- DeepSeek condemns false schemes misusing its name for leasing.
- No legitimate DeepSeek tokens involved.
- Emphasizes focus on research, not commercial leasing.
The use of DeepSeek’s name for “computing power leasing” or “financing” is illegal. Official channels reiterate the company’s research-centric approach without commercial activities, highlighting misinformation and unauthorized use of its brand.
Lede
DeepSeek, led by CEO Liang Wenfeng, warns of unauthorized “computing power leasing” using its name, deeming it illegal activity.
Nut Graph
DeepSeek’s warning highlights the potential misuse of its brand, stressing their commitment to research over commercialization, avoiding any leasing schemes.
DeepSeek’s Stance on Illegal Leasing
DeepSeek has publicly stated that any usage of the company’s name for “computing power leasing” or financing is illegal. Liang Wenfeng, the CEO, along with the company’s official channels, denies endorsement or authorization of such schemes. “Misinformation and confusion is being spread about its service,” said Liang Wenfeng, Founder and CEO of DeepSeek. The company emphasizes its focus on research, not commercialization or asset leasing.
DeepSeek has not engaged in commercialization or asset leasing, citing its research focus. The company notes that misinformation is being spread about its offerings. No evidence suggests DeepSeek’s involvement in any “computing power leasing” financial schemes.
There is no evidence of financial or market impacts from these unauthorized activities. Ethereum, Bitcoin, and related chains remain unaffected by any transactions linked to DeepSeek’s brand. No evidence indicates ETH, BTC, or altcoin flows are related to any ‘DeepSeek’ branded computing or financing schemes. The company maintains its stance on research-centric operations.
Despite DeepSeek’s warnings, the company’s reputation and focus on research-driven advancement remain unchanged. Deceptive schemes have historically lacked any legitimate connection, reinforcing DeepSeek’s decision to remain detached from such activities.
Future implications might involve tighter regulations and monitoring of false schemes. Given past high-profile impersonations in the industry, vigilance in corporate and consumer education seems essential to counteract misinformation in technology domains.