Jeremy Hogan - Secondary market sales

[HAL1000]

The rest below is taken from above linked Twitter thread by JH...

The problem is that it is likely the Judge will not even address the issue - since it's not explicitly raised by the Plaintiff. And although you could argue that it's thereafter addressed by omission, would that be enough for the exchanges? We Don't Know. BUT, there's hope!

First, Ripple could obtain agreement from the SEC to include, or the Judge could approve language provided by Ripple in its proposed Final Judgment, that the judgment does not cover Secondary Sales. KIK Interactive got the SEC to allow the language below about continuing sales.

Second, the Judge could address the concerns raised by numerous Amici in regard to Secondary Sales (including those championed by XRP holders led by attorney Deaton). Apparently the Judge in the LBRY case has agreed to address Secondary Sales at some level. We'll see.

And Finally, the Judge could be forced (if Ripple loses) to address Secondary Sales at the "penalties" stage when a disgorgement Order would have to be drafted. Why? Because the Judge must review the distribution of "disgorged" profits for fairness (cont.)...

...and so the Court must DELINEATE who receives the funds taken from Ripple. It's at this point that Ripple can argue that only actual purchasers from it directly (and not "secondary" purchasers) should receive their "investment" back. This is required by the SEC v. Wang case.

The Court would likely agree because otherwise the disgorgement would be become so diluted (due to the large amounts of secondary sales) that any individual purchaser would receive pennies (or less!) on the dollar. And this is, in EFFECT, a ruling as to secondary sales.

Viola!

It's 3 a.m. and I'm suffering insomnia like always seems to happen to me on sad holidays (like Memorial Day....and Columbus Day). So I apologize if this makes no sense. Going to try and go back to sleep - good night!