U.Today - In the wake of the in the LBRY v. SEC case, legal experts have revealed their take on Twitter on what the implications might be for XRP, especially regarding secondary market sales.
Attorney observes in the final ruling that the judge did not touch on secondary sales or the Major Questions Doctrine; he only enjoined further violations and issued a penalty.
Hogan expressed his disappointment, saying the ruling was a "status quo" one. According to him, "No ruling on secondary market sales is a status quo ruling." He highlights uncertainty for XRP's relisting on Coinbase (NASDAQ:COIN) as the status quo remains. On the other hand, this does not imply that other exchanges will delist.
"I don't think Coinbase would relist, but I don't think other exchanges would delist either," Hogan said. He further expressed disappointment in the deference the judge shows to the SEC and his failure to understand the confusion in the marketplace.
In a screenshot of a part of the judgment ruling shared by Hogan, the judge highlighted that the SEC's position on the registration requirements is clear. It is a seeming contradiction of when the judge lamented his frustration in an earlier status conference on the SEC's refusal to give clarity to investors.
A part of the final ruling reads, "Under these circumstances, I find that the imposition of a maximum statutory amount for the first-tier penalty is appropriate. Especially since LBRY's misconduct continued after the SEC's position on the registration requirement became clear, its violation is more egregious than a simple unregistered offering."
LBRY case offered little market guidance
Hogan claims that the LBRY decision and the case in general offer little market guidance and have not benefited anyone, adding that it has hurt everyone involved and is merely another feather in the SEC's cap.Bill Morgan, a legal expert and XRP enthusiast, voiced displeasure about LBRY's final ruling, stating that the judge did not deal in his decisions with whether the LBC token is a security or about secondary market sales.
He says that in the Ripple case, Judge Torres outlines the issue as being whether the defendants offered to sell or sold as a security. The judge is quoted as saying that, specifically, the SEC alleges that the defendants sold XRP as an investment contract, which is a security defined under the securities act.