I have no opinion as to the legitimacy of the criminal accusations, but having correctly paid tax liabilities would not be a defence.
If that's true, then the medium does not appear to be a lawful method for transactions above €10,000 in the EU.
> Some announcement of that policy would be better than letting it become known through surprise enforcement.
AML 5 - the Directive which introduced this regulation - is not exactly a secret. Especially if transacting through a company, it is very difficult to argue ignorance as a defence to non-compliance.
Traditionally, dealers and auction houses would require and assist with KYC/AML compliance, which was part of the value they offered. Relying on non-compliant permissionless contracts does not absolve the vendor of their responsibilities.
In addition to primary sales, there are also royalty payments for secondary sales but I don't think any of his pieces have ever sold for €200k (which would be required for a €10k royalty).
...but maybe this goes against the spirit of AML-D5 since popular generative art still drives many millions of dollars/euros in sales, but often split across smaller transactions (since a collection may contain hundred to thousands of individual pieces).