Introduction In the past two years, a term has begun to circulate in the legal community, especially in the criminal defense circle: 'ocean fishing', which roughly means that some local judicial authorities are engaging in cross-province revenue-generating law enforcement, where handling cases is not aimed at combating crime and upholding the law, but primarily for revenue generation. 01 Ocean Fishing in the Cryptocurrency Circle Such a situation also exists in the cryptocurrency circle, especially since cases in this area are primarily criminal cases. From the perspective of criminal defense, we do indeed encounter various issues in some criminal cases involving virtual currencies, whether it's regarding procedural aspects like case filing, jurisdiction, and freezing of involved assets, or substantive aspects like the composition of crimes and distinctions between different offenses. Due to the strict regulatory policies regarding virtual currencies in the country, some grassroots judicial authorities subconsciously associate virtual currencies with illegal activities. Additionally, because some individuals in the cryptocurrency circle are indeed 'very wealthy', the 'perfect' combination of these two factors leads to judicial authorities treating offenses in the cryptocurrency circle no less severely than traditional economic crimes. 02 Changes in Criminal Policy However, since March of this year, we have learned that there may be a slowdown on 'ocean fishing' domestically. An internally circulated document shows that in March of this year, the Ministry of Public Security issued a notice on 'Regulations on Jurisdiction for Cross-Province Criminal Cases Involving Enterprises', introducing stricter regulations for public security authorities handling cases involving corporate crimes across provinces. Consequently, there has been a noticeable cooling of 'ocean fishing', and the cryptocurrency circle can distinctly feel this 'spring breeze'. 03 Sources of Criminal Legal Risks in the Cryptocurrency Circle As criminal defense lawyers in the cryptocurrency circle, the charges we often deal with include: organizing and leading pyramid schemes; operating casinos; illegal business operations; aiding information network crimes (aiding crime); concealing and disguising criminal proceeds (concealment crime). Furthermore, there are traditional charges such as fraud, theft, computer-related crimes, etc. At the same time, criminal activities in the cryptocurrency circle can generally be covered by cybercrime. The jurisdiction (case filing) for cybercrime is very broad. What constitutes cybercrime? According to current regulations, it includes the following types: First, traditional computer-related crimes (crimes harming computer information networks); Second, crimes related to the internet (aiding crimes, illegal use of information networks, refusal to fulfill information network security management obligations, etc.); Third, other criminal cases involving fraud, gambling, infringement of personal information through the internet. In terms of specific filing jurisdiction, the principle is to primarily file cases where the crime occurred, but it can also be based on the residence of the suspect, the location of the servers used for the network crime, the location of the network service provider, the location of the compromised information network system and its administrator, and the location of the information network system used by the suspect, victim, or other involved personnel during the crime, as well as the location where the victim was harmed and where the victim's property suffered loss, all of which have jurisdiction for filing cases. Returning to the cryptocurrency circle, we mentioned earlier that many grassroots judicial authorities subconsciously believe that trading cryptocurrencies is illegal (which actually has no legal basis), coupled with the broad jurisdiction for case filing in cryptocurrency criminal cases; even if the public security in Area A does not file a case, it cannot guarantee that the public security in Area B will also refrain from filing (since cases in the cryptocurrency circle are considered cybercrimes, and there are too many connection points for filing cases related to cybercrime), so cross-province cases are quite normal. Additionally, based on the aforementioned regulations from the Ministry of Public Security, the main focus is now on regulating cross-province cases involving enterprises. Many cases in the cryptocurrency circle are essentially 'small workshops' that do not involve 'enterprises', which also leads to the difficulty in ensuring that even with the existence of the 'Regulations on Jurisdiction for Cross-Province Criminal Cases Involving Enterprises', there is no risk of being 'fished' in the cryptocurrency circle. Therefore, it is unlikely that ocean fishing in the cryptocurrency circle will end in the short term. 04 Final Thoughts The cryptocurrency circle's overseas movement began with the '9.4 Notice' in 2017 and has not completely ended. The competition between 'cryptocurrency circles' and 'blockchain circles' in the web3 field has never ceased, and Singapore, as a financially open city, will implement its own web3 new policies starting June 30 (mainly affecting the cryptocurrency circle). This indicates that the contradiction between regulation and the naturally resistant virtual currencies (and the cryptocurrency circle derived from them) and centralized regulators is eternally irreconcilable. The best model can only be for centralized regulators and decentralized supporter groups to learn to coexist like hedgehogs, finding a safe and comfortable distance from each other, allowing for coexistence and development.