Coinbase, one of the largest cryptocurrency exchanges, is facing a $1 billion lawsuit from BiT Global Digital. The lawsuit challenges Coinbase’s decision to delist Wrapped Bitcoin (wBTC) and accuses the company of anticompetitive behavior.
BiT Global claims Coinbase delisted wBTC to promote its own competing product, Coinbase BTC (cbBTC). Filed on Dec. 13, the lawsuit alleges Coinbase’s move amounts to monopolization of the wrapped Bitcoin market under the Sherman Act. BiT Global accuses Coinbase of issuing false statements to undermine wBTC’s compliance and gain market dominance for cbBTC.
In response, Coinbase’s Chief Legal Officer Paul Grewal defended the exchange’s decision, emphasizing its adherence to high listing standards. “When an asset no longer meets our listing standards, we will drop it,” Grewal stated on X. A Coinbase spokesperson reiterated this stance, affirming that the exchange delists assets that fail to meet its standards.
The lawsuit was filed on Nov. 19, shortly after Coinbase announced the delisting of wBTC. This came four months after Coinbase first teased cbBTC, its Bitcoin-based token aimed at boosting Bitcoin-native decentralized finance (BTCFi).
The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California by the law firm Kneupper & Covey. Coinbase operates globally, and its decisions impact crypto markets worldwide.
BiT Global argues that Coinbase’s actions are predatory and harm the crypto market by eliminating competition. The exchange’s delisting of wBTC, while onboarding memecoins and launching its own similar product, has raised questions about fairness and transparency. Tron founder Justin Sun publicly criticized Coinbase, pointing to a contradiction between Grewal’s statements and previous remarks by Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong, who claimed the exchange is “asset agnostic.”
Coinbase delisted wBTC on Nov. 19, citing undisclosed failures to meet its listing standards. BiT Global asserts the move was strategic, designed to promote cbBTC. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for competition and token listing practices in the crypto industry as regulatory scrutiny increases.
