Key Points:
– Attorney and pro-XRP advocate John Deaton emphasizes the importance of Judge Torres addressing the underlying asset and secondary market sales in her ruling.
– Deaton draws parallels to the Telegram case, highlighting the differences in circumstances between Telegram and Ripple.
– He mentions that Gram, the digital asset in the Telegram case, did not fulfill the criteria set forth in the SEC Framework for Digital Assets.
– Deaton believes that Judge Torres must address these issues in her ruling, as it would be considered a significant act of judicial activism to ignore the SEC’s theory.
– He points out that XRP, unlike Gram, was referred to as a “virtual currency” and was utilized by businesses like MoneyGram in a specific manner.
Hot Take:
According to John Deaton, it is crucial for Judge Torres to address the underlying asset and secondary market sales in her ruling on the Ripple case. He argues that ignoring these issues would be an act of judicial activism and disregarding the SEC’s theory. Drawing comparisons to the Telegram case, Deaton highlights the differences between the two and emphasizes the unique circumstances surrounding XRP.
Continue reading on Coinpedia.org
By
By
By
By
By