In a recent filing, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) opposed Ripple\u2019s motion to seal and redact evidence related to remedies briefing and documents. Moreover, the SEC urged the court to order the disclosure of Ripple\u2019s business details from the agency\u2019s March 22 remedies briefing.<\/p>\n
However, Ripple had previously requested that financial reports, post-complaint XRP<\/a> institutional sales details, and other sensitive information remain confidential due to the high risks to the firm. Amid the chaos, Bill Morgan, a pro-XRP advocate, underscored that the SEC alredy knows that Ripple\u2019s On-demand Liquidity (ODL) sales aren\u2019t investment contracts.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Pro-XRP lawyer Bill Morgan shared a snapshot from the SEC\u2019s latest response. The snapshot highlighted, \u201cThe same is true for Ripple\u2019s aged securities offering and sales information. Ripple wants to hide the extent to which it offered XRP at discriminatory prices. But the period when Ripple was offering discounts goes back to 2014 and ended in December 2020.\u201d<\/p>\n It added, \u201cRipple has not shown how the discounts it offered four years ago or more would matter, particularly since Ripple seeks to avoid remedies by claiming it \u2018has changed the way it sells XRP and changed its contracts.’\u201d in addition, the SEC emphasized that Ripple\u2019s current contracts are not the ones under scrutiny.<\/p>\n The agency further added, \u201cIndeed, the contracts at issue are not ODL contracts\u2014the only type of Institutional Sales contracts Ripple claims it enters into today\u2026 none of Ripple\u2019s current contracts contain lockups. The redactions the SEC opposes thus do not reveal \u2018long-term business plans of any kind.’\u201d<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Morgan elaborated on the SEC\u2019s position, explaining, \u201cThe SEC clarifies that none of the sales to institutions with discounts were ODL contracts.\u201d He added, \u201cThe SEC would have reviewed the ODL contracts and observed that they do not have discounts or the features referred to in the summary judgment that made institutional buyer contracts to be investment contracts according to judge Torres.\u201d<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Furthermore, Morgan pointed out a key distinction in the nature of ODL contracts. He noted that the ODL contracts require customers to buy XRP<\/a> at market price and to use the tokens in ODL transactions. Moreover, he emphasized that these customers agree on not holding them as investments. Hence, he questioned why Judge Torres categorized these contracts similarly to other institutional agreements.<\/p>\n The lawyer speculated, \u201cIt remains a mystery why Judge Torres lumped them in with the other contracts with Institutions.\u201d In addition, the pro-XRP attorney noted that the SEC knows that its stance on the ODL sales wrong. He stated, \u201cI bet SEC knows the ODL contracts are not investment contracts.\u201d This ongoing legal battle between the SEC and Ripple highlights the complexities surrounding cryptocurrency regulation and the definitions of securities.<\/p>\n Also Read:\u00a0Ripple SEC Lawsuit: SEC Files Opposition to Sealing XRP Details, Here\u2019s Everything<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n On Monday, May 20, the U.S. SEC filed a response opposing part of Ripple\u2019s motion to seal and redact certain documents. The SEC argues that Ripple\u2019s attempt to \u201cconceal financial and securities sales information\u201d is unlawful, as the information is crucial for the remedies phase and public understanding of the penalties.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Whilst, Ripple seeks to redact details such as the amount of its current assets, recent sales figures, revenues and expenses, and discounts offered to institutional investors. However, the SEC contends that these details are essential for determining penalties, injunctive relief, disgorgement, and investor harm. They argue that Ripple<\/a> has not provided sufficient evidence that making this information public would cause significant harm.<\/p>\n Furthermore, the SEC states that the financial information in question is outdated and that some of it is already publicly available. The regulator also asserts that Ripple\u2019s reliance on previous court sealing approvals does not apply to the current situation. The SEC maintains that transparency is necessary for the court\u2019s decisions and public accountability.<\/p>\n Also Read:\u00a0XRP Lawsuit: Ripple Moves 50M XRP Ahead Major Deadline, What\u2019s Happening?<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u2713 Share:<\/p>\nSEC Mentions Ripple ODL Sales In Filing<\/h2>\n
Lawyer Explains SEC\u2019s Stance On ODL Sales<\/h2>\n
SEC Files Opposition Against Ripple<\/h2>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/452042cc86ff4d4cff7e64f282bd5358?s=200&d=mm&r=g\")