Compliance is a very interesting topic

1. Because it can be a hundred ways to Rome - thanks to various overseas structures like SPV isolation; but after something goes wrong, only those who reach Rome are safe
2. The compliance of emerging assets can be said to be very flexible, as long as you protect user funds well, do not commingle, and perform proper KYC and AML
3. When your scale is small, basically no one is paying attention to you (because of insufficient destructive power?)
4. When your scale is large, even if you are compliant, you are not truly compliant
5. Many people think compliance is a document/product, just follow the checklist, but in fact, compliance is a system
6. For licensed institutions, being warned or fined is very normal; moreover, in the crypto world, as long as you can fulfill your obligations and not run away, that’s enough
7. Building on point 1, there are many ways to Rome. There’s an interesting legal concept called, if there’s no explicit regulation, then civil (contractual) matters, where intent overrides law, meaning what we agree on privately can also work
8. $spcx OpenAI Antrophic, such assets fall into this category, whether through underwriters/brokers (primary and secondary channels), LP shares, SPV shares, or even buying on the secondary market and then bringing RWA on-chain, it’s all just a matter of cost difference
9. In summary, there’s no need to say that if you don’t use channel A, you are non-compliant? The world isn’t limited to just one way
10. Any simple standard that requires a license: whether you have control over user funds, because dealing with user money is a big deal
11. Compared to these, whether (securities/crypto) funds are commingled is more important at this stage
12. I can’t continue, everyone can just take a look themselves 😄