Hello this is Matt on the moon family Said Dan Channel what is on your screen Right now is possibly Ripple's final Legal response in the secv Ripple case Yes after two plus years this may Actually finally be it now you may Recall that a few weeks ago Ripple filed A supplemental Authority so that may be The final thing the final legal filing That they initiated but a few days ago The SEC also filed a supplemental Authority which I covered in great Detail and a ripple did have a chance to Respond and they took that chance that's What's on your screen right here so Unless anything pops up that would Result in Ripple or the SEC filing Additional supplemental Authority this Is literally the end of it on your Screen right here right now so we don't Know for sure but uh there's again a Couple factors that will be largely Determined upon that would be whether or Not again there's something that would Prompt either side note to file a Supplement Authority like a you know a Case of ending that might to be Pertinent to what's going on here so Basically a ruling from a separate judge Or of course judge Torres finally ruling On this damn case to end this this Circus but that would pretty much be it So I'm going to share with you just a Few comments on this and then I want to
SIGN UP FOR A FREE 7 DAY TRIALGET YOUR .CRYPTO DOMAIN AT UNSTOPPABLE DOMAINS
TRADE CRYPTO ON BINANCE HERE "LOW FEES"
Share with you and this is what I'll Spend mostly in this videos I want to Share with you perspective from Attorney John Deaton because what was covered Here in this what is possibly Ripple's Final legal response to this entire damn Case it all boils down to the fair Notice defense and you know John Reed Stark was a former SEC official recently Put out a tweet articulating obviously You know and I'm paraphrasing but Ripple's obviously wrong when it comes To the fair notice defense yada yada and John Deaton uh his perspective is Effectively no and here's why and then He tagged that SEC official in a very Long thread he tagged that guy twice and Said uh look you know to to State and Again I'm gonna I don't wanna put words In one's mouth so I'm paraphrasing here But I will show you Deaton's comments in Full context but he effectively said Look you really can't with a straight Face you know claim that there's no Merit to Ripple's arguments here as it Relates to Fair notice defense and he Really broke it down in the greatest Detail that I've ever seen on this Particular topic so before going further Though do you want to be clear I do not Have a legal or financial background of Any kind I'm not offering legal or Financial advice and you definitely Should not buy or sell anything because
Of anything I say or right I'm just an Enthusiast who enjoys making YouTube Videos about crypto related topics but Just as a hobby and just for fun all Right so to quickly get you caught up to Speed in case you missed the sec's Supplemental filing I'm not going to Fully break it down I have a video in Recent days where I did that all you Need to know to get you through this Video is that there was a case that Concluded days ago I think it was April 7th and the SEC it had to do with a fair Notice specifically and uh you know the SEC pointed out hey you know uh in in The SEC Ripple case Ripple citing the Upton case and then in this this case That went well for the SEC a separate Case I believe was in Massachusetts uh They also cited the updating case look At these similarities uh But even though that's the case that's Not actually what matters so Ripple Filed this response and Um again possibly their their final Legal response at all ever in this case And they noted yeah but there are a ton Of differences and in fact I would say That attorney Bill Morgan member of the Xrp community summed it up pretty well Uh he retweeted this filing uh from Attorney James K filon who always shares The latest legal update so shout out and Credit to attorney philand and attorney
Morgan wrote Thanks James Ripple reminding judge Torres the Upton Case in which the defendant's fair Noticed defense was allowed is binding Precedent but the recent case the SEC Relies on isn't and is totally different On the facts and evidence anyway right So not only is this case not binding so Uh judge Torres doesn't even have to Give a damn about it Um the facts and evidence is completely Different circumstances here and also uh Just to mention quickly here Attorney Fred rispoli member of the xrp community Warned that there's a possibility that This ruling or not ruling it's Completely wrong word the supplemental Authority being filed by the SEC That could have Resulted in a delay in the SEC Ripple Case could have caused judge tours to Not rule like you know say there were an Imminent ruling to be had well attorney Rispoli pointed out that typically when Something's been filed she gives the Other side about a week to uh to respond So if she were going to continue to Behave like that then if there were an Imminent ruling then it could to some Degree push that back now if there Wasn't an imminent ruling anyway then This wouldn't have had an impact so Attorney respoli was just pointing that Out but now that Ripple has responded
