Jump to content
cmbartley

Ripple hit with its third securities laws suit

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, 2100000 said:

basically what im trying to say is that it seems that if ripple succeeds so does xrp. and that ripple uses xrp to expand its business and promote it, they did that by donations etc.. I just cant get my head wrapped around the fact that they own so much (even though they didnt create it and it was gifted) and that both xrp and ripple are like interlinked. if one succeeds the other follows. this is just my train of thoughts might not make too much sense.

It's more the other way around, if XRP succeeds so does Ripple. Ripple succeeding does not necessarily mean XRP succeeding. They use their stack of XRP, not XRP as an asset itself, to expand and promote their business. But in the end it for sure is a very nitty gritty way of arguing so your train of thoughts is nevertheless somewhat reasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but wouldn't you argue that ripple pushing for xrapid and partnerships is in a sense promoting xrp and since they own so much of it as a result of XRP's success, ripple succeeds too. anyways my question is how would we refute debunk any of this in court when it comes up. anyone have any idea? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Winteriscomming said:

Can you provide the source of this document?

@JmzBond posted it above:

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4571794/Oconer-v-Ripple-6-27-18.pdf

1 minute ago, 2100000 said:

if ripple succeeds so does xrp

That's not necessarily the case. Ripple's most sought after solution, xCurrent, doesn't use XRP. So Ripple can be successful in the absence of XRP usage. FUDsters can't have it both ways: "Ripple doesn't need to use XRP, so it's a scam" and "XRP is a security because it's integral to Ripple".

These are just inaccurate and ironically dichotomous arguments spread about by folk who reek of fear, love Bitcoin, and cash out into the good old fiat currencies they seek to replace. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think these lawsuits are staged just so ripple can have a public sort of case against its name so its on the public record and no one can say it was secretive and enriched a few. Lets just call it protocol. These lawsuits just sound childish to me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
27 minutes ago, Winteriscomming said:

I can not find the Ripple investigation, do you see it?

I do not.  They probably have just not published it yet to their blog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cmbartley said:

In fact, two (2) new lawsuits were filed against Ripple Labs, Inc. within the last week, both citing securities related issues in their complaints (see attached photo). The law.com article needs to be updated to four lawsuits, not three. 

David Oconer vs. Ripple, XRP II and Bradley Garlinghouse (California) - filed on 6/27/2018
Avner Greenwald vs. Ripple, XRP II, Bradley Garlinghouse, Christian Larsen, Ben Lawsky (California) - filed on 7/3/2018

It's not over either. More lawsuits more likely than not to be filed against Ripple Labs, Inc. due to the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision (Cyan v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund).

Check out this older post of mine below. I talk about that Supreme Court decision there. 
https://www.xrpchat.com/topic/23224-ripple-sued-for-securities-violations/?page=9&tab=comments#comment-386239

 

Hang on, guys. They'll get through this.  

 

@Pablo @Snoopy @zerpdigger @vlad_got_it @Mrsrippley @Sebastian @xrpisking
 

 

Untitled.png

Untitled1.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
1 hour ago, Tripple said:

1) The document claims that Ripple alone enforces the 20XRP minimum, and that Ripple is receiving transactions fees from on-ledger transactions. I presume they are referring to the XRP burnt per transactions which obviously doesn't enrich Ripple. 

445390211_ScreenShot2018-07-04at14_05_46.png.abb561124de3f95bb5abd21c90ece4f3.png

2)The crux of their argument is factually incorrect here. XRP was created before Ripple the company ever existed, and was gifted to the company.  


1060004424_ScreenShot2018-07-04at14_02_38.png.b550ed206d8cc7a4d3076c81e2aa757f.png

3) This is perhaps the most telling passage of the document. These guys are just bitcoin maximalists with an absolute hardon for Ripple and XRP.  They also claim here that Ripple froze McCaleb's funds, therefore alleging that Ripple has special permissions on the ledger. It does not, and it wasn't Ripple that froze funds, to my knowledge it was Bitstamp (a completely external entity) that halted transaction on their exchange. That's fine though, because all their crying won't have any impact on the actual reality.

527020552_ScreenShot2018-07-04at14_10_37.png.8b4db2e46816da035e75ece65a47bb3e.png

The whole thing is so riddled with inaccuracies and sweeping allegations that it's actually an unparalleled work of comic genius.  

This is wonderful. This will definitely be dismissed in court based on inaccuracies alone.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to ask some question.

If Ripple wins in the first court that says XRP is not security. Is that means the automatically win in second and third case?

and if they loose, are they automatically lost in second and third case? 

 

Or they can win first and lost in second case and win again in third case?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, 2100000 said:

basically what im trying to say is that it seems that if ripple succeeds so does xrp. and that ripple uses xrp to expand its business and promote it, they did that by donations etc.. I just cant get my head wrapped around the fact that they own so much (even though they didnt create it and it was gifted) and that both xrp and ripple are like interlinked. if one succeeds the other follows. this is just my train of thoughts might not make too much sense.

People seem hurt that Ripple were gifted XRP.  Ripple needed a digital asset as a tool for their software.  They were gifted XRP.  At the time they received it, it was worth next to nothing.   Also, anyone can use XRP for their own business uses.  You don't need to ask Ripple if you can use XRP for your business or not - you can just, you know, use it.  Your XRP is yours to use as you see fit.   Ripple are using their XRP for their business model.  You can use your XRP for your business.  It's a publicly traded asset.  Oil companies use oil as an asset. You can use oil too for your car. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Just now, FreedomGundam said:

I want to ask some question.

If Ripple wins in the first court that says XRP is not security. Is that means the automatically win in second and third case?

and if they loose, are they automatically lost in second and third case? 

 

Or they can win first and lost in second case and win again in third case?

What I noticed was that Ripple made a request to move the first case to a federal court as the subject matter involved individuals and companies that resided in other states as well. I guess the idea is to get a verdict from a higher level federal court and settle the matter once and for all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...