SEC v. Ryan Felton, FLiK, and CoinSpark (price manipulation, 2020)

Judgment entered

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 2, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, with sampled and disputed records read a second time. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.

Report an error in this record (sec-ryan-felton-flik-coinspark-price-manipulation-2020) by email

In 2020, the Securities and Exchange Commission brought an action against Ryan Felton, FLiK, and CoinSpark, alleging conduct this library classifies as price manipulation in two fraudulent initial coin offerings. A final judgment entered in 2024 ordered joint and several disgorgement of $2.8 million plus prejudgment interest of $704,981, deemed satisfied by a parallel criminal restitution and forfeiture order.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

$2.8m

Prejudgment interest

$705k

Total relief

$3.5m

Alleged gain

$2.2m

A dash means the release did not state a figure we could extract, not that the figure is zero. Penalty and disgorgement are stored separately so aggregates across the library do not double-count the same dollars.

What is alleged to have happened

the Securities and Exchange Commission filed this matter on September 10, 2020 in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Georgia (No. 20-cv-03739); the final-judgment release is dated March 29, 2024 (release LR-25961). The respondents named are Ryan Felton and the entities he used to run two initial coin offerings, FLiK (a promised digital streaming platform) and CoinSpark (a promised digital asset trading platform).

The complaint alleges that Felton misappropriated funds raised in both ICOs, secretly transferred FLiK tokens to himself and sold them into the market for an additional $2.2 million in profits, and separately engaged in manipulative trading to inflate the price of CoinSpark's SPARK tokens. Felton is alleged to have used the misappropriated funds and the proceeds of his manipulative trading on luxury purchases including a Ferrari and a home.

This library tags the matter as price manipulation, based on the SPARK-token trading conduct the regulator describes. The tagging is ours, not the regulator's: the SEC's complaint itself charges violations of Securities Act Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 17(a), and Exchange Act Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5, with Felton individually also charged with violating Exchange Act Section 9(a)(1) — the statutory provision aimed specifically at creating a false or misleading appearance of active trading.

The conduct is recorded against crypto.

The relief recorded in our data is disgorgement of $2,800,000, prejudgment interest of $704,981. Penalty and disgorgement are distinct: disgorgement returns the gain, while the penalty is punitive. We store them separately so that aggregate figures across the library are not double-counted.

Felton, FLiK and CoinSpark consented to a final judgment permanently enjoining them from the securities-law violations charged, permanently barring them from participating in the issuance, purchase, offer or sale of any digital asset security, and permanently barring Felton from acting as an officer or director of a public company. The judgment ordered joint and several disgorgement of $2.8 million plus prejudgment interest of $704,981, deemed satisfied by the restitution and forfeiture orders already entered against Felton in the parallel criminal case, United States v. Felton, No. 20-CR-347 (N.D. Ga.).

For the regulator's own account of the facts, read the primary document linked above. This page deliberately summarises the structured record rather than reproducing the release.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with one technique in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.

• Price manipulation — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2020-09-10 Complaint filed (N.D. Ga., No. 20-cv-03739)
2. 2024-03-28 Final judgment entered on consent

Primary documents

Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.

• SEC litigation release

The linked release is a work of the United States government and is not subject to copyright. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Related actions

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Record added October 1, 2026. submit a correction.