Lawyer James K. Filan explained the SEC’s argument.
Lawyer James K. Filan on twitter explained the SEC’s argument. He noted:
Here’s the SEC’s argument, as I interpret it. «We aren’t saying XRP is a security per se. What we are saying is that any purchase of XRP, as a matter of economic reality, is an investment in a common enterprise with other XRP holders and with Ripple. Whether it’s through horizontal commonality or strict vertical commonality, it is an investment in a common enterprise with other XRP holders and with Ripple. So while XRP may not be a security per se, there’s no other possible way to offer or sell XRP EXCEPT as a security».
He also added:
And when you realize what the SEC is saying, no matter how it is framed, the judgment that the SEC wants is one that incorporates secondary sales. See screenshot below where the SEC uses the words «a purchase» and «all units».