A former SEC attorney warns against the celebration over the recent court ruling in the Ripple case, suggesting that an appeal could potentially result in a reversal. The ruling categorizes Ripple’s securities offerings into three types and determines the legal implications for Ripple and its investors. The court ruled that Ripple’s sale of XRP to sophisticated individuals and entities violated securities laws, but deemed XRP to be a non-security in programmatic sales once it was sold anonymously to exchanges. The court also rejected Ripple’s attempt to introduce a new test and challenged its argument regarding the difference between “investment of money” and “merely payment of money.” The ruling grants SEC protection and remedies to institutional investors but leaves retail investors without such protections, which the former SEC attorney finds concerning. The distinction the court makes between tokens awarded to employees and third parties is also criticized, along with the court’s refusal to consider employee and third-party distributions as securities. The attorney highlights that appeals and future cases could lead to different interpretations and outcomes, emphasizing the complexity of crypto-related legal matters.
AI Sentiment: Neutral
