Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
TradFi
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Pre-IPOs
Unlock full access to global stock IPOs
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
Promotions
AI
Gate AI
Your all-in-one conversational AI partner
Gate AI Bot
Use Gate AI directly in your social App
GateClaw
Gate Blue Lobster, ready to go
Gate for AI Agent
AI infrastructure, Gate MCP, Skills, and CLI
Gate Skills Hub
10K+ Skills
From office tasks to trading, the all-in-one skill hub makes AI even more useful.
GateRouter
Smartly choose from 40+ AI models, with 0% extra fees
The New York Federal Court orders Arbitrum DAO to freeze $71 million worth of ETH linked to North Korean hackers, potentially for compensation to victims of terrorist attacks
BlockBeats News, May 3rd, according to documents from the Southern District of New York Federal Court, the U.S. court has issued a restraining order against Arbitrum DAO, requiring it not to transfer approximately $71 million worth of ETH assets previously frozen from the KelpDAO hacking incident.
The plaintiff attempted to use these assets to enforce an unpaid judgment related to cases of terrorism, kidnapping, and other crimes committed by North Korea over the years. Court documents state that the plaintiff has applied for alternative service to send legal notices to Arbitrum DAO and considers it a “partnership organization” that can be held accountable.
The court also emphasized that Arbitrum DAO has a Security Council governed by ARB holders, capable of taking action in emergency situations. Therefore, if relevant members refuse to cooperate, they may face legal consequences such as contempt of court.
Market analysts believe this case could become an important example of the U.S. judicial system directly regulating DAO governance structures, also highlighting the compliance pressures faced by DeFi protocols within the existing legal framework.