Here attorney rispoli says back on track To any day now for the ruling so good to See that and I'm not going to read the Ruling itself it's slightly over a page But it just kind of summarize I think That's enough but it's on your screen Right now and I'm going to flip to the Second page so if you want to pause for Either these Pages if you do want to Read it in its entirety you are able to Do so so there's the last part of it Right there just hit pause if you care To do so now into what Attorney John Deaton has to say he wrote The Following This is a lengthy thread following up my Crypto law Live cast on Ripple's Fair Notice defense since it is a Hot Topic This week normally lack of fair notice As a defense is not only weak but Usually a for sure losing argument it's Been argued in crypto cases before yet The fair notice defense is pled as Ripple's fourth affirmative defense is Ripple's Fair notice defense argument Different or unique than previous ones Yes but we must first fully understand The nature of the fair notice defense And when if ever it would become Relevant in the case To fully comprehend Ripple's Fair notice Defense we must first distinguish it From typical Fair notice argument that Has been raised in previous crypto cases Like telegram Kik Library
We must also distinguish Ripple's Fair Notice defense from arguments regarding Issues of selective enforcement the Issue that some projects get a free pass While others get prosecuted or the issue Of regulatory capture by a select few Investors who have captured transient Regulators personally I believe many Experienced security lawyers and then he Tagged John Reed Stark here so that's The Former SEC official he was as uh written Here in his own little bio he was uh the Chief of ssec office of Internet Enforcement and also I'll mention this I Don't need to read the article but Here's a headline from you today xrp Army warned by former SEC official and They're talking about a tweet from John Reed Stark Formerly of the SEC uh citing the sec's Filing of their supplemental Authority As further evidence that of course Ripple and the fair notice just doesn't Have any legs and he he filed he he put That tweet out just the other day and And this is uh attorney Deaton Responding by the way this is just as a Time I'm recording this uh he tweeted Out everything I'm sharing with you just 14 hours ago so this is the newest stuff From attorney Deaton here and so again He says personally I believe many Experienced Securities lawyers like John
Reed Stark and he tagged him there and Others are too quick to dismiss Ripple's Fair notice defense It is likely because they are confusing It with the typical due process argument That has already failed several times in Crypto cases the typical notice argument Has centered around claims that the Statutory term investment contract is Too vague and the Howie test does not Provide adequate notice to entrepreneurs Involved in blockchain Technologies in a Way that allows them to know what's not Allowed a telegram kick in library made Similar arguments those arguments failed In each case as they should Some of you might be surprised to hear Me say that but the law is the law yes Congress should modernize the law and Provide regulatory Clarity but existing Law is what it is and I'm curious are Any of you surprised to hear attorney Deaton say that that uh actually on as Far as Fair notice is concerned that Those were the right decisions even Though it's negative for those crypto uh Participants I'm actually not Particularly surprised Having learned The bits that I've learned along the way For a little bit over two plus years but I personally and find I'm biased I mean I guess pretty much we all are for xrp Holders because we're under attack here Just to be fair so fine even being
Biased and still trying to always do my Best in life to just be intellectually Honest and it still always struck me as Different when it comes to what's Happening to you know in the Ripple case Specifically here this idea of fair Notice and if it comes to a point where Fair notices ruled upon like I'm not Pretending to know for sure what judge Torres is going to do but I'm with John Deaton in terms of this concept of it's Still got Merit it's a real argument With real teeth Anyway attorney Deaton continues though The Howie test is flexible how he Actually needs quote Uh the the test embodies a flexible Rather than a static principle One that is capable of adaptation to Meet the countless and variable schemes Devised by those who seek the use of the Money of others on the promise of Profits end quote Therefore arguing that the term Investment contract in the statute and The Howie test itself are too vague to Be applied to blockchain Technologies is A losing argument But that's not what Ripple is arguing Relative to its Fair notice defense Argument not even close And so again it is true that you know How he's supposed to be flexible to some Degree now I think that how he's been
