By Bitcoinist - prije 10 mjeseca - Vrijeme čitanja: 3 minute
Pro-XRP Lawyer Offers Key Solution To Ripple’s Legal Woes Against SEC
Jeremy Hogan, pro-XRP odvjetnik, ima raspravljati the issue of secondary market sales and its potential impact on the Ripple vs. the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) lawsuit.
Ishod ovog slučaja ključan je za vlasnike XRP-a jer će odrediti smatra li se imovina inherentno vrijednosnim papirom. Ako se ne riješi problem prodaje na sekundarnom tržištu, to bi moglo utjecati na ponovno uvrštavanje XRP-a na burze kao što je Coinbase.
SEC-ova tužba sugerira da je XRP vrijednosni papir, poput dionice. Međutim, SEC-ovi zahtjevi sudu u tužbi ne zahtijevaju izričito ništa što bi imovini dodijelilo ovaj status. Ovo ostavlja upitnim pitanje prodaje na sekundarnom tržištu.
Disgorgement Order Could Force Ripple vs. SEC Case To Address Secondary Sales Issue
The SEC has charged Ripple with violating securities laws by selling XRP as an unregistered security. If Ripple is found to have violated securities laws, it could be required to pay disgorgement, which would oblige the company to give up profits gained through illegal or unethical means.
However, Hogan suggests that Ripple could obtain an agreement from the SEC to include language in its final decision that the judgment does not cover secondary sales.
Hogan argues that the court must determine who receives the funds taken from Ripple in a disgorgement order. Disgorgement is a legal remedy that requires a defendant to give up profits gained through illegal or unethical means.
Furthermore, the Pro-XRP lawyer suggests that Ripple could argue that only actual purchasers from it directly, not secondary purchasers, should receive their investment back in a disgorgement order. This argument is based on the SEC v. Wang case, in which a court ruled that disgorgement should only be paid to those who purchased a security from the defendant.
If the court agrees with Ripple’s argument, it would mean that only those who purchased XRP directly from Ripple would be entitled to receive their investment back. This would exclude secondary market purchasers, such as those who bought XRP on exchanges.
This could be a positive outcome for Ripple, as it could limit the financial impact. It could also help to clarify the legal status of XRP, as it would confirm that XRP is not inherently a security.
SEC-ovo priznanje statusa tokena u slučaju LBRY moglo bi imati pozitivne implikacije za XRPU prošlom ročištu u Knjižnici (LBRY), mreža za plaćanje datotekama temeljena na blockchainu protiv SEC-a, okružni sud SAD-a saslušao je usmene argumente o primjeni pravnih lijekova. Sudac je morao odlučiti može li kripto imovina koja vlasniku omogućuje slanje uputa mreži utjeloviti investicijsku shemu tvrtke. SEC je želio da sudac izda široku zabranu protiv prodaje tokena LBRY, u kojoj token postaje vrijednosni papir.
Međutim, saslušanje je bila dobra vijest, posebno za XRP. John Deaton, amicus curiae u tužbi XRP, također je podnio podnesak amicus brief u slučaju LBRY. Odvjetnik SEC-a u tužbi LBRY priznao that the secondary market sales of LBC tokens do not constitute a security. The judge ruled that the secondary market transactions of LBRY tokens by people unaffiliated with no investment intent in the LBRY case are legal.
The LBRY case sets a precedent that could benefit Ripple and XRP holders, confirming that secondary market transactions do not constitute securities. If the Ripple vs. SEC judge follows a similar line of reasoning, it could mean that XRP is not inherently a security, as secondary market sales are an essential part of cryptocurrency trading and do not represent an investment scheme by the company.
Istaknuta slika s iStocka, grafikon s TradingView.com
Izvorni izvor: Bitcoinje