Author: Lawyer Shao Shiwai

In daily work, Lawyer Shao interacts with many KOLs in the cryptocurrency space and consultants engaged in paid knowledge services, mainly providing teaching or sharing around the topic of "how to engage in virtual currency investment trading."

This type of consultant often has similar doubts:

On one hand, they always feel that this type of business may carry certain risks;

On the other hand, they see many peers around them continuously conducting related businesses.

Thus, they become confused—can this business actually be done? Does it really carry legal risks?

Based on the recurrent high-frequency questions in past consultations, this article organizes the relevant issues and compiles them in a Q&A format to systematically respond to these common queries (to protect the privacy of the consultants, relevant information has been anonymized, and only general, representative questions are summarized).

Question: Hello, Lawyer Shao, I am a KOL in the cryptocurrency space. I mainly publish cryptocurrency analysis videos on domestic and foreign social media platforms (like Bilibili, Xiaohongshu, YouTube, etc.), directing traffic to WeChat through these videos, then establishing paid communities where I charge members in USDT or fiat currency.

The services provided in the community include my recorded trading courses, daily market analysis, and Q&A.

What I want to ask is, since I am not engaging in traditional stock business but in cryptocurrency, which the country itself does not recognize and does not have relevant business licenses, does this make any difference? Will the absence of explicit regulation actually reduce the risk?

Answer: This is precisely where the complexity of the risk lies. Because there are no clear licensing regulations, it is difficult to directly apply the "illegal business operation crime." However, judicial authorities often refer to domestic policies regarding virtual currencies as a basis for handling such cases.

Question: I have also heard that regulation regarding virtual currencies has become stricter, such as the 2.6 notification and other documents released this year, so what legal risks exist in my current business model? How can I make it more compliant?

Answer: Based on your described business model, you have indeed entered a zone with significant legal risks.

In practice, KOLs who create content and engage communities are not viewed uniformly; they can roughly be divided into three tiers, each corresponding to different risk levels:

First Type: Pure Content-Based

This primarily involves historical trend analysis and basic knowledge explanations without making real-time analyses or immediate judgments on specific market conditions; even if some charge fees, they only sell recorded courses. This category has relatively low overall risk, but it does not mean there is no risk at all; the key is whether the content is interpreted as having the nature of operating guidance.

Second Type: Semi-Guided in the Middle Ground

This typically involves establishing paid communities, providing daily market analysis, trading explanations, and Q&A. Although expressions here may not directly give clear buy/sell points, phrases like "this position can be focused on" or "there's an opportunity here" do emerge. This type is generally the most easily recognized group providing "investment advice" in practice, and risks often accumulate gradually at this stage.

Third Type: More Typical Strong Guidance

This type explicitly provides buy/sell points, operational ranges, and even forms certain binding relationships with users' trading results and earnings. Once there is a dispute or a report made, this category is more likely to fall under criminal evaluation, and the handling methods will vary significantly.

Specifically concerning your business, the core risk lies in the content you share within the community, which is not merely knowledge teaching, but includes your real-time analysis and judgment of the market conditions (for example, marking on a chart "this might be a good buying opportunity"). Such content is likely to be recognized as having "guiding trading" nature and will influence the decision-making behavior of members. Even if you emphasize the trading logic rather than making direct calls, it essentially still falls under providing investment analysis advice.

Offering paid trading consultations or providing daily market analysis and Q&A could easily be viewed as "guiding trading."

Question: If my content is classified as "guiding trading," what specific legal risks might I face? Is it civil liability or criminal liability?

Answer: The risks mainly fall into two categories:

1. Civil Risk: If your advice leads to investment losses for users, they may file civil lawsuits against you seeking compensation for damages. Although you did not promise returns, the risks are relatively controllable; however, the litigation itself will consume time and energy.

2. Criminal Risk: This is more concerning. If users report to the public security agency after incurring losses, or if malicious reports are made, there is a possibility that the public security agency will initiate a criminal investigation. Potential charges could include fraud, fundraising fraud, etc., based on the logic that users invest based on their trust in your advice, and after incurring losses, they might claim that your actions constituted fraud.

Question: What types of content might be considered "investment advice" (or "guiding trading")?