Stretched beyond recognition I think Most of us probably agree on that right But that's not so you know if that were The argument you could see how that Wouldn't be good for for ripple and you Have seen those types of arguments in Previous crypto cases and you know That's why they've lost but that that Attorney Dean's pointing out here that Is not what Ripple is arguing It's way different than that so check This out because he you know John Dee Does the most thorough job I've seen Ever in breaking down exactly why this Is the case And so he wrote The Following Ripple sphere notice defense is specific To xrp and the specific facts of how United States agencies especially the SEC treated xrp I believe Ripple's Fair noticed offense Has teeth and there's a real chance Judge Torres rules the fair notice Defense is an issue for a jury to decide If the judge finds any sales violated The law in other words judge Torres does Not even consider the fair notice Defense unless she rules Ripple offered Slash sold xrp as a security If she decides Ripple did not offer and Or sale xrp as a security at any time Past or present she doesn't even get to The fair notice defense issue and ripple Wins outright so let's pause note that's
Why I've been reiterating many times Along the last couple years once I I Learned this to be true that you know if We get to the point where judge Torres Is ruling on fairness defense some dumb Went wrong for ripple and that ain't Good and potentially not good for xrp Holders depending on exactly how we got There now not that I I think it's going To be necessarily bad for xrp holders it Could specifically just be bad for uh For ripple because even if uh the judge Finds that Ripple sold any xrp as a you Know unregistered Securities Transactions action that doesn't mean That she necessarily find that secondary Market transactions would also outright Be illegal in fact I find that rather Improbable so for extra P holders it's Probably going to be just fine either Way I'm very optimistic on that but We'll see what ultimately happens anyway Dean continues now that we understand When or how the fair notice defense Becomes relevant we need to understand Why Ripple's argument is different from Earlier cases that's because the facts Surrounding xrp are quite different than Other cases here's a few examples of why Ripple's Fair notice defense has teeth First before getting into specific Relevant facts you must keep in mind That xrp was openly traded in the United States for almost eight years
Before the suit and as you will learn Xrp was well known to all the U.S Government agencies including the SEC From the very beginning in 2013 Chris Larson Met with the SEC Federal Reserve Fencing Treasury and Department of Justice and gave a presentation on xrp The SEC was present and didn't warn hey Chris you just described a security you Better not give away or sell any xrp The next year in 2014 the usgao Highlighted xrp as a virtual currency Utilized in a decentralized payment Platform called Ripple by the way it's a Quote In 2015 And doj sued Ripple over xrp sales and Classified xrp as convertible virtual Currency forcing Ripple to comply with Banking laws Clearly since Fin and the doj were at The 2013 xrp presentation they were Watching closely Vincent shared the info with the SEC via An information sharing agreement that Was in place the SEC didn't jump in and Say hey wait these sales also violate Securities laws in fact when you read The fincen settlement agreement it Directs Ripple to only register sales With fencing and provide and pay for an Auditor approved by the doj and each Year provide transparency of every sale Or transfer of xrp are you starting to
Get the picture here uh yes attorney Dean I definitely definitely am getting The picture here and it's pretty insane Isn't it Ripple was told by the Government to only register sales with Fencing Only So if they went against what the Government said then they could have Attempted to register xrp as a security Now I'd be offended if Ripple ever tried To register xrp as a security because That would imply that they somehow have Control over the decentralized ecosystem And that kind of pissed me off it Probably pissed off pretty much all you Do right because that's the point of Crypto it's a big part of it anyway Decentralized nature of it Ripple has no Damn right to try and register a Decentralized ecosystem on the whole and They wouldn't do that ever but you get My point right and so the idea here that They were told by the government to only Register with finson and then when they Only do that then another part of the Government slaps them what in the ever Loving hell is that What in the ever-loving hell this does Not make sense this is why it's burning My biscuits son attorney Dean continues In 2017 through 2019 the SEC filed Dozens of crypto cases extra pie Where's the heart sometimes xrp was
