Ripple notches win in SEC case over XRP cryptocurrency

Post by petesergeant » Thu, Jul 13, 2023, 8:26 PM UTC

WinstonSmith84 wrote: post #3

"partial" win!? It's hard to see what would be a "win" otherwise... It's going to have also larger implications - the SEC somehow manages to lose that one, it was hard to imagine or predict. If not even XRP is a security, there is truly no other coins which could be a security. Hate it or love it, but the SEC is simply going to lose all their other lawsuits EDIT: oh funny ... Reuters edited their title and removed "p…

Post by zdragnar » Thu, Jul 13, 2023, 8:33 PM UTC

shrimpx wrote: post #36

constantly wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And with the deep pockets of the crypto puppet masters and all the evidence coming out about the Justice’s susceptibility to taking as many “gifts” as they can get their hands on, that just further solidifies the pre-determined outcome.

The US has a standing doctrine called 'delegation', where the executive is allowed to make up rules and enforce them. The Federalist Society finds that doctrine to be unconstitutional and wants to chip away at it. All 6 conservative justices have ties to the Federalist Society, so it really doesn't require any lavish gifts in this case.

Post by coolestguy » Thu, Jul 13, 2023, 8:42 PM UTC

amluto wrote: post #13

This is IMO rather odd logic. I skimmed the opinion. If identical logic were applied to ordinary stock shares, it seems like it’s saying that shares in a C corp are securities if the C corp sells them to institutional investors, but that if the C corp sells the same shares by putting limit orders on a stock exchange (NASDAQ, for example) and Reddit-reading meme stock buyers buy them, then somehow the C corp didn’t ac…

Post by eric_cc » Thu, Jul 13, 2023, 8:56 PM UTC

petesergeant wrote: post #41

WinstonSmith84 wrote: post #3

"partial" win!? It's hard to see what would be a "win" otherwise... It's going to have also larger implications - the SEC somehow manages to lose that one, it was hard to imagine or predict. If not even XRP is a security, there is truly no other coins which could be a security. Hate it or love it, but the SEC is simply going to lose all their other lawsuits EDIT: oh funny ... Reuters edited their title and removed "p…

> If not even XRP is a security Forgive me, I know little about crypto, and am bearish on it, but: My understanding is that Ripple was very much meant to be a currency/commodity, unambiguously, where most other crypto backed by whitepapers were meant to be securities on the basis that they were meant to back some hare-brained scheme or have some utility beyond simply being a means of transfer. If I'm right about that…

Post by eric_cc » Thu, Jul 13, 2023, 8:59 PM UTC

rvz wrote: post #25

Looks like the crypto critics are now confused and have gone silent again after the Bitcoin leveraged ETFs getting approved and now they got this one wrong again. Just for the ones at the back, it is absolutely NOT the SEC that determines what is and what isn't a security and the SEC does NOT get the final say, which this summary judgement has already shown. But of course complain all you want, but there was a reason…