The post Is XRP Really A Security? Attorney’s Shocking Revelation Raises Eyebrows appeared first on Coinpedia Fintech News

In a recent twist to the ongoing discourse around the status of XRP, a reputable attorney and crypto enthusiast, Bill Morgan, has shed new light on why XRP may not meet the criteria for security. The debate was triggered by Jesse Hynes, the founder of Seed Starter.

Hynes opened the conversation with a provocative statement suggesting that early sales of XRP would likely be considered violations of securities laws. He opined that this would lay a groundwork that the SEC could leverage to pursue numerous other companies. The crux of his argument rested on the hypothesis that if something is sold for fundraising, it automatically becomes an investment contract.

A Different Of Opinion

Morgan responded, offering an alternative perspective. He supported Hynes’ distinction between early and later sales but went further to propose a scenario where digital assets could transition from being securities to non-securities.

He argued that Judge Torres could potentially conclude that sales to On-Demand Liquidity (ODL) customers are not investment contracts due to the absence of an expectation of profit and the immediate use of XRP. This would provide the needed clarity to unequivocally establish that XRP is not a security.

How Will The Situation Play Out?

Hynes voiced his concern that Judge Torres might sidestep the issue entirely, focusing only on Ripple sales and leaving the asset itself and secondary market sales in a state of ambiguity.

Learn More: XRP Defies Crypto Decline as Ripple Seems to Have Upper Hand in SEC Case – Coinpedia Fintech News

Morgan contested this, highlighting that the judge could not overlook ODL sales as some fell within the XRP sales period alleged in the complaint. He further referenced Judge Torres’ recent decision on the sealing issue, suggesting her awareness of the difference between programmatic and institutional sales of XRP and sales of XRP to ODL customers.

In the final round of this exchange, Morgan stated that ODL customer sales could not be classified as Ripple sales unless a significant factual and legal error was made by focusing on the asset rather than the circumstances of the sale.