Jump to content
Gepster

Is XRP a security or not, lets find the answer

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, OzAlphaWolf said:

I see. Well in that case, several of the key engineers have moved to Coil. Ripple can easily 'task' them with sensitive work that benefits everyone.

For example,  Ripple has decentralized the xrp network this year, but that means they likely gave up a degree of control, so if network parameters like "burn rate", "minimum wallet xrp", etc. need adjustments, and the SEC says to Ripple as part of an agreement, you can't do that anymore unless you register XRP with us as a security...that's what I was getting at, as an example.

Rippple could allow network participants with voting power (validators) to vote on changes to network parameters and then consult Ripple first before voting on such changes so validators are aware of the potential ramifications of such changes.  That way, network participants with voting power (validators) can make changes to network parameters as they see fit while Ripple maintains its hands-off approach to avoid getting slapped with securites violations.

Decred for example has on-chain voting and implementation. I think that's a compromise the SEC would be willing to make if it came to that to keep XRP as a non-security.

 

 

Edited by enrique11
additional comments

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty much everyone here has an opinion...I can just guess the heated constructive discussion they must have behind closed doors to decide what the hell is this new living organism called XRP :popcorn1:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Malloy said:

Pretty much everyone here has an opinion...I can just guess the heated constructive discussion they must have behind closed doors to decide what the hell is this new living organism called XRP :popcorn1:

I just hope that at least they're talking about it - that the SEC is not close-minded and has jumped to a premature decision about XRP without compromise, tying Ripple's hands behind its back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, enrique11 said:

For example,  Ripple has decentralized the xrp network this year, but that means they likely gave up a degree of control, so if network parameters like "burn rate", "minimum wallet xrp", etc. need adjustments, and the SEC says to Ripple as part of an agreement, you can't do that anymore unless you register XRP with us as a security...that's what I was getting at, as an example.

Rippple could allow network participants with voting power (validators) to vote on changes to network parameters and then consult Ripple first before voting on such changes so validators are aware of the potential ramifications of such changes.  That way, network participants with voting power (validators) can make changes to network parameters as they see fit while Ripple maintains its hands-off approach to avoid getting slapped with securites violations.

Decred for example has on-chain voting and implementation. I think that's a compromise the SEC would be willing to make if it came to that to keep XRP as a non-security.

 

 

rippled validators can vote this (fee, reserve, amendments),  but only validators in UNL will take affect, by now the validators in UNL are ALL controlled by ripple.  Decentralization is the key issue from day one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, yxxyun said:

rippled validators can vote this (fee, reserve, amendments),  but only validators in UNL will take affect, by now the validators in UNL are ALL controlled by ripple.  Decentralization is the key issue from day one. 

Thanks for clarifying this aspect!

Then it is doable...for sufficient decentralization so that Ripple is sufficiently not in control, so that it will not be a security in the eyes of the SEC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, vsyc said:

Its the same with you, you said "quit" but nothings happens, still waiting on list of your sell, hope you did not put them on 10 EUR.

Same was lock up, in end of November same "quitings" and "upsets".

Empty words.

What?

I sold it all for ETH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, enrique11 said:

For example,  Ripple has decentralized the xrp network this year, but that means they likely gave up a degree of control, so if network parameters like "burn rate", "minimum wallet xrp", etc. need adjustments, and the SEC says to Ripple as part of an agreement, you can't do that anymore unless you register XRP with us as a security...that's what I was getting at, as an example.

Rippple could allow network participants with voting power (validators) to vote on changes to network parameters and then consult Ripple first before voting on such changes so validators are aware of the potential ramifications of such changes.  That way, network participants with voting power (validators) can make changes to network parameters as they see fit while Ripple maintains its hands-off approach to avoid getting slapped with securites violations.

Decred for example has on-chain voting and implementation. I think that's a compromise the SEC would be willing to make if it came to that to keep XRP as a non-security.

Is this really necessary? I think you may be looking into things too much. If ETH/BTC is not a security, but it still vitalik's team upgrades/works on ETH, and blockstream works on BTC by themselves then surely XRP is also allowed to do the same as a developer? From their statements it seems to me the main issue is around the actions of a single entity overwhelmingly contributing to the value of the network. For Ripple, this currently is the case, but is being changed with xPring/Coil etc.