Either the second largest crypto asset Or the third largest crypto asset during All these prosecutions in 2018 hinman's Speech declared eth not a Security even If its Ico was because the network was Sufficiently decentralized therefore Any network equal or slightly more Decentralized than ethereum doesn't have To register listen to the lawyers who Helped get eth a pass say it When you consider hinman's speech could Ripple convince a jury that it believed The xrp Ledger Was as equally decentralized as eth Plus no case versus Ripple was initiated During all those prosecutions Not even a cease and desist letter was Sent telling them to stop selling xrp In fact up until April 1st 2019 SEC Enforcement lawyers and staff were Allowed to own and trade xrp In January 2019 coinbase met with the SEC regarding xrp coinbase informed the SEC that it determined that xrp was not A security and was planning to list xrp In February 2019. Coinbase wanted to IPO It wanted to make sure the SEC didn't View xrp differently the SEC did not Deter coinbase and xrp was listed Immediately coinbase publicized xrp's Utility And to send money across border xrp was Used as a utility slash exchange token
Just as the UK's FCA describes by the Way for those of you that care to look I Made it close to as full screen as Possible And this this is the ad that attorney Dean's talking about you see xrp is Listed at the bottom here Fast and free for all coinbase users Yada yada xrp Well why do you think they were doing That Because they felt like they had the Green light from the SEC effectively Continues also in 2019 SEC published a Digital asset framework which said Howie Is unlikely to uh is unlikely to meet if The network is fully functional and Quote it can immediately be used to make Payments in a wide variety of contexts Or acts as a substitute for real or fiat Currency end quote sounds like xrp yeah Doesn't that sound like xrp So if it's functionally useful and it's It's not being used for the purposes of Investment what do you think and Hester Purse one of the SEC Commissioners has Brought up that exact point and I don't Remember the exact quote but it was Something along the lines of if there's Something that's being used to Facilitate you know transactions or has Utility effectively then that doesn't Sound like a security to her and I've Shared that quote I just can't remember
It verbatim off you know right at the Top of my head here but that's a Commissioner in the SEC that's what Ripple has been doing And uh and then he says attorney you can Continue says after coinbase listed xrp In February 2019 MoneyGram filed a Notice with the SEC and read what it Said quote this agreement Will enable MoneyGram to utilize Ripple's x-rapid product xrp in foreign Exchange settlement as part of the MoneyGrams Cross-border payment process end quote And for those of you that are newer to The xrp community xrapid was rebranded To on-demand liquidity so it's the same Technology quite literally and then Attorney continues if xrp was itself an Illegal security the way the SEC now Claims why would the SEC allow this MoneyGram partnership 18 months before Clayton dropped a lawsuit on his last Full day at the SEC and the very next Day after meeting with Gary ginsler According to the sec's Absurd Theory the Xrp that MoneyGram sold through Exchanges like coinbase to the public Were also investment contracts with Ripple even if the purchaser never heard A company called Ripple that sold Software to Banks In June 2019 MoneyGram told the SEC Sorry I'm getting a spam phone call I
Just need to put this damn thing in Airplane mode when I'm recording According to the sec's Absurd Theory the Xrp that MoneyGram sold through Exchanges like coinbase to the public Were also investment contracts with Ripple even if the purchaser never heard A company called Ripple that sold Software to banks in June 2019 MoneyGram Told the SEC it was acquiring and Selling xrp and it wasn't an issue in Fact we learned the SEC instructed MoneyGram how to report xrp on the books As a contra expense In the 76 years since Howie there's no Case where Contra expense equals a Security so folks think about this not Only did the SEC approve the MoneyGram The MoneyGram deal with with ripple that Because they vetted that they're like Yeah okay go ahead you're fine not only Did they do that which is bad enough Frankly considering that they ended up Suing Ripple later claiming the extra Piece of security they were they were Telling MoneyGram how to report xrp on The books did they say here's how you Report the illegal Securities Transaction on your box did they say That little asshat Pricks no they did Not They just said here's how you do it Here's the proper way to report this Thing
Obviously this is just it's so two-faced And that's why I've always said anybody Who is unbiased you just come in with an Open mind even if you know nothing about Crypto here are the facts you're gonna End up on the side of the xrp community Recognizing oh wow these are absolutely Terrible humans and we wish they didn't Exist you'd be right there with us you Know even if you didn't you know if you Weren't a part of crypto prior then then Attorney Dean says coinbase and Moneygram's use of xrp wasn't the only Events in 2019. fsoc's 2019 annual Report highlighted xrp along with Bitcoin eth and Litecoin look who signed It the report said Bitcoin eth xrp and Litecoin grew in market share Significantly it didn't mention Securities and I'm not going to read Every name on this thing but uh Jay Clayton signed it It's worth knowing And then Dean says hinman's speech was June 14 2018. as you know he didn't Mention xrp in his speech only gave Bitcoin and ether free pass we don't Know about the drafts or emails But there's a Howie xrp memo written by SEC enforcement lawyers dated the day Before on June 13 2018. and folks that's Always been highly suspicious to me So there's a memo about xrp specifically So SEC officials concluded something and
