SEC vs Ripple Labs had a fun twist.
The judge said Hinman can be deposed as a function of the decision making process at the SEC being opaque.
This will 100% backfire on Ripple tho because getting into why XRP isn't like BTC or ETH.. is the case, itself
bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
The judge said Hinman can be deposed as a function of the decision making process at the SEC being opaque.
This will 100% backfire on Ripple tho because getting into why XRP isn't like BTC or ETH.. is the case, itself
bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
XRP derp lawyer: "Sir, how did you determine that BTC and ETH are not securities?"
Hinman: "Well, we studied the networks and you can mint your own tokens. All XRP on the market comes from a sale from Ripple."
XRP derp lawyer: "..."
Hinman: "Well, we studied the networks and you can mint your own tokens. All XRP on the market comes from a sale from Ripple."
XRP derp lawyer: "..."
XRP derp lawyer recovers: "But ETH was an ICO, was it not?"
Hinman: "Yes, but it ended 6 years ago. The ongoing XRP ICO is Ripple's only source of income."
XRP derp lawyer: "..."
Hinman: "Yes, but it ended 6 years ago. The ongoing XRP ICO is Ripple's only source of income."
XRP derp lawyer: "..."
XRP derp lawyer: "Clearly they sold an unregistered security. Why hasn't the SEC taken action?"
Hinman: "That company no longer exists."
XRP derp lawyer: "..."
Hinman: "That company no longer exists."
XRP derp lawyer: "..."
Those three points will force XRP to plead for settlement at any cost in order to survive, because once that testimony hits the record their corporate death is just about guaranteed.
This is NOT the same as ETH.
You can mine ETH. The ICO tokens are a minority of the supply.
You cannot mine XRP. The XRP supply on the market depends purely upon the seller. The iCO tokens are the entire supply.
You can mine ETH. The ICO tokens are a minority of the supply.
You cannot mine XRP. The XRP supply on the market depends purely upon the seller. The iCO tokens are the entire supply.
https://twitter.com/cisco_gdz/status/1418857383187595269?s=20
Y'all need an org chart because Clayton is where the buck stops.
That's the difference between "Chairman" and "Director".
There's nothing inconsistent between their statements.
That's the difference between "Chairman" and "Director".
There's nothing inconsistent between their statements.
https://twitter.com/cisco_gdz/status/1418857912991109126?s=20
Clayton was Hinman's boss.
🤷♂️
🤷♂️
No, you're flat wrong. I should know because I'm the one that proposed the term to congress of "blockchain commodity" which is was a term the SEC agreed was appropriate.
The permissionless ability to mint tokens is the key factor. Believe me or don't.
The permissionless ability to mint tokens is the key factor. Believe me or don't.
https://twitter.com/cisco_gdz/status/1418858888330424322?s=20
Understand that Clayton's statements in January 2018 threatened to make my entire career in crypto illegal.
I had a vested interest in splitting that hair very finely.
I had a vested interest in splitting that hair very finely.
The only reason I would like to see Ripple Labs destroyed is because of this lawsuit.
They aren't crypto. They piggy backed on the success and are now trying to pretend they are exactly the same.
Nobody thus far is fooled.
They aren't crypto. They piggy backed on the success and are now trying to pretend they are exactly the same.
Nobody thus far is fooled.
https://twitter.com/cisco_gdz/status/1418859474731810816?s=20
Asserting there is a difference between the technical and legal is a red herring, in that it is very specifically the operation of the technology which is the determining factor of legal classification.
They did so via enforcement precedent.
Permissionless minting of tokens isn't a sure thing, as the CabbageTech dev and BitConnect found out.
You can still fuck it up by asserting undue influence.
Permissionless minting of tokens isn't a sure thing, as the CabbageTech dev and BitConnect found out.
You can still fuck it up by asserting undue influence.
https://twitter.com/cisco_gdz/status/1418860219795492869?s=20
This has been a good breakdown of the key points, but one must also remember Ripple Labs were advised appropriately by three different, qualified law firms and willfully ignored all three because their business model would be destroyed.
Not only did a handful of lawyers tell them... but so did I.
No fucks were given, and that's why they are under sustained legal pressure.
No fucks were given, and that's why they are under sustained legal pressure.
It's also worth noting that corporate death will not be specifically mandated by the court, but the changes to the business model which will be demanded plus the disgorgement of any restitution and penalties will spell the end for Ripple Labs... and very well may end XRP.
XRPs DLT implementation is not as anti-fragile as a blockchain implementation and as a result requires constant maintenance and monitoring by Ripple Labs employees.
ETH raised $12M via their ICO, and there's reasons its virtually untouchable.
First and foremost was EthSuisse, the developer of ETH, issuer of the tokens, and executor of the sale dissolved when the genesis block was created.
It doesn't exist anymore.
First and foremost was EthSuisse, the developer of ETH, issuer of the tokens, and executor of the sale dissolved when the genesis block was created.
It doesn't exist anymore.
https://twitter.com/toastedavocado2/status/1418865149906145282?s=20
The legal framework around the pre-launch execution cost $1,000,000 of the $12,000,000 raised.
That's over 8% of the funds raised.
That's over 8% of the funds raised.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
