic compliance.” I just wanted to make sure you were aware of this before our meeting with the attorney, because before I would say a lot of things, right? Lots of things, before we started this project, and we met with the attorney and the legal team there, who said, “Hey, you better be careful what you say. ‘Investment’ is a no-no.’ We can’t say it because the SEC has purchased and owns that word, so we can’t say it. But you can say, “You can buy some coins”. It’s impossible to guarantee a profit. For this reason, even though Alan and his team have developed a program that has the potential to earn greater than 5% weekly, guess what? Right? We can’t just say, “Target five percent.” We have to say that.
As a result, many things must be altered, and the same language must be used throughout the community. It’s just a precautionary measure to ensure that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) never enters our yard. If you’re referring to a “passive” investment opportunity, you’ll have to pay additional fees, but the act of offering unregistered securities itself is illegal.
BuilderDefi’s passive returns of 5% a week No matter how it’s marketed or phrased, a multi-level marketing opportunity is a security offering. By comparing Friedland to Jesus Christ on the cross, Friedland’s business partner Santos Kidd ended the webinar “I have the power to eliminate anyone or anything that is causing you problems. People in this area are familiar to me (indecipherable).”
On February 10th, BuilderDefi will begin soliciting investment from the general public.