剖析 XRP FUD：分析 XRP 的法律地位

面對圍繞 XRP 法律地位普遍存在的恐懼、不確定性和懷疑 (FUD)，律師 Bill Morgan 提出了全面的分析，消除了誤解並澄清了該代幣獨特的法律依據。摩根剖析了對 XRP 價格壓制的毫無根據的指控、托雷斯法官裁決的影響，以及最近涉及其他加密實體的法院判決對 XRP 地位的影響。

Dissecting the XRP FUD: Comprehensive Insights into the Legal Standing of XRP

剖析 XRP FUD：全面洞察 XRP 的法律地位

In an effort to dispel the pervasive fears, uncertainties, and doubts (FUD) that have plagued the XRP community and the broader crypto market, legal expert Bill Morgan has provided a comprehensive analysis of XRP's legal standing. Morgan's insights come in the wake of various court rulings that have cast a shadow over the crypto industry, with significant judgments against entities like Coinbase and Terraform Labs drawing particular attention.

為了消除困擾 XRP 社群和更廣泛的加密市場的普遍恐懼、不確定性和疑慮 (FUD)，法律專家 Bill Morgan 對 XRP 的法律地位進行了全面分析。摩根的見解是在各種法院判決之後發表的，這些判決給加密貨幣行業蒙上了陰影，其中針對 Coinbase 和 Terraform Labs 等實體的重大判決引起了特別關注。

Deconstructing the Narratives of FUD

解構 FUD 的敘述

Morgan delineates three primary narratives of FUD that have persistently troubled the XRP community:

摩根描述了持續困擾 XRP 社群的 FUD 的三個主要敘述：

1. Allegations of Price Suppression: The assertion that Ripple's distribution of XRP has artificially suppressed the token's price has been a persistent concern within the community.
2. Legal Clarity in Doubt: In the wake of Judge Torres' ruling in the SEC v. Ripple case, questions have arisen regarding the legal clarity of XRP and its potential implications for the token's future.
3. Stablecoin Dilution: Concerns have been raised that the introduction of a proposed stablecoin by Ripple could potentially dilute demand for XRP.

Addressing the Legal Clarity of XRP

價格壓制指控：有關 Ripple 分發 XRP 人為壓制代幣價格的說法一直是社區內持續關注的問題。法律清晰度 存疑：托雷斯法官在 SEC v. Ripple 案中做出裁決後，引發了一些疑問關於XRP 的法律清晰度及其對代幣未來的潛在影響的問題出現了。穩定幣稀釋：人們擔心Ripple 提出的穩定幣的引入可能會稀釋對XRP 的需求。解決 XRP 的法律清晰度

Morgan delves into the legal intricacies surrounding XRP, specifically addressing the question of its legal clarity. He argues against the notion that XRP lacks legal certainty, stating that "despite the court's clear finding that XRP itself is not a security, some continue to wrongly assert that certain sales could render the token a security." Morgan emphasizes that there is no legal precedent to support such an argument.

摩根深入研究了 XRP 的複雜法律問題，特別解決了其法律清晰度問題。他反對 XRP 缺乏法律確定性的觀點，並指出“儘管法院明確認定 XRP 本身不是證券，但一些人仍然錯誤地斷言某些銷售可能會使該代幣成為證券。”摩根強調，沒有法律先例支持這種論點。

Morgan specifically addresses the confusion stemming from recent judicial decisions. He contrasts the SEC's allegations against Coinbase and Solana with the case against Ripple, suggesting that misconceptions have arisen from the broader community's misinterpretation of these separate legal proceedings.

摩根特別解決了最近司法判決帶來的混亂。他將 SEC 對 Coinbase 和 Solana 的指控與針對 Ripple 的案件進行了對比，表明誤解是由於更廣泛的社區對這些單獨法律程序的誤解而產生的。

"The misunderstanding lies in conflating the nuances of different cases," Morgan elucidates. He meticulously rebuts the assertion that Judge Failla's decision against Coinbase has implications for XRP's status. Morgan highlights a critical quote from Judge Failla, emphasizing the importance of the context in which crypto-assets are sold and marketed: "Courts should look to what the offeror invites investors to reasonably understand and expect."

