Media Outlets Assert Legal Grounds
According to the May 3 filing, the media houses claim that FTX’s argument that the names of its customers constitute confidential commercial information is based on speculation. They argue that the public’s presumptive right of access to bankruptcy filings should not be overridden by conjecture about rival firms attempting to lure FTX’s clients away.
Refuting Scamming and Identity Theft Concerns
FTX has not demonstrated how releasing its customer information would subject them to scams, identity theft, personal attacks, or online victimization, according to the media houses. The filing states that crypto owners are like everyone else scammers can target and that such potential threats should not justify sealing individuals’ names in bankruptcy proceedings.
Citing the Celsius Case
The media outlets point to the Celsius case as evidence supporting their position. They note that the release of the bankrupt Celsius customers’ information did not subject them to the risks claimed by FTX. In this case, customers informed the appropriate authorities when they received phishing emails and other scam attempts. Court records show that no single Celsius customer named in the litigation fell victim to theft — either of their identity or crypto assets.
Foreign Laws Not an Excuse
The media outlets also argue that there is no legal basis to redact names under foreign laws. They assert that U.S. law guarantees the public a strong presumptive right to inspect bankruptcy filings, a right that cannot be abrogated by a party’s assertion of legal obligations under foreign law.
Key Points
What is the issue at hand?
Four major media houses — Bloomberg, Dow Jones, The New York Times, and Financial Times — are fighting against the redaction of non-U.S. customers’ information of the bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange FTX.
What are the main arguments presented by the media houses?
The media houses argue that FTX has not provided sufficient evidence to justify hiding its customer information. They contend that the public’s presumptive right of access to bankruptcy filings should not be overridden by conjecture and that potential scamming and identity theft concerns do not justify sealing individuals’ names.
How do the media outlets address the issue of foreign laws?
The media outlets assert that there is no legal basis to redact names under foreign laws. They argue that U.S. law guarantees the public a strong presumptive right to inspect bankruptcy filings, a right that cannot be abrogated by a party’s assertion of legal obligations under foreign law.
What is the relevance of the Celsius case?
The media outlets cite the Celsius case as evidence supporting their position, noting that the release of Celsius customers’ information did not subject them to the risks claimed by FTX. No Celsius customers named in the litigation fell victim to theft — either of their identity or crypto assets.
When is the hearing date for this case?
The hearing date for the case is scheduled for May 17.