Another interesting factor in the newly released SEC framework is the impact of Plasma/POS integration for ETH, as it would basically mean earnings or "dividends" from staking, which could potentially cause it to be considered a security as in that case there is an expectation of profit from a single entity (or perhaps not if there are so many dApps that drive the value of the network/demand for the token usage?).

 

The most encouraging thing for me is the former SEC chairman that is representing Ripple in their court cases. Lawyers don't normally take on cases that they think are exceedingly difficult to win, unless desperate for money. If the case is won by Ripple here, there will be a news storm and those 2 SEC representatives will be the most highly in demand crypto lawyers in the industry.

7 hours ago, enrique11 said:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a security. They are very confident that it isn’t and repeatedly say it’s not. They have been WORKING YEARS WITH the regulators and I would imagine are helping them through this. 

 

Another note, I think the law makers realize if they make the wrong decision, they risk loosing ANOTHER corperation from picking up and moving to another country and that will be bringing in TONS of money and also is a revolutionary business. When you see companies like this, you do everything to make sure they stay in and are part of the US.

Happy Friday! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The same discussions we have here, the SEC is having. One thing is clear to me and that part was not mentioned clearly. It´s not all about money. It´s also about power. With Ripple as a US company and XRP´s possible bright future, the SEC would be dumb to destroy their tool for keeping US power in the global, financial system and in crypto. That´s imo the reason their mouth keeps closed. They shut up until Ripple did their job. they work hand in hand. Think! Ripple works in the most regulated industry, the banking industry.

And then also: What benefit would they have to declare xrp a security? To protect the few investors in xrp? come on. They are not doing anything to protect them from btc or eth. 

Anyway, for me, who calculatory sees his whole investment lost from day 1 that means:

xrp is a security. fine. I hodl
xrp is not a securtity. fine. I hodl

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, bachmama said:

The same discussions we have here, the SEC is having. One thing is clear to me and that part was not mentioned clearly. It´s not all about money. It´s also about power. With Ripple as a US company and XRP´s possible bright future, the SEC would be dumb to destroy their tool for keeping US power in the global, financial system and in crypto. That´s imo the reason their mouth keeps closed. They shut up until Ripple did their job. they work hand in hand. Think! Ripple works in the most regulated industry, the banking industry.

And then also: What benefit would they have to declare xrp a security? To protect the few investors in xrp? come on. They are not doing anything to protect them from btc or eth. 

Anyway, for me, who calculatory sees his whole investment lost from day 1 that means:

xrp is a security. fine. I hodl
xrp is not a securtity. fine. I hodl

 

I think the most important thing in the statement is the acknowledgement that an ICO that starts as a security can transmute into a non security and that they will discuss this with companies behind closed doors.  This lifts the cloud that has been hanging over Ripple - basically they will help Ripple by discussing these questions and if there are problems they will tell them which hoops to jump through.

On this issue my worries have evaporated.  Ripple choose whether they want XRP to be a Security, Ripple have told people they do not expect to be classed as a security.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Julian_Williams said:

This lifts the cloud that has been hanging over Ripple - basically they will help Ripple by discussing these questions and if there are problems they will tell them which hoops to jump through.

Most likely these discussions have already happened.  55billion Escrow, the decentralisation strategy , the donations, Coil, New logo, Xpring etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't worry about XRP being labeled as such. As you may have noticed Ripple the company seems to always be ahead of the news that we receive. We see that they are furthering the decentralization of the xrp ledger ex. Removal of ripple nodes, building on the ledger...aka Coil. Think about it what does coil do that reminds you of something? Ethereum let's you build on the ledger and what did we hear yesterday ethereum is not a security. If you ask me the company ripple has been in talks with the SEC long before we hear this information. Also another thought ripple is backed by the federal reserve. As you may or may not know the federal reserve has stated that there is no other agency of government that can overrule actions that they take. So if you are backed by them I wouldn't fret. Ripples co founder Chris Larsen in the past with his company Prosper had an issue with the SEC labeling what they were doing as a security and well that didn't pan out well for the SEC. Chris fought and won that case. Sorry for the long discussion I just wanted to give my thoughts on this situation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×