Thread by @Arturo_P_A

Just finished reading the SEC v. Ripple Complaint — Most of the allegations in re. XRP being a security are built around the false idea that investors bought an asset that had no 'use' beyond speculative purposes.

This is exactly where their whole case cracks up.

1/

Ripple has to properly document and demonstrate all the 'uses' made available by the XRPL since the beginning of times. Some of them include:

- Immediate and cheap peer-to-peer transfers (everyone could be its own ODL since XRPL was first launched).

2/

- Every XRP investor has had access to a fully functional decentralized exchange since the very beginning, being able to use XRP to trade against a variety of IOUs.

- XRP has been a very useful instrument for payments since it came into existence.

3/

- Also, XRP investors have been able to employ wealth management strategies through the utilization of diverse XRPL features, such as escrows.

- Later on, other non-Ripple dependant 'uses' were brought by other companies such as Coil, amongst many others.

4/

- Additional 'uses' appeared through the years, including the ability to loan and/or stake XRP and obtain yields (including the possibility to borrow XRP), as well as the ability to make online payments through payment aggregators.

5/

Truth is that, since the creation of XRP, every XRP holder has had the immediate possibility to 'use' the asset for a variety of things. In fact, speculation is something that came to XRP after the asset was already useful for many other purposes.

6/

As a matter of fact, speculation as a self-maintained 'use' didn't appear until XRP was integrated with a variety of exchanges and deep markets were built around the digital asset. Even before that happened, XRP was already available to support many uses through the XRPL.

7/

I have personally used XRP to make international payments and international transfers without using any intermediaries whatsoever. Let alone Ripple's ODL. — This is something the SEC deliberately failed to acknowledge in order to be able to sustain their allegations.

8/

The SEC's allegations are trying to ascertain that, beyond speculation and Ripple's "subsidized ODL", there's nothing XRP buyers can do with XRP, hence why XRP investors rely solely in the efforts of Ripple. – This is wrong in many different levels, as argued above.

9/

For these reasons, I believe there are strong arguments that could give Ripple a good case against the SEC. Remember that the complaint filed by the SEC is by no means final, and that the final verdict will come from the courts.

10/10

Bonus tweet:

If you want XRP to continue thriving as the fully independent digital asset it is, *now* is the right time to subscribe for @coil, pay for the @XummWallet Pro version, use the tools built by @TowoLabs, run your own validators... You get the idea.

I didn't expect this thread to be shared this much, so here's a brief disclaimer for added sanity:

I'm not a US law expert. My opinions are not legal advice and are only based on my understanding of the Complaint. They are also not representative of the opinions of my employer.