Recently, Chinese pop king Jay Chou publicly warned his missing friend, magician Cai Weize, on social media over a custody dispute involving over 100 million New Taiwan dollars in Bitcoin, drawing widespread attention from various sectors of society. According to exclusive reports from Taiwanese media "Mirror Weekly," Cai Weize began holding Jay Chou's Bitcoin investments in 2024, amounting to over 100 million, but over the past year, he has delayed repayment under the pretext of a locked account, ultimately disappearing. Jay Chou posted multiple updates on social media, angrily stating, "If you don't show up soon, you're finished," and subsequently unfollowed Cai Weize. This incident not only reveals the potential risks of celebrity involvement in the cryptocurrency market but also highlights the legal dilemmas and asset security issues that custody and private trading may face under the current strict regulations on virtual currency transactions in the Chinese market.
- Jay Chou's "Bitcoin Woes": Over 100 Million Assets Taken by Custodian?
Jay Chou's custody dispute with magician friend Cai Weize exposes the risks of cryptocurrency investment under the celebrity spotlight.
Custody Dispute: It is reported that Cai Weize helped Jay Chou manage Bitcoin investments amounting to over 100 million New Taiwan dollars. However, for the past year, Cai Weize has claimed that his account was locked, preventing Jay Chou from withdrawing funds.
Disappearing Act: After delaying repayment for a year, Cai Weize ultimately chose to vanish, leading to a complete fallout with Jay Chou. Jay Chou took to social media to seek him out, stating, "If you don't show up, you're finished," and then unfollowed Cai Weize.
Cai Weize's Background: Cai Weize is a magician friend of Jay Chou, not only a regular on travel shows but also one of the happy companions on tours. He experienced his family's bankruptcy, began his magic career at 19, and later gained Jay Chou's recognition. However, he is also quite active in the blockchain investment circle, with various side businesses, and there are rumors that he once had his girlfriend embezzle company funds for him to invest in blockchain. He even leveraged Jay Chou's fame to claim connections with Southeast Asian and Dubai royalty, soliciting investments or commissions from others.
- A Warning on Cryptocurrency Investment: Not Your Keys, Not Your Coins
Jay Chou's experience is not an isolated case; it reaffirms the cautionary saying in the cryptocurrency field: "Not your keys, not your coins."
Control of Private Keys: The core meaning of this phrase is that if you do not control the private keys of your wallet, then those coins do not truly belong to you. In a custody relationship, the private keys are usually controlled by the custodian, and once the custodian goes missing or encounters issues, the asset security of the principal faces significant risks.
High-Risk Market: Whether in mainland China or Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan, any transactions related to the cryptocurrency market face high-risk issues, from celebrities to the general public. Severe price volatility, significant information asymmetry, and platform security vulnerabilities can all lead to substantial losses for investors.
- Regulatory Attitudes and Legal Dilemmas Regarding Virtual Currency in Mainland China
In mainland China, the legal status and trading activities of virtual currencies have always been under strict regulation, which places custody disputes like Jay Chou's in a more challenging legal position.
Changes in Regulatory Attitudes: China's regulation of virtual currencies has gone through three stages: from "regulatory lag, technological rise" (before 2013), to "tightening regulation, clarifying risk-bearing" (2013-2020), and then to "banning trading, mining, and service provision, strengthening criminal penalties" (2021 to present).
Complete Denial of Financial Attributes: On September 15, 2021, ten departments, including the People's Bank of China, the Supreme People's Court, and the Supreme People's Procuratorate, issued a notice on "further preventing and addressing the risks of virtual currency trading speculation," clearly stating that "investing in virtual currencies and related derivatives, which violates public order and good customs, renders the relevant civil legal actions invalid, and any resulting losses shall be borne by the parties themselves." This marked a comprehensive denial of the "financial attributes" of virtual currencies, rendering investment actions invalid.
Guiding Case from the Supreme Court: The key points of the ruling in the case of "Gao Zheyu vs. Shenzhen Yunsi Road Innovation Development Fund Company and Li Bin's Application to Revoke Arbitration Award" clearly state that the arbitration award ordering the respondent to compensate in US dollars equivalent to Bitcoin, and then converting that into RMB, constitutes a disguised support for the exchange transaction between Bitcoin and legal currency, violating national regulations on financial supervision of virtual currencies and contravening public interest. The People's Court should rule to revoke the arbitration award. This indicates that in mainland China, contracts for virtual currency trading may be deemed invalid, making it difficult for victims to recover losses through legal means.
- Controversial Focus and Responses in Judicial Practice
In virtual currency trading disputes, judicial practice faces numerous controversial focal points:
Whether it falls within the court's jurisdiction: Some courts tend to view such activities as involving "illegal financial activities" or "violating national financial regulatory policies," and based on reasons like "economic evaluation lacks basis" and "violating public order and good customs," they determine that the case does not fall within the scope of civil litigation and directly dismiss the parties' lawsuits. However, some local courts may choose to accept and substantively review cases when the trading facts are clear and the contractual relationship is relatively independent.
Validity of Contracts: In judicial practice, the validity of virtual currency trading contracts primarily depends on whether the contract content violates national prohibitive regulations. If the contract involves purchasing, exchanging, or speculating in virtual currency trading, it is usually deemed invalid; however, if the contract only pertains to legal areas such as blockchain technology services or computing power leasing, the court may confirm its validity.
Recovery of Losses After Contract Invalidity: When a virtual currency trading contract is deemed invalid, whether parties are allowed to claim the return of property or compensation for losses becomes a contentious issue in judicial practice. Most courts believe that since the trading behavior itself violates regulatory policies, the parties should bear the risk themselves and do not support claims for return or compensation; however, if one party engages in obvious fraud or embezzlement, the court may still protect the interests of some victims based on the fairness principle of the Civil Code.
Specific Methods for Returning Property: If the court orders the return of Bitcoin or other virtual currencies, it may be questioned as "whitewashing illegal transactions through judicial rulings." If the original items cannot be returned, the court typically requires compensation in RMB, but since most virtual currency trading platforms are priced in US dollars or other foreign currencies, whether calculating the RMB amount based on the dollar price at the time of the transaction constitutes "disguised foreign currency settlement" is also a matter of dispute. Additionally, given the extreme volatility of virtual currency prices, the timing of determining the compensation amount is crucial.
Conclusion:
The custody dispute between Jay Chou and magician friend Cai Weize serves as a wake-up call for all cryptocurrency investors. In a market lacking clear legal protections and characterized by high volatility, any form of custody or private trading carries significant risks. For the Chinese market, it is essential to fully recognize the illegality of virtual currency trading and the potential legal dilemmas that may arise in the event of disputes. Whether celebrities or ordinary people, it is crucial to remain highly vigilant in the cryptocurrency market, avoid illegal trading, and safeguard one's asset security.
Related Reading: China intervenes? Exclusive revelations from British media: Ant Group and JD suspend Hong Kong stablecoin plans.
Original article: “Jay Chou Caught in Massive Bitcoin Custody Dispute, Magician Friend Cai Weize Goes Missing”
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
