Court Decision on SEC Case Confirms Ripple Doesn't Own XRP Ledger
Date: 2023-10-07 Author: Dima Zakharov Categories: IN WORLD
Legal Clarity for XRP: The recent court ruling by Judge Analisa Torres emphasizes the importance of this decision. It establishes XRP as the only altcoin with legal clarity in the United States. This marks a milestone for the cryptocurrency, as regulatory uncertainty has surrounded it for some time.
Ripple's Lack of Ownership: The court decision also reaffirms that Ripple does not own XRP Ledger (XRPL). This clarification came from a section of the ruling where the judge explicitly stated that Ripple does not have ownership over XRPL. This statement has been widely regarded as a significant legal clarification.
SEC's Lack of Evidence: According to the court's judgment, the SEC failed to provide evidence that the use of XRPL and XRP represented a "substantial focus" for Ripple. This lack of evidence played a crucial role in the court's decision.
Other Distributions Not Securities: The court's decision was in response to the SEC's claim that other distributions of XRP by Ripple violated securities laws. However, the court pointed out that its previous decision on July 13 regarding other Ripple distributions was based on the Howey Test, which requires an investment of money. The court determined that recipients of other distributions did not pay money to Ripple.
Grants and Development Efforts: The court noted that a significant portion of other distributions consisted of grants provided to third parties as part of efforts to develop new applications for XRPL and XRP. This clarification underscores the diverse nature of these distributions.
SEC's Inconsistent Legal Theories: Judge Torres criticized the SEC for presenting inconsistent and changing legal arguments regarding other Ripple distributions. The court's scrutiny is particularly relevant as the SEC seeks a review of these transactions in the appeals process.
Unclear SEC Positions: The SEC's shifting positions on whether other XRP distributions were unregistered securities offerings or indirect sales to the public raise questions about the agency's stance. It remains unclear how these legal theories align with the SEC's allegations against Ripple.
Ripple's Lack of Ownership: The court decision also reaffirms that Ripple does not own XRP Ledger (XRPL). This clarification came from a section of the ruling where the judge explicitly stated that Ripple does not have ownership over XRPL. This statement has been widely regarded as a significant legal clarification.
SEC's Lack of Evidence: According to the court's judgment, the SEC failed to provide evidence that the use of XRPL and XRP represented a "substantial focus" for Ripple. This lack of evidence played a crucial role in the court's decision.
Other Distributions Not Securities: The court's decision was in response to the SEC's claim that other distributions of XRP by Ripple violated securities laws. However, the court pointed out that its previous decision on July 13 regarding other Ripple distributions was based on the Howey Test, which requires an investment of money. The court determined that recipients of other distributions did not pay money to Ripple.
Grants and Development Efforts: The court noted that a significant portion of other distributions consisted of grants provided to third parties as part of efforts to develop new applications for XRPL and XRP. This clarification underscores the diverse nature of these distributions.
SEC's Inconsistent Legal Theories: Judge Torres criticized the SEC for presenting inconsistent and changing legal arguments regarding other Ripple distributions. The court's scrutiny is particularly relevant as the SEC seeks a review of these transactions in the appeals process.
Unclear SEC Positions: The SEC's shifting positions on whether other XRP distributions were unregistered securities offerings or indirect sales to the public raise questions about the agency's stance. It remains unclear how these legal theories align with the SEC's allegations against Ripple.
