By Bitcoinist - 10 månader sedan - Läsningstid: 3 minuter
Pro-XRP Lawyer Offers Key Solution To Ripple’s Legal Woes Against SEC
Jeremy Hogan, en pro-XRP-advokat, har diskuteras the issue of secondary market sales and its potential impact on the Ripple vs. the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) lawsuit.
Resultatet av det här fallet är avgörande för XRP-innehavare, eftersom det kommer att avgöra om tillgången i sig anses vara en säkerhet. Om frågan om försäljning på sekundärmarknaden inte tas upp kan det påverka åternoteringen av XRP på börser som Coinbase.
SEC-processen tyder på att XRP är ett värdepapper, som en aktieandel. SEC:s begäran från domstolen i rättegången kräver dock inte uttryckligen något som skulle ge tillgången denna status. Detta lämnar frågan om försäljning på andrahandsmarknaden i fråga.
Disgorgement Order Could Force Ripple vs. SEC Case To Address Secondary Sales Issue
SEC har åtalat 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:s erkännande på tokenstatus i LBRY-fall kan ha positiva konsekvenser för XRPI en tidigare förhandling i biblioteket (LBRY), blockchain-baserat filbetalningsnätverk mot SEC-processen, hörde den amerikanska distriktsdomstolen muntliga argument om tillämpningen av rättsmedel. Domaren var tvungen att avgöra om en kryptotillgång som gör det möjligt för ägaren att skicka instruktioner till ett nätverk kan förkroppsliga ett investeringssystem av ett företag. SEC ville att domaren skulle utfärda ett brett föreläggande mot försäljningen av LBRY-tokenet, där tokenet blir säkerheten.
Utfrågningen var dock goda nyheter, särskilt för XRP. John Deaton, en Amicus Curiae i XRP-processen, lämnade också in en amicus brief i LBRY-fallet. SEC-advokaten i LBRY-processen medgav 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.
Utvalda bild från iStock, diagram från TradingView.com
Ursprunglig källa: Bitcoinär