「誤解在於混淆了不同案例的細微差別，」摩根解釋道。他精心反駁了 Failla 法官針對 Coinbase 的裁決對 XRP 地位產生影響的說法。摩根強調了法伊拉法官的一句話，強調了加密資產出售和營銷背景的重要性：“法院應該考慮要約人邀請投資者合理理解和期望的內容。”

This point underlines a significant distinction Morgan draws between the promotional strategies employed by Ripple compared to those scrutinized in other cases. "Ripple's marketing efforts were notably more reserved, aimed at institutional buyers rather than the retail market," Morgan observes.

這一點強調了摩根在 Ripple 所採用的促銷策略與其他案例中審查的策略之間的顯著差異。摩根觀察到：“Ripple 的營銷力度明顯更為保守，針對的是機構買家而不是零售市場。”

This, according to him, was a pivotal factor in Judge Torres' decision, which found that the expectation of profits from others' efforts, a key criterion of the Howey test, did not apply to Ripple's programmatic sales of XRP.

據他說，這是托雷斯法官做出決定的關鍵因素，法官發現，從他人的努力中獲得利潤的預期（豪伊測試的關鍵標準）並不適用於 Ripple 的 XRP 程序化銷售。

Unique Legal Grounds

獨特的法律依據

Morgan further dissects the legal landscape, noting that each case in the crypto space hinges on its particular facts and circumstances. "The Ripple case, and indeed the legal clarity of XRP, stands on its own merits, distinct from the SEC's actions against other entities," Morgan asserts. He firmly reiterates that the SEC has not contested Judge Torres' ruling regarding XRP, which effectively negates the basis for any residual uncertainty about the classification.

摩根進一步剖析了法律格局，指出加密貨幣領域的每個案例都取決於其特定的事實和情況。摩根斷言：“Ripple 案以及 XRP 的法律清晰度都有其自身的優點，與 SEC 針對其他實體的行動不同。”他堅定地重申，SEC 並未對托雷斯法官關於 XRP 的裁決提出異議，這實際上否定了分類中任何剩餘不確定性的基礎。

Moreover, Morgan quotes directly from the legal proceedings to underscore the specificity of the Ripple case: "The SEC's inability to demonstrate that Ripple promoted XRP to retail purchasers is a testament to the unique circumstances underpinning the case. This is not merely opinion; it's a matter of legal fact."

此外，摩根直接引用了法律訴訟中的內容來強調 Ripple 案件的特殊性：「SEC 無法證明 Ripple 向散戶購買者推銷 XRP，這證明了該案的獨特情況。這不僅僅是意見；它是法律事實問題。”

Dispelling Misconceptions and Moving Forward

消除誤解並繼續前進

Morgan concludes his detailed commentary with a call to the community and the broader crypto industry to recognize the distinctiveness of each legal case within the sector. "To conflate the Ripple case with others is to misunderstand the legal landscape in which we operate," he states, urging for a more nuanced understanding of regulatory actions against crypto assets.

摩根在詳細評論的最後呼籲社區和更廣泛的加密行業認識到該行業內每個法律案件的獨特性。他表示：「將 Ripple 案件與其他案件混為一談是對我們營運所在法律環境的誤解。」他敦促人們對針對加密資產的監管行動有更細緻的了解。

"Legal clarity for XRP has been established, irrespective of ongoing or future cases against other tokens or entities. It's time to move beyond the FUD and focus on the path ahead," Morgan advises.

摩根建議：“無論當前或未來針對其他代幣或實體的案件如何，XRP 的法律明確性已經確立。現在是超越 FUD 並專注於未來道路的時候了。”

At press time, XRP traded at $0.59.

截至發稿時，XRP 交易價格為 0.59 美元。