'XRP is NOT a security’ - Ripple defends token after price collapse fears

[Guest]

https://www.express.co.uk/finance/city/993459/Bitcoin-price-ripple-cryptocurrency-ethereum-BTC-to-USD-XRP-news

 

Quote

RIPPLE has hit back at speculation that the XRP token could be classified as a security in the US following fears that the decision could spur a “big dip in its market value.”

 

[0083041]

Go away Jed.

[Capone]

Enough fud dude, get out.

[3Tom]

If XRP is a security it would make me a Share Hodler!

[n2it]

Article is titled "'XRP is NOT a security’ - Ripple defends token after price collapse fears".

TL:DR: Writing Grade: D

Of course Ripple says it's not a security, based on "... the standards for what a security is based on the history of court law.”

Then multiple bit-players (some of whom are launching their own ICOs) speculate on the effect on XRP of a security classification.

What bothers me most about the article is *all* the ICO touting wonks have a doomsday scenario for XRP getting classified as a security and none of them address RIpple's argument that XRP is not a security in the first place. They say nothing about the fundamental issues. Or they did, but the reporter left it out.

In addition, independent sources have sided with Ripple's interpretation of the situation, but none of those were mentioned in the article.

I did like the quote (from an unidentified Ripple representative. ? WTF): "Everyone is free to say what they want or pursue their own agenda in the media, but ultimately the facts around XRP will win out over uninformed speculation"

[enrique11]

Of course Ripple is going to say it's not a security.

[enrique11]

XRP isn't a traditional asset.

To try to figure out if XRP is a security it's best to look at the most recent guidance given by the SEC for cryptos which was given by Hinman on Jun 14: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJyRATEXpMQ

Some questions to ask:

     Why did the SEC give the OK to ETH, but not to XRP? 

     Was it due to the SEC not being sure about XRP yet?

     Was it due to pending court cases?

     Was it due to the SEC being sure about XRP, but giving them the opportunity to comply with time by evolving?

      Was it due to other reason(s) not stated above?

     Can we deduce definitively from the differences between ETH, XRP whether or not XRP is a security?

The SEC realizes the importance of not coming down heavy regulation wise on the US crypto space at this early stage as it could cause an offshore exodus of American companies as well as cause the U.S. to fall behind in this space, possibly causing long-term damage to the United State's standing globally.

I'm inclined to believe that the SEC won't screw around with XRP even if they deem it a security because of how Ripple has used it, even if the SEC hasn't declared it publicly because it might have a cascading effect of lawsuits that target similar cryptos - the U.S. is very litigious-happy (around 60% to 70% of the world's lawyers live and work in the US!).   This will basically put a significant chill on the crypto space in the US in my opinion for some time, giving other countries an opportunity to pass us by, but what about the courts, do they understand the gravity of the situation? - will the SEC give the courts guidance in this respect?  Do the courts care?  Will having the best legal defense make a difference here? 

Edited July 25, 2018 by enrique11