• LBRY Inc recently announced that it would be closing shop after losing its case against the SEC.
• The court ruled that the company violated Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933 when issuing its native cryptocurrency token.
• Now, lawyers are debating whether Ripple could face a similar fate in its own clash with the SEC over XRP tokens.
Closing Shop: LBRY’s Final Judgment
LBRY Inc – the firm responsible for developing the LBRY Protocol – recently announced that it will be closing shop following a final judgment in their case against the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The judge sided with the Commission and ruled that LBRY violated Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933 when issuing its native cryptocurrency token.
Ripple Case vs SEC
This ruling has led to lawyers debating whether or not Ripple could share a similar faith as they are amidst a massive clash with the SEC over whether or not they facilitated the sale of unregistered securities when issuing their XRP token.
Comments From Lawyer Bill Hughes
Commenting on this was Bill Hughes, a lawyer at Consensus, who said: “Oooof LBRY might be thinking it missed a real important argument. Don’t be too rough with your counsel for missing this opp”
This may indicate that there may have been some missed opportunities in terms of legal arguments which could have possibly helped LBRY win their case against the SEC.
SEC’s Authority Over Crypto Assets
This case serves as an example of how powerful and far-reaching the authority of US regulators can be when it comes to crypto assets and their issuance and trading activities within US borders. Many other digital asset companies have been issued similar warnings by US authorities regarding potential violations of existing securities laws.
In conclusion, this ruling highlights just how crucial is to ensure that crypto projects comply with existing regulations before launching any new tokens or services within US jurisdiction in order to avoid running into any unnecessary legal issues down line