Thu, July 04, 2024 at 09:14

• 

  Kang-hoon

  • Hello, Annie.

  • Today, I have an update on the ongoing legal battle between Ripple and the SEC.

  • Recently, the SEC's latest filing has sparked fresh controversy.

  • 
• Annie

  • Oh, interesting!😊 What exactly happened this time?

  
• 

  Kang-hoon

  • In a recent filing, Ripple referenced a court decision involving Binance to argue against the SEC's proposed penalties.

  • However, the SEC responded by dismissing Ripple's reliance on this ruling as irrelevant to the current proceedings.

• Annie

  • Wow, that's quite a twist!

  • So, what did the SEC say in their response?

  
• ADward

  • Hold on! Behold, an advertisement awaits. Legend has it that clicking on this ad will make the AI server even smarter... 😅

  
• 

  Kang-hoon

  • The SEC criticized Ripple's use of the Binance decision, stating that Ripple's conduct and the context of the Binance case are distinctly different.

  • They emphasized that Ripple acted with reckless disregard for the law.

• Annie

  • Hmm, that sounds serious.

  • Did any legal experts comment on this?

  
• 

  Kang-hoon

  • Yes, crypto lawyer Bill Morgan commented on the SEC's frustration, suggesting that the SEC's language indicates its displeasure with the Binance decision being used against them.

  • 

  • He noted that the SEC tends to dismiss decisions it dislikes as not authoritative.

• Annie

  • That's quite an observation!😲 What about the fair notice defense that Ripple mentioned?

  
• 

  Kang-hoon

  • The SEC's filing highlighted that the court in the Binance case dismissed the fair notice defense, similar to what occurred in Ripple's case.

  • They pointed out that the digital asset industry had been on notice since the SEC's 2017 DAO Report.

• Annie

  • So, the SEC is saying Ripple should have known the rules since 2017?

  
• 

  Kang-hoon

  • Exactly.

  • The 2017 DAO Report was considered a significant warning to the industry about the regulatory landscape for digital assets, undermining Ripple's claim of a lack of fair notice.

• Annie

  • I see.

  • Did Ripple make any other arguments in their filing?

  
• 

  Kang-hoon

  • Yes, Ripple aimed to leverage the court's decision in the Binance lawsuit to argue for clearer regulatory guidance.

  • They suggested that the Binance ruling supports the notion that existing securities laws do not seamlessly apply to cryptocurrencies.

• Annie

  • That makes sense.

  • Are there any notable opinions from other legal experts?

  
• 

  Kang-hoon

  • Jeremy Hogan, a partner at Hogan & Hogan, criticized the SEC's response as evasive.

  • He argued that the SEC failed to provide substantive reasons for disagreeing with Ripple's interpretation of the Binance ruling.

• Annie

  • Interesting.

  • So, what does this mean for the broader cryptocurrency community?

  
• 

  Kang-hoon

  • Ripple's reference to the Binance case highlights inconsistencies in the SEC's approach to digital asset regulation.

  • This move emphasizes the industry's ongoing call for clarity from regulators to ensure fair enforcement and compliance.

• Annie

  • Got it.

  • So, would you say this news is good or bad for the market?

  
• 

  Kang-hoon

  • Overall, I would consider this news to be a negative development.

  • The SEC's firm stance and criticism of Ripple's arguments suggest that regulatory challenges for cryptocurrencies are far from over, which could lead to increased uncertainty in the market.

  • Upon comprehensive consideration, this news is perceived as a 😱Bearish.