Research uncovers inconsistencies at NFT auction

0
103

Fynn Kliemann’s business practices should be treated with caution – this has been clearly shown by the research by Jan Böhmermann and his ZDF Magazin Royale. But now research by Contrast new inconsistencies in Kliemann’s business.

Fynn Kliemann was probably going through a not so good time. Just a few weeks ago, Jan Böhmermann and his ZDF Magazin Royale uncovered the dubious machinations surrounding Kliemann’s mask deals.

Now the next research makes inconsistencies in Kliemann’s business. Because like them Contrast-Editor reported that he violated his own auction conditions at an NFT auction. This could result in claims for damages.

What is behind the research on Fynn Kliemann?

Contrast took a close look at Kliemann’s auction of NFTs in his research. He earned around 215,000 euros for digital works of art.

The so-called non-fungible tokens are pieces of music that Kliemann recorded himself. He offered these as NFTs. His fans could then buy them using cryptocurrencies.

The problem with the matter: Kliemann – once again, one almost has to say – did not follow the rules at the auction. Because, as the political magazine reports, he accepted bids even after the deadline had expired, thus driving up the price and thus his profit significantly.

Kliemann’s NFT auction in detail

At the time of the auction, it was said on Kliemann’s “JingleBe” website that the auction would end on March 7, 2021 at 8 p.m. The respective highest bidder at this point in time should have been awarded the contract, as is customary for an auction.

Contrast reports on the computer scientist Fabian K., who wanted to bid on one of the pieces of music. On that very Sunday at 7:58 p.m., K. bid the equivalent of 573 euros for one of the digital pieces of music.

With this bid, he was also the highest bidder at 8 p.m. – i.e. at the end of the auction. But the auction wasn’t over then. According to the ARD political magazine, further bids were received at the auction.

Kliemann only ended the auction for this NFT at 9 p.m. At that time, the highest bid was almost double what Fabian K. had originally bid.

This is not an isolated case

But it is not only in this case that Fynn Kliemann is said to have behaved in this way. In the case of at least 84 NFTs, the price continued to rise after the end of the auction.

Die Contrast-Redaktion has calculated that the turnover with the NFTs has increased by around 68,000 euros after the previously specified period. Fabian K. then emailed Kliemann in March and April 2021. Contrast these emails are available.

The political magazine quotes from Kliemann’s answer: “I’m really sorry. You’re absolutely right.” Today, Kliemann announced through his lawyer that he was breaking new ground with the NFT auction.

Kliemann thought he could automatically end all auctions at 8 p.m. sharp. However, this was not possible. This is the lawyer’s justification for Kliemann’s little extra pocket money.

Fynn Kliemann is now threatened with claims for damages

But what is the legal situation in such a case? Contrast quotes the lawyer Katharina Garbers-von Boehm, who specializes in NFTs.

If the auction is properly advertised, whoever was the highest bidder at 8 p.m. has a civil claim to get the NFT.

Pascal Decker, partner of the law firm dtb, says opposite Contrast: “It doesn’t matter if you apologize afterwards for something you allegedly didn’t know any better before, if you could have known it more easily: the liability remains.”

It is therefore clear: the injured parties could now sue Kliemann for damages. Theoretically, they would even be entitled to the pieces of music – but this is no longer possible in part due to resale.

Also interesting:

Source: https://www.basicthinking.de/blog/2022/06/21/fynn-kliemann-nft-versteigerung/

Leave a Reply