Then the very next day there's this There's this E3 past speech from from Bill Hinman It's just that's never sat well with me So was there ever a chance that xrp was Going to be a part of this or this or That and then you know Joe Lubin Um apparently he had a copy of the the Speech before he's like I only got to Read a few pages he said something along Those lines and he's like was there Anything about xrp in there And then somebody said no there's Nothing about actually in there and it Goes oh that's odd so was he being Sarcastic or not I mean probably Sarcastic he knew something though come On Put put the pieces together it's not That it's not that something is weird About that and then in the attorney Dean Says we haven't read it because Judge nepern said it was privileged Judge netburn informed us however that No recommendation was made at the Conclusion of the xrp memo if SEC Enforcement lawyers had determined that Xrp was clearly a security they would Have recommended action be taken at a Minimum they would have recommended that A cease and desist letter be issued to Ripple if Ripple refused then an Enforcement action They are called enforcement lawyers if
It was clear that the that the law was Being broken they wouldn't say you know Just just let them get away with it No kidding To the point where it's To some degree I'm sitting there Thinking perhaps the SEC they really Just didn't know what the hell to do About crypto in general with xrp being a Part of it so it's just like I don't Know they're sitting there shaking their Head all of them a bunch of idiots Then they want to come back after they Decide that they want to sue the entire Space into Oblivion like yours they can Already end your arrest and you're a Security except for none of what makes Any damn sense and they're just out to Harm everybody Then attorney Eden says also considering January 1st 2020 Ballard Inc a market Participant filed an Ethics disclosure With the SEC That said when it comes to crypto don't Worry because Baylor will only deal with The third crypto assets I'm sorry three Crypto assets generally accepted in the Market as non-securities Bitcoin eth and Drumroll xrp how about that Now also consider that in October 2020 Less than 60 days before Ripple was sued The SEC informed the public the people It supposedly protects that the SEC had Never determined xrp to be a security
Let's not forget that Brad garlinghouse David Schwartz met with the SEC in August September of 2018 with Clayton And Hinman Garlinghouse spoke up and out and said Quote Ripple is living in purgatory Because of the lack of regulatory Clarity regarding xrp end quote Now folks No meeting with Clayton and Hinman We're living in purgatory Where was the comet extra piece of Security and so the eternity points it Out he says this meeting was several Months after the June 13 2018 xrp Momo And the Henman speech giving Bitcoin and Eth Clarity by declaring a regulatory Free pass for the two top tokens Hinman And Clayton did not reply to the Ripple CEO by saying xrp is a security that's Why Had the memo found xrp clearly a Security they could have handed it to The CEO and CTO of Ripple and said here Read this but they didn't instead Clayton said okay just keep talking to The staff about it and at Future Meetings or words to that effect I won't even get into the conflicts so Say what you want about it but to claim Ripple's Fair notice defense is totally Without Merit like John Reed Stark and Others Requires one to ignore both the facts
And the law you can argue that it won't Ultimately Prevail but it's not Meritless now that's an incredible Threat exactly so again To condense it all down you know this There's there is this idea and fair Enough that Howie is supposed to be Adaptable and I do mean fair enough But crypto's so far out of the realm of What a slight adaptation of Howie you Know it could reasonably cover that it's Just like and then when you so then Separately you know if you're if you're Talking about that as it pertains to Fair notes if it's okay fine that's one Thing but then you look at the separate Facts and the law and of course ripples Fair nodes defense has Merit I don't Know you know if we get to the point Where it's getting ruled out I I don't Know if it's gonna Ultimately Prevail either but to say It's it's got no merit yeah I'm with the I'm attorney Dean on this one I'm not a financial advisor you should Not buy or sell anything because of Anything I say right that would be a Very very very bad idea until next time To the Moon family sedan