Answer: Lawyer Shao previously encountered a KOL who started with "teaching" in paid knowledge communities, but slowly transitioned to analyzing market trends daily and occasionally said, "this position can be focused on." He always believed he was not making "calls." However, after users reported losses, the core issue ultimately identified by the police was whether users were trading based on his judgments.

Therefore, based on relevant judicial practices, policy spirit, and our experiences handling numerous Web3 and virtual currency cases, the following behaviors in practice may be recognized as "investment advice" with the nature of "guiding trading," thus generating legal risks:

1. Providing Specific Buy/Sell Points

This is the most direct "calling" behavior—clearly telling users when to buy and when to sell. For example, directly stating in a community or video "Bitcoin can be entered at this position," "buy Ethereum at the current price, aiming for XX," or "this is the stop-loss point."

2. Providing Market Analysis and Trend Predictions

Even if you do not directly say "buy," if you provide analysis of the current market and predictions about future trends, it still constitutes high-risk behavior. For instance, analyzing candlestick patterns in trading videos, predicting Bitcoin or the short-term trends of a certain coin, interpreting market hot spots and suggesting opportunities arising, or giving outlooks for future markets or operational ranges.

3. Teaching Methodology

This is a situation that many consultants easily misunderstand—only discussing methodology should not be considered guiding investment?

In judicial practices, if the methodology taught in paid courses essentially conveys specific operating guidelines for selecting currencies or trading skills and implies that clients can execute based on these, it will tend to be recognized as a disguised "investment advice."

The reason is that this goes beyond merely discussing basic candlestick knowledge or trading history and possesses strong operational guidance. Users pay to learn how to make money. Users pay to join the community because they believe your "logic" can help them profit in the market.

4. Conducting "Guiding Trading" Under the Guise of "Teaching"

For courses or teaching communities, as long as their core provides real-time, targeted market analysis and operational advice, risks still exist.

Question: So my current service content, as long as I do not predict the future and only discuss historical trends and trading methods, can achieve zero risk?

Answer: The core judgment standard is whether the content constitutes "investment advice." The key to the judgment lies not in how you define your service as teaching or sharing experience, but from the perspective of the ordinary user (paid student), whether your course content essentially constitutes "investment advice" or "guiding trading."

Question: I mainly share major coins like Bitcoin and do not recommend smaller coins. Additionally, I often emphasize that investment has risks and that trading should be cautious. Does this mean my actual risk is relatively low?

Answer: Your practice of sharing major coins, emphasizing risks, and not promising returns does lower the risk to some extent. However, it still depends on your overall style and content positioning within the community, which will determine whether you attract relatively rational users or those primarily engaged in speculation, who are more likely to take extreme measures (such as reporting or filing complaints) when they incur losses.

Question: If I clearly state at the time of user payment that "for reference only, does not constitute investment advice,” and “for teaching purposes only, does not constitute investment advice,” can I avoid criminal risk?

Answer: No. The determination of criminal cases follows the principle of "substance over form." Judicial authorities will not cease to review the essence of your business simply because you stated in the contract that "does not constitute investment advice." The key to the judgment is what you have actually done and what content you have delivered, rather than what you externally claim.

In Conclusion

Many consultants are mainly concerned with several practical questions:

In my current situation, have I already crossed the line? If I stop now, is it still too late? Will the money earned previously be subject to retrospective claims?

There is no unified answer to these questions. Analysis needs to be combined with the specific business. Usually, it depends on several key factors:

• How your content is presented and whether it is understood as having operational guidance nature

• Users' trading behavior and whether it corresponds with your content

• Pricing model of your business and whether it relates to users' trading behavior

These questions often directly affect how the final outcome is evaluated in specific cases.

If you are at a similar business stage and are unsure about your risk boundaries, it is advisable not to make judgments solely based on your self-understanding of teaching and sharing. If you are already aware of the risks but cannot clearly specify where they are, you need to re-evaluate the key facts.

Some questions can only yield truly meaningful answers when viewed in the context of the specific business structure.

Special Statement: This article is an original work by Lawyer Shao Shiwai and represents only the author's personal views, not constituting legal consultation or opinions on specific matters.

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。