META 1 Chief Attacks Outlets Over “Fictitious” SEC Claims

Reading Time: 2 minutes
  • One of the men behind META 1 has attacked news outlets including FullyCrypto over coverage of his project
  • Robert Dunlap claims that the project, which is the subject of SEC action over alleged securities fraud, is the victim of a “fictitious” campaign by the agency
  • Dunlap has been held in civil contempt in the case after continuing to advertise META 1 while being ordered not to

META 1, the cryptocurrency project charged by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as being a fraud, has threatened FullyCrypto with unspecified legal action after we labelled the META 1 whitepaper the worst ever written. The project, which markets itself as a “sophisticated financial instrument”, has been on the receiving end of sanctions by the SEC since March 2020 due to accusations that the founders used investor funds to buy luxury items and misinformed investors about the project’s backing.

META 1 and the Case of the Indecipherable Whitepaper

META 1 purports to be an art verification platform where art would be purchased, verified for authenticity, tokenized, and then sold, but their whitepaper, which is full of poor English, typographical and grammatical errors, repeated paragraphs, and overly complex formulas, undermines their respectability at the outset.

FullyCrypto reported on this and questioned how anyone could take the META 1 offering seriously, to which Robert Dunlap, who in May this year was held in civil contempt by the court in his case against the SEC, appears to have taken umbrage.

Dunlap Releases the Legal Hounds

In an email to FullyCrypto, which is identical to one recently sent to news outlet Finance Feeds, Dunlap claims that our article, which focused on the spurious nature of the whitepaper, featured “gross defamation of character” despite no individual being mentioned. Dunlap also claims that the “fictitious” SEC case has been closed due to “META 1 Coin Trust’s legal superiority in the entire digital asset space”. The case is in fact still pending.

This claim, which makes about as much sense as the whitepaper itself, is as confusing as it is incorrect, with the various court orders against Dunlap and the company, including the freezing of their funds, very much based on facts rather than fiction. Dunlap then goes on to boast about his legal powers which he says are “not something you will be able to defend”, although it seems that the U.S. legal system has done a pretty good job of defending itself against them so far.

Dunlap’s outbursts in defense of META 1 seem to be nothing more than the desperate lashing out of a man whose project is in its death throes, and the quicker it can be put out of its misery the better – if only for the sake of the English language.