L'alderoty de Clo Stuart de Ripple a déclaré que le cas de la SEC contre XRP fait partie d'une «guerre contre la crypto»

L'affaire, qui a commencé en 2020, se concentre sur les allégations selon lesquelles Ripple Labs n'a pas enregistré son jeton XRP en tant que sécurité avec la SEC.

Cryptocurrency company Ripple is facing an ongoing legal battle with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) over allegations that it failed to register its XRP token as a security with the agency. The case, which began in 2020, has drawn attention within the crypto industry, and recently, Ripple's Chief Legal Officer (CLO) Stuart Alderoty shared his thoughts on recent regulatory shifts on the case.

La société de crypto-monnaie Ripple est confrontée à une bataille juridique en cours avec la Commission américaine des Securities and Exchange (SEC) concernant les allégations selon lesquelles elle n'a pas enregistré son jeton XRP en tant que garantie avec l'agence. L'affaire, qui a commencé en 2020, a attiré l'attention au sein de l'industrie de la cryptographie, et récemment, le directeur juridique en chef de Ripple (CLO) Stuart Alderoty a partagé ses réflexions sur les changements réglementaires récents sur l'affaire.

In an interview with CNBC, when asked about the latest developments in the case, Alderoty highlighted that Ripple was not accused of fraud, market manipulation, or consumer harm. In fact, he pointed out that the SEC has not been able to identify any specific victims of the alleged wrongdoing or any evidence of financial loss. Instead, the lawsuit largely stems from Ripple's alleged failure to register with the SEC, despite the fact that there was no clear mechanism in place for crypto companies to do so at the time.

Dans une interview avec CNBC, interrogé sur les derniers développements dans l'affaire, Alderoty a souligné que Ripple n'était pas accusé de fraude, de manipulation du marché ou de dommages aux consommateurs. En fait, il a souligné que la SEC n'a pas été en mesure d'identifier les victimes spécifiques de l'acte répréhensible présumé ou de toute preuve de perte financière. Au lieu de cela, le procès découle en grande partie de l'absence présumée de Ripple à s'inscrire auprès de la SEC, malgré le fait qu'il n'y avait aucun mécanisme clair en place pour que les entreprises cryptographiques le fassent à l'époque.

According to Alderoty, the case is part of a broader "war on crypto," a regulatory approach under the previous administration that sought to stifle the growth of the cryptocurrency industry through aggressive enforcement actions. He mentioned that Ripple has spent over $150 million defending itself in this case over the course of four years.

According to Alderoty, the case is part of a broader "war on crypto," a regulatory approach under the previous administration that sought to stifle the growth of the cryptocurrency industry through aggressive enforcement actions. Il a mentionné que Ripple a dépensé plus de 150 millions de dollars à se défendre dans ce cas au cours de quatre ans.

Following the shift in power, the SEC's stance has begun to change. In the final days of the Trump administration, the SEC filed an appeal in the case, submitting their opening brief just five days before the inauguration. However, with the anticipated confirmation of Paul Atkins as the new SEC chair, Alderoty hopes that the new leadership will take a more measured approach and reconsider the merit of such lawsuits.

Après le changement de pouvoir, la position de la SEC a commencé à changer. In the final days of the Trump administration, the SEC filed an appeal in the case, submitting their opening brief just five days before the inauguration. However, with the anticipated confirmation of Paul Atkins as the new SEC chair, Alderoty hopes that the new leadership will take a more measured approach and reconsider the merit of such lawsuits.

Meanwhile, Ripple's legal team is still preparing to file a responsive brief in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. However, Alderoty views the ongoing case as background noise in the grander scheme of Ripple's strategy. He also expressed his belief that continuing with these lawsuits, particularly those that involve “non-fraud, victimless crime” allegations, is a waste of taxpayer money and regulatory resources.

Pendant ce temps, l'équipe juridique de Ripple se prépare toujours à déposer un mémoire réactif à la deuxième Circuit Court of Appeals. Cependant, l'alderoty considère le cas en cours comme un bruit de fond dans le schéma le plus grand de la stratégie de Ripple. He also expressed his belief that continuing with these lawsuits, particularly those that involve “non-fraud, victimless crime” allegations, is a waste of taxpayer money and regulatory resources.