Scan to download
BTC $60,590.74 +1.85%
ETH $1,556.08 +0.52%
BNB $574.38 +2.31%
XRP $1.08 -0.01%
SOL $61.77 -0.85%
TRX $0.3230 +1.06%
DOGE $0.0808 +1.22%
ADA $0.1572 -0.43%
BCH $214.42 +0.98%
LINK $7.31 +1.52%
HYPE $56.47 -2.36%
AAVE $60.38 +0.88%
SUI $0.7092 +3.99%
XLM $0.2034 +7.52%
ZEC $355.51 +10.75%
BTC $60,590.74 +1.85%
ETH $1,556.08 +0.52%
BNB $574.38 +2.31%
XRP $1.08 -0.01%
SOL $61.77 -0.85%
TRX $0.3230 +1.06%
DOGE $0.0808 +1.22%
ADA $0.1572 -0.43%
BCH $214.42 +0.98%
LINK $7.31 +1.52%
HYPE $56.47 -2.36%
AAVE $60.38 +0.88%
SUI $0.7092 +3.99%
XLM $0.2034 +7.52%
ZEC $355.51 +10.75%

am

After 14 years, Bitcoin addresses from the Satoshi Nakamoto era have shown activity, and some dormant wallets may still be controlled by their original owners

According to CoinDesk, an address from the "Satoshi era" that has never been used since March 2011, holding 35.55 bitcoins (approximately $2.54 million), made a transfer this week, which is seen as one of the first publicly visible responses from defendants in a lawsuit involving approximately 3.8 million bitcoins (valued at about $285 billion) in New York.On-chain data shows that the address transferred 15 BTC to a new address on June 2, keeping the remaining 20.55 BTC as change. The address initially received bitcoins on March 27, 2011, when the price of BTC was less than $1.In March of this year, a plaintiff using the pseudonym "Noah Doe" filed a lawsuit in New York state court alongside two LLCs from Wyoming, attempting to claim ownership of approximately 3.8 million long-dormant bitcoin wallets under New York's lost property law, positioning themselves as the "discoverer." The court approved sending on-chain notifications to the relevant wallets via the bitcoin OP_RETURN field.In July 2025, the advisory firm Salomon Brothers Strategic Advisors sent dust transactions with links to legal notices to 39,000 wallets, including the aforementioned address, requesting holders to prove ownership within 90 days.Alex Thorn, head of research at Galaxy Research, pointed out that the address corresponds to defendant number 38215 in the case, stating, "Clearly, these bitcoins have not actually been abandoned."Additionally, another address that had been dormant for 15 years, 1CDSyXAQxro4FPUoqAQb81642ruqDsUiNp, also transferred 20 BTC (approximately $1.48 million) on the same day, but this address did not appear on Noah Doe's list of lawsuits.Analysis suggests that the on-chain movements mentioned above indicate that some bitcoins from the Satoshi era, considered "abandoned assets," are actually still under the control of the original holders.

Non-small-cap investment AI Agent infrastructure project AMIKO, and reached a strategic cooperation with it

According to official news, Feixiaohao has invested in the AI Agent infrastructure project AMIKO and has reached a strategic cooperation with AMIKO. The two parties will collaborate on capital support, content dissemination, live events, media promotion, AI search content development, product scenario integration, and multilingual market promotion, aiming to establish a clearer project recognition for AMIKO in the Chinese and international Web3 markets.AMIKO is positioned as a digital identity and social infrastructure for the AI Agent era, attempting to integrate identity, productivity, social interaction, and economic capability within the same system, allowing users to have AI Twins, Companions, Assistants, and Experts that represent their actions, communication, and collaboration. Its technical path involves OpenHermit hosting runtime and OpenClaw BYOA scenarios, focusing on AI digital avatars, social continuity, Agent native identity layers, and economic circulation within the platform.Feixiaohao (Feixiaohao.ai) stated that this investment and strategic cooperation will leverage its Web3 data platform, industry media, live events, and global ecological communication capabilities to help AMIKO reach a broader audience of Web3 users, media, and AI search content scenarios. Previously, AMIKO had received strategic investment from the American AI investment firm High Ridge Holdings for product development, ecological expansion, and international growth.

The second trial of the 660,000 yuan virtual currency theft case in Wuhan, China, has been revised: the main culprit was sentenced to ten years and six months in prison, and the amount stolen was determined based on the actual payment cost incurred by the victim

According to the "Procuratorial Daily," Lin, Zeng, and Dai conspired to use virtual currency trading as a pretext. During the trading process, they secretly filmed the victim's digital wallet private key and, after the virtual currency was credited, secretly logged into the victim's wallet to reverse the transaction, transferring the related virtual currency back to their controlled accounts. The three committed the crime three times, causing the victim a total economic loss of 660,000 yuan.The first-instance court held that in the absence of a clear judicial interpretation regarding the valuation method of virtual currency and sentencing standards, it was inappropriate to directly determine the amount involved as particularly huge based on the victim's purchase amount of 660,000 yuan. Therefore, they sentenced the three based on "other serious circumstances," imposing prison terms ranging from eight years to five years and six months, along with fines. The Hanyang District Procuratorate of Wuhan City in Hubei Province subsequently filed an appeal, which was supported by the Wuhan City Procuratorate.The prosecution argued that the first-instance court applied the law incorrectly and imposed an excessively light sentence. Prosecutor Dai Wentao of the Wuhan City Procuratorate stated that in the case where the victim had a clear loss amount to refer to, it was contradictory and legally erroneous to claim that the value of virtual currency could not be determined. In judicial practice, using the resale price and transaction price as the basis for determining the amount of theft has become mainstream, and determining the value of virtual currency based on the actual cost paid by the victim has factual, legal, and practical basis.The Intermediate Court of Wuhan accepted the prosecution's opinion in the second instance, revoked the corresponding content of the original judgment, and changed the determination of the theft amount to particularly huge. It sentenced the principal offender Lin to ten years and six months in prison for theft, and sentenced the accomplices Zeng and Dai to eight years in prison each, along with fines.
app_icon
ChainCatcher Building the Web3 world with innovations.