Judge Analisa Torres’ greatly anticipated Order in the SEC’s lawsuit against Ripple is a split decision. The Order basically finds that Ripple’s digital token XRP is a security when sold privately to individuals and institutional investors pursuant to purchase agreements, but is not a security when sold on a digital asset exchange where sellers don’t know who’s buying and buyers don’t know who’s selling.[1] Although the Order should be perceived as at least a partial victory for crypto, it perversely upends a fundamental tenet of the securities laws which is that the laws are designed to protect those who cannot fend for themselves. Moreover, the finding that digital tokens sold anonymously on digital asset exchanges is not a security also seems to contradict the “fraud on the market” theory of securities liability.Continue Reading Parting the Crypto Sea: Ripple’s XRP Ruled to be a Security When Sold to Private Investors, But Not When Sold on an Exchange
completed its initial public offering of digital tokens, raising approximately $85 million in the IPO from over 7,200 institutional and retail investors. The INX IPO is the first SEC registered offering of digital tokens, and represents another major milestone for blockchain asset
Ripple Labs, Inc. and two of its executives alleging they offered and sold over $1.38 billion of digital asset XRP without registration or exemption in violation of Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933, seeking disgorgement of ill-gotten gains. Ripple filed an
York entered a 
speech on securities regulation. But SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce did just that in a February 6, 2020 
developer Block.one had agreed to pay a $24 million fine to settle charges that it had engaged in an unregistered offering of securities in violation of Section 5 of the Securities Act. The announcement set off a mini-firestorm of criticism in the crypto
declared 
On
finding the issuance of “free” tokens through a related bounty program in exchange for online promotional services constituted an