Coin Center is doubling down on a core argument in crypto policy debates: writing and publishing code should be treated as free speech under the US Constitution.

The position comes as developers face growing legal uncertainty over whether they can be held responsible for how their software is used.

Code as Speech, Not a Financial Service

In a new report, Coin Center leaders Peter Van Valkenburgh and Lizandro Pieper argued that publishing software is fundamentally an act of expression.

They compared writing code to:

• Writing a book
• Publishing a recipe
• Sharing ideas publicly

Under this view, developers are speakers and inventors, not financial intermediaries.

First Amendment Protections at Stake

The argument centers on the First Amendment, which protects freedom of speech.

Coin Center warns that requiring developers to register, license, or restrict their code could amount to “prior restraint”, a legal concept that is typically unconstitutional.

Their position is clear:
Code should not be regulated like a financial service if it is merely published.

When Regulation Might Apply

The report draws an important distinction.

Developers may fall under regulation if they:

• Control user funds
• Execute transactions on behalf of users
• Act as intermediaries or custodians

But simply writing and releasing code should remain protected.

Legal Uncertainty After High-Profile Cases

The debate has intensified following prosecutions of crypto developers, including:

• Roman Storm
• Developers behind Samourai Wallet

These cases raised concerns that developers could be held criminally liable for how others use their software.

Courts Struggling With “Code vs Conduct”

Some lower courts have argued that because software can produce real-world effects, it resembles conduct rather than speech.

Coin Center rejects this view, calling it a misinterpretation of existing legal precedent.

The report cites the Lowe v. SEC decision, which found that publishing financial information without managing client assets is protected speech.

Broader Implications for Crypto Innovation

At the heart of the debate is how to regulate decentralized systems that remove intermediaries.

Crypto technology allows:

• Peer-to-peer transactions
• Self-custody of assets
• Reduced reliance on traditional financial institutions

Coin Center argues that labeling developers as intermediaries for convenience risks stifling innovation.

A Defining Issue for the Industry

The outcome of this debate could shape the future of crypto development in the US.

If courts side with Coin Center’s view:

• Developers gain stronger legal protection
• Open-source innovation may accelerate

If not:

• Developers could face increased legal risk
• Regulatory pressure on software creators could intensify

“Speech Cannot Be Licensed Into Silence”

Coin Center’s message is ultimately philosophical as much as legal.

In a world where software underpins economic activity, they argue that protecting code as speech is essential to preserving freedom and innovation.

Coinbase is pushing deeper into the intersection of AI and crypto with the launch of a new marketplace designed specifically for autonomous agents.

Introducing Agentic.market

The new platform, called Agentic.market, acts like an app store for AI agents, allowing them to discover, evaluate, and use services without needing traditional API integrations.

Built on Coinbase’s x402 payments protocol, the marketplace aims to simplify how AI agents interact with online services and make payments.

What the x402 Protocol Does

The x402 protocol enables AI agents to:

• Make payments using stablecoins
• Access services programmatically
• Operate independently without human intervention

It is named after the HTTP “402 Payment Required” status code, reflecting its focus on enabling native internet payments.

A Marketplace for Autonomous Agents

Agentic.market provides two key layers:

• A web interface for humans to browse services
• A programmable layer for AI agents to integrate tools automatically

AI agents can:

• Search and compare services
• Access “skills” (predefined instructions for using tools)
• Execute transactions using built-in wallets

This allows agents to not only consume services, but also potentially offer services themselves.

Solving a Fragmentation Problem

According to Coinbase, one of the biggest challenges in the AI agent ecosystem has been fragmentation.

Until now, developers relied on:

• Word-of-mouth
• Disconnected platforms
• Manual integrations

Agentic.market aims to centralize this ecosystem, making it easier for agents to operate efficiently.

Growing Adoption of AI Payments

The x402 ecosystem is already seeing traction:

• Hundreds of thousands of AI agents active
• Hundreds of millions in transaction volume

This signals growing demand for machine-to-machine commerce powered by crypto.

Backed by Major Tech and Finance Players

The protocol has attracted support from major companies, including:

• Google
• Microsoft
• Amazon Web Services
• Visa
• Mastercard
• Stripe
• Circle

These companies are backing the development of the x402 Foundation, which will help govern the protocol.

The Bigger Vision: AI-Native Commerce

Industry leaders believe AI agents could soon dominate online transactions.

Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong has predicted that AI agents may soon outnumber humans in online commerce, while Circle’s leadership expects billions of agents to transact onchain within a few years.

A Glimpse Into the Future

The launch of Agentic.market highlights a major shift:

• From human-driven apps → to agent-driven ecosystems
• From manual payments → to autonomous transactions

If adoption continues, platforms like this could become foundational infrastructure for the next phase of the internet.

A New York lawmaker has introduced a proposal aimed at preparing Americans for the economic impact of artificial intelligence, including the possibility of widespread job displacement.

A New “AI Dividend” Concept

Alex Bores unveiled a plan to create an “AI Dividend,” a system that would provide direct payments to US citizens if automation significantly reduces employment.

The idea is simple in principle: if AI drives massive productivity gains and concentrates wealth, a portion of that value should be redistributed to the public.

How the Program Would Work

The proposed dividend would be funded through a mix of mechanisms, including:

• Taxes on AI usage
• Equity stakes in major AI companies
• Broader tax reforms targeting capital versus labor

Payments would only be triggered if AI begins to meaningfully displace workers, positioning the program as a safeguard rather than a permanent entitlement.

Beyond Direct Payments

The plan also includes funding for:

• Workforce retraining and education
• Transition support for displaced workers
• Oversight and safety infrastructure for AI systems

This broader approach aims to help workers adapt rather than rely solely on financial assistance.

Rising Concerns Over AI Job Losses

The proposal comes amid growing debate about AI’s impact on employment.

Some estimates suggest automation is already affecting the labor market, with thousands of jobs reportedly lost each month due to AI-driven efficiencies.

Major companies like Amazon, Meta, Intel, and Microsoft have all reduced workforces while increasing investment in AI.

Not Everyone Agrees on the Risk

Despite these concerns, some analysts argue the threat may be overstated.

Morgan Stanley recently noted that AI’s impact on jobs has been “modest so far,” pointing out that past technological shifts often created new roles even as they eliminated others.

However, there is still uncertainty about whether AI could break from historical patterns.

Political and Economic Implications

The AI Dividend is part of Bores’ campaign platform as he runs for Congress, meaning its future depends on both political support and broader legislative momentum.

If adopted, it could mark a major shift in how governments:

• Tax emerging technologies
• Distribute economic gains
• Address automation-driven inequality

A Safety Net for the AI Era

Bores framed the initiative not as a penalty on innovation, but as a form of economic insurance.

The proposal reflects a growing recognition that as AI reshapes industries, policymakers may need new tools to ensure the benefits are shared more broadly across society.