Attorney Shao Shiwei | Do Crypto KOLs Operating Paid Communities and Selling Courses Risk Violating the Law?

Question: I have also heard that regulation of virtual assets has been strengthened, such as through documents like the "2.6 Notice" issued this year. Therefore, what legal risks exist in my current business model? How can I operate in a more compliant manner?

Answer： Based on the business model you described, it has indeed entered a range with significant legal risks.

In practice, key opinion leaders (KOLs) who produce content and manage communities are not treated uniformly. They can generally be categorized into three tiers, with markedly different risk profiles corresponding to each tier:

The first tier consists of those primarily engaged in pure content provision.

Their main activities include analyzing historical price trends and explaining fundamental concepts, without providing real-time market commentary or making immediate judgments on specific market movements. Even if fees are charged, they are limited to the sale of recorded courses. Overall, the risk for this category is relatively low, but this does not mean there is no risk at all. The key consideration remains whether the content could be construed as having the nature of operational guidance.

The second tier comprises semi-guidance activities occupying an intermediate zone.

Paid communities are typically established to provide daily market analysis, chart interpretation, and Q&A. Although explicit buy/sell price levels are not directly stated, judgments such as “this level is worth monitoring” or “there is an opportunity here” may appear. In practice, this category of actors is most readily deemed to be “providing investment advice,” and risks often begin to accumulate at this stage.

The third category is a more typical form of aggressive trade-signal provision.

It explicitly provides buy/sell price levels and trading ranges, and may even establish some form of linkage with users’ trading outcomes or profitability. Once disputes arise or reports are filed, this category is more likely to be directly subject to criminal assessment, and the handling approach will differ significantly.

With respect to your specific business operations, the core risk lies in the fact that the content you share within community groups is not merely instructional knowledge, but includes real-time analysis and judgments on market conditions (for example, annotating charts with statements such as “this may present a favorable long opportunity”). Such content is likely to be characterized as having the nature of “guiding trading,” thereby influencing members’ decision-making. Even if you emphasize trading logic rather than issuing direct trade calls, it essentially constitutes the provision of investment analysis and advice.

Providing for compensationChart interpretationand other investment consulting services; providingdaily market analysis and Q&A, these service offerings are easily viewed as “inducing trading.”

Q： If my content is deemed to constitute “inducing trading,” what specific legal risks would I face? Would they be civil liabilities or criminal liabilities?

A： The risks primarily fall into two categories:

1.  Civil Liability Risks: If your advice leads to investment losses for users, they may file civil lawsuits against you, claiming compensation for their losses. Although you have not guaranteed returns and the risks are relatively manageable, litigation itself will consume time and energy.

2.  Criminal Liability Risks: This is a more significant concern. If users report losses to public security organs or if there are malicious reports, public security organs may initiate investigations. Potential charges includefraud, fundraising fraud, etc., with the logic being: Users invest based on trust in your advice, and after suffering losses, they may claim that your actions constitute fraud.

Question: What content might be considered 'investment advice' (or 'guiding transactions')?

Answer：Attorney Shao previously handled a case involving a KOL who ran a knowledge-based paid community. Initially, he provided 'teaching,' but gradually began analyzing market trends daily in the group chat and occasionally suggested, 'This position is worth paying attention to.' He always believed he was not 'calling trades.' However, after users suffered losses and reported the matter, the core issue determined by public security organs was whether users made transactions based on his judgments.

Therefore, considering relevant judicial practices, policy guidelines, and our extensive experience handling Web3 and virtual currency cases, the following behaviors may be deemed as having the nature of 'guiding transactions' or constituting 'investment advice,' thereby posing legal risks:

This constitutes the most direct form of "shilling"—explicitly instructing users when to buy and when to sell. For example, directly stating in community groups or videos that "Bitcoin can be entered at this level," "Buy Ethereum at the current price, with a target of XX," or "This is the stop-loss point."

Even if one does not explicitly say "buy," providing analysis of current market conditions and predictions of future trends similarly constitutes high-risk conduct. For example, analyzing candlestick patterns in market commentary videos, predicting the short-term trends of Bitcoin or a specific cryptocurrency, interpreting market hotspots to imply emerging opportunities, or providing outlooks for future market movements or operational ranges.

This is a scenario that many clients easily misunderstand:"Merely discussing methodologies should not count as inducing investment, right?"

In judicial practice, if the methodologies taught in paid courses essentially impartcoin-selection or trading techniques with clear operational guidance, and imply that clients may execute trades accordingly, such conduct will tend to be characterized as disguised "investment advice."

The reason is that this no longerinvolves teaching pure fundamentals of candlestick charts or trading history, but rather carries strongoperational guidance.Users pay precisely to learn how to generate profits. The reason users pay to join a community is that they believe your “logic” can help them achieve profitability in the market.

For courses and educational communities, as long as their core offering consists of real-time, targeted market analysis and trading recommendations, risks remain.