Andrew Hamilton, a lawyer with computer experience, leads a class action lawsuit accusing social media and search engine giants like Google, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube of cartel-like behavior designed to wipe out the burgeoning cryptocurrency sector.
The lawsuit, which has already generated more than $ 600 million in claims, Accuses companies of acting like cartels by launching a coordinated attack to stifle competition from the emerging virtual currency sector in 2018 – As social platforms, issued strict bans against the promotion of crypto assets and initial coin offers.
After two and a half years of preparation told Cointelegraph that it was ready to submit the documents within 48 hoursand highlights that applicants’ registrations will close on August 21st.
The attorney believes the total value of the lawsuits against the companies could rise to $ 300,000 million.
Hamilton is the CEO of JPB Liberty – the legal entity planning to bring the lawsuit to court in your home country, Australia, free of charge.
Speaking to Cointelegraph, Hamilton said that when the ban on crypto ads was put in place, immediately realized that it was anti-competitive, based on his experience in competition law.
After extensive research found that the social media giants were acting like a cartel and that it was “pretty easy to prove”.
Then he wrote to them Australian Competition and Consumer Commission and decided to create Your own litigation finance company to support the case according to the regulator did not respond to your concerns.
In addition to volunteering for your job, The lawsuit got “a large law firm” to contribute “hundreds of hours after hours”. – Hamilton emphasized that “Lawyers only work for free if they really believe in something.”
He claims that the ban on powerful crypto ads “completely killed the ICO market [oferta inicial de monedas]”.
He described that ICOs “offer a new way to raise money for technology startups”. this avoids the troublesome regulated fundraising processes associated with the tech industry.
“This is a very big threat to Facebook and Google, strategically, because instead of having startups that need to raise money and ultimately be bought by Facebook, Google or someone before they become a competitive threat.” […] The ICOs drove the investment. “
“Basically, people could raise whatever money they need to make their product. […] It actually meant people could focus on developing and improving technology. […] instead of spending all of his time collecting donations “
Hamilton claims the effects of the crypto advertising ban have been far-reachingand reported that many applicants were unable to secure the investment after losing their ability to advertise on major Internet platforms.
Considering Facebook’s Libra Stablecoin Project Hamilton describes the company’s strategy of “forbidding all competitors” from advertising on its platform “while they are secretly working on its own cryptocurrency” as “outright hypocrisy” which is clearly against competition law.
In the same way, Underscores Twitter’s move to ban advertisements from critical companies and enables Jack Dorsey’s financial firm Square to promote its crypto-friendly cash app on the platform.
“This was a huge attack on the competition. […] At the same time that Twitter banned crypto ads, Jack Dorsey launched the Cash app and it became the number 1 app. They destroyed their competitors and then made small exceptions to the advertising ban for their colleagues. “
Also, Search engine optimization and online marketing professionals targeting the cryptocurrency niche have found that their accounts are lockedand the lawyer told the story of an SEO specialist whose Google Adwords account was still banned for life at that time due to its crypto-focused customer representation.
“Anyone who was in the Web 3.0 space and competed with Facebook and Google was struck down by it.”Hamilton added.
JPB Liberty is currently seeking funding from institutional litigation funding agencies. If the plaintiffs are successful, they will receive 70% of all future settlements, while 30% goes to the funders of the lawsuit.