Recently, there has been an interesting case in the crypto world—a project that was investigated by multiple countries unexpectedly hired renowned lawyer Barry Pollack as their legal advisor. This name may not be familiar to everyone, but in the industry, it carries a label: the exclusive lawyer for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who, under the intense pressure of global warrants and multi-country pursuits, managed to secure a settlement opportunity for his client.
This case actually reflects a deeper logic in the current crypto market— as regulations become increasingly strict, having only technology and a team is no longer enough. Legal barriers are becoming a standard feature for top-tier projects.
From an operational perspective, Pollack’s typical approach is to reframe political accusations and public opinion pressure within the framework of legal procedures, using procedural rigor and the opponent’s rules to constrain them. If litigation can cause delays or ultimately lead to a settlement, it becomes an opportunity for the project to turn the tide from despair to reversal.
The takeaway for the entire crypto ecosystem is—under the wave of compliance, professional legal resources are becoming a more scarce chip than technological innovation. Projects that seem doomed often succeed in turning around because they have a strong legal team laying out the defenses behind the scenes.
So next time you see a project suddenly under investigation, don’t rush to conclusions—first check what level of legal team they’ve hired. True industry giants often have already built their firewalls in places you don’t notice. In this era, compliance capability is becoming a key variable for a project’s survival and growth.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
11 Likes
Reward
11
9
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
AirdropGrandpa
· 01-09 03:23
Polak is impressive, coming from Assange's circle, and he's quite skilled at this.
Legal delay tactics are truly the ultimate; dragging it out forever means victory.
Now I understand that big shots in the crypto world aren't just burning money on marketing, but on legal teams.
Does anyone know who else is at this level of legal expertise?
Compliance—two years ago, who cared about it? Now it's a matter of life and death.
View OriginalReply0
SchrodingerAirdrop
· 01-07 13:08
Damn, this is the real game rule. I used to think that technical strength alone could win, but now it's all about the stature of the legal team.
Having lawyers of Polak's caliber endorse you is basically telling the market— we're not fleeing, we're just in a lawsuit.
Speaking of which, this logic is indeed brilliant. Use the opponent's rules against them, drag out the delay tactics, and the financing side offers a settlement, and the project can come back to life.
In the past, I only looked at whitepapers and ambassador lists when evaluating projects. Now I have to first check the resumes of the legal teams. My goodness, the crypto world is really becoming more and more "formal."
Next time a project is named by the FBI, I won't panic immediately. I need to first find out what level of legal support they have...
View OriginalReply0
Rugman_Walking
· 01-07 05:50
Haha, this is the real truth in the crypto world. Hiring a top lawyer is more effective than anything else.
Polark is indeed formidable; those who can turn the tide from despair are not simple characters.
It seems that before bottom-fishing in the future, you really need to check the legal team composition of the project.
Thinking about it this way, no matter how advanced the technology is, without a legal moat, it's all useless.
So those projects that look like they're about to die are actually not that simple.
This has been understood for a long time; compliance is the lifeline, after all.
I heard that some projects even hired top global law firms before going public.
No wonder some obviously problematic projects can still survive well.
A single phone call at a critical moment can turn danger into opportunity—so realistic.
View OriginalReply0
MEVHunterX
· 01-07 05:50
Damn, this is why some projects never die; it's all the legal teams working behind the scenes.
Once Polak makes a move, regulators have to think twice. His tactics are absolutely brilliant.
Instead of just reading the white paper, it's better to check out the legal team behind it. Truly.
The concept of a legal moat is something I need to remember; it's more effective than any technical barrier.
By the way, if this guy can handle such tough cases like Assange, then dealing with issues in the crypto world is probably nothing.
Compliance isn't really compliance; having a top-tier lawyer is what truly matters.
Next time a project gets investigated, my first reaction will be, "Who did they hire?"
View OriginalReply0
TokenSleuth
· 01-07 05:49
I see, so those projects that turn the tide against the wind have actually laid out their legal teams long ago.
