Securities and Exchange Commission (or (1) another governmental authority or (2) a governmental agency of similar stature and standing) to constitute a security on a current and going forward basis (and not, for the avoidance of doubt, a determination that XRP was a security in the past).“Lies like these, that inflict serious harms on our democracy, have been costless,” said Rachel Goodman, a lawyer with the group Protect Democracy who is representing the Georgia election workers along with plaintiffs in other libel claims against election conspiracists. “A ‘Securities Default’ means if XRP is determined on an official basis (including without limitation by settlement) by the U.S. And it would also be ammunition for the class action lawsuits it faces. For starters, it would lose its Series C investment based on the wording. While others such as Block.One, have made SEC settlements that amounted to a slap on the wrist, Ripple can’t really afford to settle. That’s because it has left the decision up to the courts and the judge considered that as asking rather than answering the question of whether XRP is a security.īecause the action failed on this point, the need to protect cash balances falls away. Judge Morgan Zurn ruled that the current SEC enforcement action lacks the finality implied by the word ‘determined’. The ruling hinged on the contract wording, which required it to be ‘determined’ that XRP is a security (full wording below). Ripple’s position is that – based on the contract’s wording – XRP is not a security. Tetragon is concerned that Ripple could use free cash to buy XRP and wants to make sure the free cash is available to pay them back. On Friday, Ripple announced a victory that denied Tetragon a preliminary injunction.Ī clause in the investment agreement gives the option to Tetragon to clawback the investment if XRP is deemed a security going forward. Meanwhile, apart from the SEC litigation, Ripple is also battling with Tetragon, the lead investor in Ripple’s $200 million Series A, which is asking for its money back. We still believe in the promise of digital assets and blockchain technology to change the status quo in global payments for the benefit of billions of consumers around the world.” Ripple’s shareholder battle “We are both committed to revisiting our relationship in the future. “Together, we processed billions of dollars through RippleNet and On-Demand Liquidity (ODL),” said Ripple in a statement. The Moneygram lawsuit alleges that the company should have been aware that if XRP was found to be a security it would impact Moneygram’s bottom line because it would lose the market development fees. Ripple and Moneygram did a deal in 2019 in which Ripple agreed to make $50 million of XRP available to Moneygram in exchange for an equity interest. Last week Moneygram itself was the subject of a class-action lawsuit relating to its use of XRP. The underlying messaging solution RippleNet, that several banks use does not use XRP. ODL uses XRP for transfers enabling foreign currency transactions and cross-border payments. This follows the SEC’s December lawsuit against Ripple alleging XRP is a security. A couple of weeks ago, the money transfer company said it stopped using Ripple’s On Demand Liquidity (ODL) solution for the four currencies where it was active. Yesterday Ripple announced its “current” partnership with Moneygram was ending by mutual agreement.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |