The Ripple CTO David Schwartz Recently Confirmed That Ripple Owes No Obligation to Hold XRP

input: The Ripple CTO David Schwartz recently confirmed that Ripple owes no obligation to hold XRP, blaming this idea on XRP security misrepresentation.

Ripple CTO David Schwartz recently confirmed that the company owes no obligation to hold XRP, blaming this idea on those misrepresenting XRP security.

His comments came in response to an ongoing discussion about Ripple’s role in XRP’s distribution and its responsibilities toward token holders. For context, Bitcoin advocate and XRP critic, Pierre Rochard, argued that Ripple has no obligation to ensure XRP holders benefit from its actions. He asserted that the company is free to sell its large XRP holdings, even if it negatively impacts retail investors. According to him, this is what makes XRP a non-security.

Ripple Has No Obligation to HODL Its XRP Bag

Interestingly, Schwartz agreed, emphasizing that Ripple, like any other business, operates in its own best interest. He compared XRP ownership to possessing early artwork from an emerging artist.

While investors might hope the artist continues to create value that benefits their holdings, there is no obligation for them to do so. He stressed that neither Ripple nor any company should be expected to act against its own interests to serve investors.

Amid this disclosure, the Ripple CTO also pointed out that Ripple has been an established player in the industry for nearly 14 years. The company holds more XRP than it could feasibly liquidate in a short timeframe. Notably, this alleviates fears that it could dump all its holdings in the short-term.

Also, Schwartz dismissed the idea that Ripple could be the only major crypto company to succeed, likening the notion to expecting Google to be the sole winner in the internet industry.

Notably, his comments echo Ripple’s defense in its ongoing legal battle with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which began in December 2020. For context, the SEC alleged that Ripple had an obligation to ensure XRP holders observed gains on their holdings, a theory that the firm has rebuffed.

XRP Not a Security

Following Schwartz’s latest remarks, a prominent Ripple critic known as “ScamDaddy” shared a screenshot of the conversation, questioning why anyone would be surprised by Ripple prioritizing its business goals, implying that this has always been clear.

Schwartz responded by suggesting that most of the confusion about Ripple’s role in XRP’s ecosystem stems from those pushing the narrative that XRP is a security. He implied that this group has deliberately misrepresented the relationship between Ripple and XRP.

“It’s mostly the ‘XRP is a security’ crowd that deliberately created confusion about the relationship between Ripple and XRP,” the Ripple executive said in a post on X.

Notably, further discussion arose when XRPL validator Vet pointed out that individuals who believe Ripple owes XRP holders an obligation to HODL are also those claiming that Ripple was responsible for issuing XRP.

In response, “ScamDaddy” acknowledged that the term “issued” is widely debated but maintained that Ripple’s founders created both the XRP Ledger and the token, later distributing it.

However, Vet countered this, clarifying that the XRP Ledger existed before Ripple as a company. He acknowledged that there was an overlap between the individuals who developed the technology and those who later established Ripple, but he stressed that the two entities were not synonymous.