Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.
Over the weekend, the SEC filed its Memorandum in Opposition to the Ripple Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment in the ongoing lawsuit.
A Ripple enthusiast who goes by the name "bill" on Twitter has expressed his views about the SEC's counterarguments to the Ripple defendants' motion. He feels that the SEC has not raised a strong argument in response to Ripple, stating that the SEC would have been in a better position if it were targeting specific Ripple sales or offers of XRP.
Tomiwabold OlajideHe criticizes the SEC for running "an absurdly broad case of targeting all XRP sales or offers for 8 years, including in secondary markets."
The good news for ripple is that the SEC didn’t offer any specific sales with contracts and allege that although it may be to an accredited investor it was subterfuge to get to the secondary market. No specific transactions - just all transactions. I don’t see how it sticks.
— John E Deaton (220K Followers Beware Imposters) (@JohnEDeaton1) October 23, 2022
According to CryptoLaw founder John Deaton, the SEC's vagueness might be a boon for Ripple. He wrote: "The good news for Ripple is that the SEC didn't offer any specific sales with contracts...No specific transactions, just all transactions. I don't see how it sticks."
"Bill," a legal expert, sees signs of weakness in the SEC's legal argumentation as it mischaracterizes Ripple's attempt to construe an undefined statutory term "investment contract" with reference to the pre-1933 blue sky law cases. He, however, sees only two seemingly strong points made by the SEC.
First, Ripple may have a weakness in confining the term scheme. The Ripple argument is that a "transaction or scheme" merely conveys that a court should look to the broader context in which the instrument is grounded.
The SEC points out that Ripple cites no case that holds this to be the case. Secondly, the SEC points out that Section 5 of the Securities Act prohibits unregistered offers, not just sales.
Meanwhile, expectations are in place regarding the next key dates in the Ripple lawsuit. Today, Oct. 24, the parties are expected to file publicly redacted versions of the opposition briefs. John Deaton earlier disclosed that some of the exhibits, numbering 440 in total, would be made public on Oct. 24. Nov. 21 is another big date, as the parties will file publicly redacted versions of the reply briefs.
Alex Dovbnya
Dan Burgin
U.Today Editorial Team
Vladislav Sopov