Two leading lawyers discuss SEC case and rip Ripples's arguments to shreds

[xerxesramesepolybius]

https://unchainedpodcast.com/the-secs-lawsuit-against-ripple-and-2-execs-what-you-need-to-know/

Stephen Palley, partner at Anderson Kill. and Gabriel Shapiro, partner at BSV Law, discuss the SEC’s lawsuit against Ripple and two executives, Chris Larsen and Bard Garlinghouse. In this episode, they explain:

what was so “egregious” that the SEC went after two executives, Chris Larsen and Brad Garlinghouse, were charged 

why their sales showed an information asymmetry, and why that matters

why the complaint comes close to being a fraud case, but why the SEC didn’t charge them with fraud

why the idea that XRP is a currency and therefore cannot be a security will likely not fly

why it’s unlikely the case will go to the Supreme Court

the SEC’s case for why XRP is a security, and Ripple’s role in it

how even on a technical level, the XRP network is centralized

how strong the SEC’s case is against Larsen and Garlinghouse

Stephen’s and Gabriel’s predictions on how the lawsuit will play out

how this will likely impact XRP investors

whether or not Ripple could become an SEC-reporting company and XRP a security

what happened with Ripple’s lead investor in its most recent fundraising round

whether or not the SEC might go after exchanges or other players who made money off XRP or collaborated with Ripple around XRP trading

what this means for Coinbase, in particular, because it’s going public later this year

what Ripple’s defense, in its summarized Wells submission, was 

how this case compares to some of the other big SEC/crypto securities cases, Kik/Kin and Telegram

whether there might ever be a digital token that is determined to be a security for specific transactions but not others

what the wider implications of the case are for the rest of the crypto industry 

[panmores]

Then these lawyers are basically confirming what moderator Laura Shin knew already in 2018.

 

[xerxesramesepolybius]

12 minutes ago, panmores said:

Then these lawyers are basically confirming what moderator Laura Shin knew already in 2018.

 

That's what the MP said in the parliamentary committee in May 2018

"Stewart Hosie: We will get back to some of that in a moment, but the point that was made earlier, Mr Zagone, is that if people buy XRP—a financial asset—from Ripple Labs, it does not entitle them to an ownership stake, there is no right to be converted back into conventional currencies and it does not pay any return. It also seemingly has no purpose. Is that simply to avoid XRP looking like a security or an equity, and to avoid the necessary regulation?"

 

http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/treasury-committee/digital-currencies/oral/82323.html

[princesultan]

2 “leading lawyers” discuss SEC case against ripple?

one of them looked like a bum with a crumpled shirt. And after googling, he’s one of 3 partners in a 4 person firm.

ya... I’m not listening to that guy for even a second. 

and we all know Laura shin...

im all for listening to both sides and being critical of ripple, but after listening to 8 min of this junk podcast, I could tell that there is literally nothing of interest in it for me to learn about. 

pass!

[Julian_Williams]

Laura Shin comes across as very anti XRP, almost laughing about the situation XRP holders find themselves in, and the lawyers do too.  They seem to ignore that XRP does have a use case and with FLR that use case is even more solid and accepted in 95% of the world that is not governed by US SEC jurisdiction.  So I found their discussion almost pedestrian in its take on the case.  Maybe US law courts really are that banal?

Having said that this video very much demonstrates how damaging the egregious behaviour of BG and CL is to the public's perception Ripple's reputation and chances of reaching a settlement with SEC.   

They think the case will go on for a year or more. I do not think Gensler wants this this case on their books for another year, dominating his opportunities to move SEC forward regulatory clarity in a more positive manner.  There is a good incentive for both sides to meet somewhere in the middle, hopefully with the management of Ripple put straight and the sale of the XRP tokens sold under tighter controls.  

Edited January 26, 2021 by Julian_Williams

[princesultan]

5 minutes ago, Julian_Williams said:

Laura Shin comes across as very anti XRP, almost laughing about the situation XRP holders find themselves in, and the lawyers do too.  They seem to ignore that XRP does have a use case and with FLR that use case is even more solid and accepted in 95% of the world that is not governed by US SEC jurisdiction.  So I found their discussion almost pedestrian in its take on the case.  Maybe US law courts really are that banal?

Having said that this video very much demonstrates how damaging the egregious behaviour of BG and CL is to the public's perception Ripple's reputation and chances of reaching a settlement with SEC.   

They think the case will go on for a year or more. I think SEC do not want this case on their books for another year which is a good incentive for both sides to meet somewhere in the middle, hopefully with the management of Ripple put straight and the sale of the XRP tokens sold under tighter controls.  

Agree. The entire issue here is the behaviour of the CEOs which is a terrible sign. 

[HAL1000]

Other countries already ruled it not a security - but a couple of lawyers they know better!

[Duke67]

@xerxesramesepolybius you call this jerk a leading lawyer ???

Steven Palley is deep balls in Bitcoin because his brain can't understand anything beyond that.

[Duke67]

This is who represent Ripple against the SEC:

 

[SquaryBone]

6 hours ago, HAL1000 said:

Other countries already ruled it not a security - but a couple of lawyers they know better!

Do these countries are part of the SEC or regulate US fintech, ...?

[SquaryBone]

45 minutes ago, Duke67 said:

This is who represent Ripple against the SEC:

 

It means less than you think. Yes he knows what the SEC does and how they do it. He'll defend Ripple for sure. That doesn't mean the court and the SEC itself will think Ripple's way.

I have to say this seem to just confirm that they knew this was an issue already for a long long long time and that's why they hired ex-SEC, ... to try to get out of this mess. All BG can do is say: 'we'll be on the right side of history' and hope and pray it goes his way.

[macropolo]

The two things I found strange about this interview was the off-hand dismissal of Chinese mining pool centralization, with Laura Shin dismissing it as a non-issue born from the desperate floundering of Ripple executives and the fact that neither of these experienced litigators seemed to know that the SEC had requested a trial by jury.  

[XRPage]

20 minutes ago, macropolo said:

off-hand dismissal of Chinese mining pool centralization

Brad, is that you? Either it is you or someone who gets paid by him. Wtf is wrong with you people??? 

Edited January 26, 2021 by XRPage

[XRPage]

1 hour ago, Duke67 said:

This is who represent Ripple against the SEC

Most lawyers are mercenaries. They will defend whoever pays more, aka Ripple

[XRPage]

Thank you @karlosfor the warning point. Are there warning points for excesive and dangerous shilling too? That would have saved many from heavy bags... Censhorship in an open blockchain forum is not what we need

Edited January 26, 2021 by XRPage