John Deaton reporting on how the LBR hearing went :)

[HAL1000]

Who's that, that's John Deaton he fights for the users of the token

 

THE SEC ARE IN RED

Edited January 31 by HAL1000

[HAL1000]

 

[mrhat75]

Hopefully this gets us settlement soon 

[HAL1000]

LOL - But I think it sums up the crypto industries general feelings...

Bill Hinman, Gary Gensler and J Clown all need to be investigated for gross misconduct and conflicts of interest in the crypto space.

[Julian_Williams]

I feel that this Court action by Deaton has changed the landscape. He placed a very simple case study in front of the judge, the judge forced SEC to respond and admit in Court the LBRY token used in this way was not a security (IE the oranges groves, not the oranges are the securities).  I do not see how Gensler can maintain that all tokens are securities, or that ODL is a security transaction.

Deaton points out that the burning of .0005 XRP on XRPL  could still be represented as a security.  But SEC were set up to protect investors, how is it protecting investors to call the burning a security?

[HAL1000]

 

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, Julian_Williams said:

I feel that this Court action by Deaton has changed the landscape. He placed a very simple case study in front of the judge, the judge forced SEC to respond and admit in Court the LBRY token used in this way was not a security (IE the oranges groves, not the oranges are the securities).  I do not see how Gensler can maintain that all tokens are securities, or that ODL is a security transaction.

Deaton points out that the burning of .0005 XRP on XRPL  could still be represented as a security.  But SEC were set up to protect investors, how is it protecting investors to call the burning a security?

This is good progress, but note that Gensler could still be right that most tokens are likely securities.

Whenever there is a "yield" or a "reward" involved, things get very tricky. It's even worse with a network (L1, L2, or DeFi) that involves voting or staking because then it's easier to make the argument for a "common enterprise". Not saying I necessarily agree, just that it is easier to make the argument. The only thing that would save those networks is if the courts or Congress agree to conditions like these:

• If there is a free airdrop and then participants choose to spend extra fiat to acquire those tokens, it is not an investment of money even if there is a central promoter. 
• Rewards are not considered "profits" if the distribution is in speculative assets like crypto tokens.

If either of these are not agreed upon, most crypto will be considered securities. 

Btw, ODL would be a security transaction if XRP the token itself is deemed a security. But I don't think Gensler ever suggested that. In fact I vaguely remember that he said XRP is a situation where it is both used for consumptive purposes and also has been sold as an investment contract (by Ripple, in his opinion)

[HAL1000]

He admitted he was frustrated with the SEC and pled with them to give clarity but he said they won’t and it’s not his job to make SEC policy and do the SEC’s job. I responded that I was there not asking him to do the SEC’s job and provide crypto clarity but I was there pleading with him to provide clarity regarding his ruling because it was being interpreted as including secondary sales.

He then said that he would make it very clear that his order does not include secondary sales. He then forced the SEC to agree that they weren’t pushing for that. The judge then gave an example to make it clear. He said LBRY sold directly to Flipside Crypto who placed the LBC in a cold wallet. The judge said his order covers that sale but not when Flipside Crypto sells to someone thereafter.

I argued how the underlying asset is never considered the security and that there isn’t a single case in 76 years finding otherwise and that Judge Castel in Telegram clarified that the Gram was NOT the security, Hinman’s speech states the token itself is never the security, etc. At the end of the hearing he summed up what he was going to do and after he addressed the parties he looked over to me and said “And Amici, I will make it very clear that my order does not cover secondary sales and that should satisfy you” or words-to-that-effect...

 

[Julian_Williams]

18 minutes ago, HAL1000 said:

He admitted he was frustrated with the SEC and pled with them to give clarity but he said they won’t and it’s not his job to make SEC policy and do the SEC’s job. I responded that I was there not asking him to do the SEC’s job and provide crypto clarity but I was there pleading with him to provide clarity regarding his ruling because it was being interpreted as including secondary sales.

He then said that he would make it very clear that his order does not include secondary sales. He then forced the SEC to agree that they weren’t pushing for that. The judge then gave an example to make it clear. He said LBRY sold directly to Flipside Crypto who placed the LBC in a cold wallet. The judge said his order covers that sale but not when Flipside Crypto sells to someone thereafter.

I argued how the underlying asset is never considered the security and that there isn’t a single case in 76 years finding otherwise and that Judge Castel in Telegram clarified that the Gram was NOT the security, Hinman’s speech states the token itself is never the security, etc. At the end of the hearing he summed up what he was going to do and after he addressed the parties he looked over to me and said “And Amici, I will make it very clear that my order does not cover secondary sales and that should satisfy you” or words-to-that-effect...

 

Gensler's SEC have this habit of using the good will of the judge towards a Gov institution to nudge the Court into making judgements that afterwards hurt the public and protect Gensler's friends.  I think eventually the judges see what is happening and resent being used in this way.

[HAL1000]

16 minutes ago, Julian_Williams said:

Gensler's SEC have this habit of using the good will of the judge towards a Gov institution to nudge the Court into making judgements that afterwards hurt the public and protect Gensler's friends.  I think eventually the judges see what is happening and resent being used in this way.

I think social media is changing the game for the powers that be. THEY are no longer able to control the narrative of whatever BS they used to feed the little people. Heroes like John Deaton are finding themselves backed by legions, this is a new type of war that THEY and their Jim Cramer type friends are losing in the narrative sense. THEIR lying, cheating, scheming ways are for the first time on public display for all truth seekers to see.

Social media is US, mainstream media is THEM and WE out number THEM in the millions, the truth will out.

Edited January 31 by HAL1000

[Julian_Williams]

I agree.  John Deaton has invented decentralised justice, and it seems to work

 

But it is also worth realising that Deaton is a very focused lawyer who simplifies the key arguments very effectively and present them very well. These are not common skills amongst lawyers, and it is a big reason he has been so successful

Edited January 31 by Julian_Williams