Former OpenSea Exec’s NFT ‘Insider Trading’ Case Will Continue

Nate Chastain argued charges over an alleged insider trading scheme shouldn’t stick because NFTs aren’t securities, but a judge wasn’t phased

article-image

Blockworks Exclusive Art by Axel Rangel

share

key takeaways

  • Judge Jesse Furman shot down Chastain’s argument, labeling it “wholly without merit”
  • Furman however said “insider trading” may be misleading in this case and can be struck from the indictment

Nate Chastain, the former OpenSea employee accused of an insider NFT trading scheme, was unable to convince a judge to dismiss his indictment, allowing the case to go ahead.

The Department of Justice in June charged Chastain with wire fraud and money laundering over a series of allegedly dodgy trades which occurred during his tenure as OpenSea’s head of product between January and September 2021.

Authorities say Chastain used confidential information regarding which NFTs would be featured on OpenSea’s homepage, leveraging that knowledge to secretly purchase dozens of tokens just before they appeared. 

Chastain subsequently profited by selling those NFTs, while using anonymous digital wallets and accounts on OpenSea to conceal his moves, according to the DOJ. He allegedly generated at least 19 ETH ($25,500, current price) through the trades, based on information from his known wallets. 

Chastain resigned from OpenSea after being suspected of misappropriating insider information in September 2021. At the time, a number of NFT traders flagged on Twitter that a wallet belonging to Chastain was routinely at the center of transactions involving NFTs that would show up on OpenSea’s featured portal.

Reuters reported he was accused of secretly buying 45 NFTs on 11 different occasions as part of an insider trading scheme. In one such event, his purchase and sale of the NFT “Spectrum of a Ramification Theory” on Sept. 14, 2021 more than quadrupled his profits on that particular trade.

Chastain attempted to have the charges dropped, with his counsel arguing that the existence of securities or commodities trading is an essential element of any insider trading offense — NFTs are neither of those, they contended. But this dispute has failed to convince the case’s judge.

The lawyers also claimed the government cannot prove charges of money laundering, as Chastain’s crypto transactions in question were conducted on the Ethereum blockchain and thus “completely visible to the public.”

Chastain case not exactly ‘insider trading’

In denying the motion to dismiss on Oct. 21, Judge Jesse Furman said Chastain isn’t charged with insider trading in the “classic sense of the term.”

He is charged with wire fraud that makes no reference to either securities or commodities and instead relates to “obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses.” So, his argument is “wholly without merit,” the judge said.

Furman pointed to another case as a reference point to make clear that Chastain’s counsel hadn’t made a solid argument. In that case, a Wall Street Journal reporter entered into a scheme with traders to share the timing and contents of a column so they could use it to make profits.

“The columnist and traders were charged with, and convicted of, both securities fraud and mail and wire fraud,” the judge said. They had argued to reverse the convictions on grounds that the information in question was not “property.” Yet the court ruled that the publication schedule and contents of the newspaper column constituted property within the wire fraud statute.

“No court has suggested, let alone held, that conviction in such a case requires trading in securities or commodities,” the judge said. 

The judge acknowledged, though, that the term “insider trading” may be misleading in Chastain’s case. The appropriate remedy, he said, would be to strike that phrase from the indictment. This would also prevent the government from using it at trial.


Get the news in your inbox. Explore Blockworks newsletters:

Tags

Decoding crypto and the markets. Daily, with Byron Gilliam.

Upcoming Events

Old Billingsgate

Mon - Wed, October 13 - 15, 2025

Blockworks’ Digital Asset Summit (DAS) will feature conversations between the builders, allocators, and legislators who will shape the trajectory of the digital asset ecosystem in the US and abroad.

Industry City | Brooklyn, NY

TUES - THURS, JUNE 24 - 26, 2025

Permissionless IV serves as the definitive gathering for crypto’s technical founders, developers, and builders to come together and create the future.If you’re ready to shape the future of crypto, Permissionless IV is where it happens.

Brooklyn, NY

SUN - MON, JUN. 22 - 23, 2025

Blockworks and Cracked Labs are teaming up for the third installment of the Permissionless Hackathon, happening June 22–23, 2025 in Brooklyn, NY. This is a 36-hour IRL builder sprint where developers, designers, and creatives ship real projects solving real problems across […]

recent research

Research Report Templates (19).png

Research

Suilend has grown into the top money market and liquid staking provider on Sui. STEAMM, Suilend’s Superfluid AMM, presents a compelling avenue for growing market share within Sui’s DEX landscape and revenue generation for the protocol. Suilend’s multi-product suite position it well for owning market share across key verticals. While current metrics across the Sui ecosystem are likely inflated due to Sui Foundation incentive programs, SEND trades at amongst the lowest multiples in the lend/borrow sector, suggesting that a bull case for continued growth in the ecosystem may be mispriced.

article-image

The stablecoin issuer now plans to offer 32 million Class A common stock shares at a price of up to $28 each

article-image

Let’s go whale watching, Bitcoin style: Investigating the mysterious “12ib7” wallet now worth $3.2 billion

article-image

Bitget’s L2 is undergoing a leadership change and will be helmed by Colin Goltra, formerly the blockchain’s chief growth officer

article-image

The funding was spread out across 61 rounds, a slight dip in both number of rounds and total funding in comparison to other months

article-image

Why is it controversial to say things are better than they used to be?