I just read something quite interesting about how Coin Center is defending crypto developers. Basically, they argue that software code should be considered protected speech under the First Amendment of the United States, similar to writing a book. It makes sense when I think about it.

Peter Van Valkenburgh and Lizandro Pieper, the leading researchers behind this, raise a fundamental point: developers should not be responsible for how someone else uses their code. That is, if you write a tool, you are not responsible for all the ways people might misuse it. That would be like blaming the author of a book for how someone decides to apply their ideas.

The issue gets more serious when you see cases like Tornado Cash, where developers faced legal consequences for the misuse of their software. Coin Center is questioning whether that is truly fair from a constitutional perspective. They believe that the First Amendment of the United States should protect these creators.

What I find most important is that they are differentiating between two things: on one hand, distributing code (which would be protected speech), and on the other hand, regulable activities such as when a developer actually controls user assets or executes transactions on their behalf. That is conduct, not speech.

They criticize heavily what they call the 'functional code theory,' which treats software as if it were an action rather than expression. According to them, the established principles of the First Amendment of the United States should apply to these modern technological contexts. It’s a solid legal argument that we will probably see more of in courts as crypto regulation evolves.