---
Polack's level of lawyers are playing the procedural game, really ruthless.
---
Wait, does that mean technology is no longer important? Then what's the point of innovation?
---
No wonder some projects can survive even after being investigated; the legal moat is so crucial.
---
Basically, if you have enough money to hire the right lawyers, you can get through anything. This logic feels a bit crooked.
---
I always thought technology determined life or death; it seems I have a narrow perspective.
---
Doesn't that mean well-funded projects can do whatever they want? After all, lawyers have their backs.
---
Lack's background is indeed solid. Being able to handle cases like Assange's, what does that say about crypto projects?
---
Next time I look at a project, I’ll first check out the legal team. I’ve learned this trick.
---
Doesn't that mean if you have money and power, you can play around? Sounds a bit messed up.
View OriginalReply0
YieldHunter
· 01-07 05:45
honestly? if you look at the data, legal warfare is just another risk-adjusted metric now. tldr: hire better lawyers than your prosecutors, survive longer. degens sleeping on this angle fr
Reply0
token_therapist
· 01-07 05:41
Ha, you're right. These days, the crypto world really requires spending money on lawyers to survive.
This guy's actions are just outrageous. Being pursued by multiple countries and still turning things around—he's got real skills.
I should have known that nothing beats a hardcore legal team; it's more effective than any white paper.
Looks like in the future, when investing in projects, you need to check the lawyer list first—that's true due diligence.
These days, having a good track and great code doesn't matter; without a firewall, you're dead.
View OriginalReply0
LoneValidator
· 01-07 05:40
Wow, even top lawyers like Pollack have been brought in, which shows this matter is really not that simple.
Assange's lawyer? That’s definitely top-tier, using procedural delays skillfully.
So, in the crypto world now, law truly rules, and technology has become a supporting role.
Having money to hire good lawyers is the only way out; projects without funds, just having code is useless.
Suddenly I remember that saying: winning is often about what you can't see.
This move is really impressive, turning an investigation into a legal battle. Keep watching.
View OriginalReply0
DegenWhisperer
· 01-07 05:37
Damn, this is the real "legal moat," more valuable than any technological innovation.
One good lawyer is worth ten technical teams, which is the harsh reality of the crypto world now.
When lawyers of Pulak's caliber step in, regulators have to think twice. By the way, how much does that cost?
The legal fees alone could fund a new project. No wonder small investors can never compete with big institutions.
Next time you look at a project, don't just read the white paper—check out the backgrounds of their legal team first.
So those projects claiming they're " doomed" have actually been quietly planning all along. While we're arguing on Twitter, they've already gone to court.
Recently, there has been an interesting case in the crypto world—a project that was investigated by multiple countries unexpectedly hired renowned lawyer Barry Pollack as their legal advisor. This name may not be familiar to everyone, but in the industry, it carries a label: the exclusive lawyer for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who, under the intense pressure of global warrants and multi-country pursuits, managed to secure a settlement opportunity for his client.
This case actually reflects a deeper logic in the current crypto market— as regulations become increasingly strict, having only technology and a team is no longer enough. Legal barriers are becoming a standard feature for top-tier projects.
From an operational perspective, Pollack’s typical approach is to reframe political accusations and public opinion pressure within the framework of legal procedures, using procedural rigor and the opponent’s rules to constrain them. If litigation can cause delays or ultimately lead to a settlement, it becomes an opportunity for the project to turn the tide from despair to reversal.
The takeaway for the entire crypto ecosystem is—under the wave of compliance, professional legal resources are becoming a more scarce chip than technological innovation. Projects that seem doomed often succeed in turning around because they have a strong legal team laying out the defenses behind the scenes.
So next time you see a project suddenly under investigation, don’t rush to conclusions—first check what level of legal team they’ve hired. True industry giants often have already built their firewalls in places you don’t notice. In this era, compliance capability is becoming a key variable for a project’s survival and growth.