Follow me on Twitter: @moonlamboio

DISCLAIMER: I am not a financial adviser. None of what I have communicated verbally or in writing here should be considered financial advice; it is not. Do your own research before investing in any digital asset, and understand that investing in any cryptocurrency is inherently risky. If you do, you need to be prepared to lose your entire investment.

Hello this is Matt on the moon family Sedan channel xrp should be re-listed on Coinbase and frankly it should be Relisted on every exchange that halted Trading or delisted it it should be Tradable again and I'm preaching to the Choir I know we get it we're in the know We've been following the secv Ripple Case for over two years uh we're Basically all effectively lawyers at This point right I know not literally But I tell you what I sure know a whole Hell of a lot more about Securities Law Than I ever thought I'd know that's for Damn sure I'm sure you probably feel Pretty similar if you've been following The case even halfway closely but we're Not the only ones that think that this Would be the right approach in fact a Library which lost to the SEC this past November uh believes and stayed publicly That uh that coinbase should absolutely Re-list xrp Um so there's that and I also want to Share with you Um because there are a bunch of comments Around that I want to share with you but Then there's also this story uh this is From Bloomberg but it was covered by all The crypto media as well uh coinbase Wins dismissal of lawsuit Over unregistered Securities now the Reason that I want to highlight this and I probably would have given it a blurb

There's a good chance anyway Um even just the nature of the case Being what it is because it's Interesting it's a legal thing that's in The news but as it turns out this case Um it looks like it's directly going to Impact some xrp holders I kid you not And I will explain why but uh before Going further I do want to be clear I do Not have a legal or financial background Of any kind I am 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 so First I wanted to share this tweet this Is from January 31st from the official Library account and uh in my Gene you do Need to know this to have a proper Understanding for what's going to be Covered in this video it's actually Crucial that you understand this and I Know most of you aware but I got just Quickly properly set the table here that Uh there was a hearing just uh within The last few days it was on January 30th Actually And in the secv library case there was a Hearing for what would basically be Called the remedies portion because mind You again like I said no in November the SEC already defeated Library so now

We're talking about okay what penalties Are going to be levied against library Is there going to be discouragements What's what's this or that what's it Mean for secondary markets now there's a Major win on that front and Attorney John Deaton was actually or because he Was representing somebody as Amicus in The secv library case actually and based On that conversation it actually Resulted ultimately and the judge Pressing the SEC and the SEC admitting That secondary Market transactions Meaning you know transactions from like Uni or unn exchange the secondary Market Transactions not not having to do with Library from the get-go those are not Part of his ruling so they're not Securities violations that's a major win Actually for anybody that cares about The long-term viability certainly of LBC Itself but it has implications for Broader crypto markets and you know of Course this will be brought to the Attention of Judge anneliesa Torres in The SEC Ripple case And so that's very big very important News now Library wrote The Following Many are calling yesterday a victory for Library but we haven't won yet It doesn't matter if the judge says Library credits is not a security if Third parties exchanges Etc are still Too terrified of the SEC to work with it

That's the real test And Attorney John Deaton agreed he Retweeted that and said I agree 100 if There was ever a utility token it is LBC How many professional Traders or retail Investors were speculating on the price Action of LBC does it equal a tenth or One hundredth of eth xrp cardano Etc Professional crypto Traders have never Heard of the LBC token yeah and that's An excellent point here now if you look At what was stated and find technically There is one little caveat we do need to See the actual written ruling from the Judge and regarding the penalties and Remedies portion of this lawsuit Whatever you want to call it But if he does what he said on the Record in court he's going to do and by The way that transcript will be will be Released at some point if he's if he Does what he said he's going to do then It is crystal clear that LBC Transactions that aren't touching Library so whether you're an exchange or Just individuals transacting however Using it that is not part of the judge's Ruling in the sec's victory it is not he Says he's going to write it out so it's Explicitly very clear that should be All the clarity that exchanges need to Re-list the LBC token because the judge Is explicitly stating there is nothing Against those transactions clear as day

And in order for the exchange to prove That they're not in violation they just Have to prove they're not Library that's It and by the way library is about to Well they're about to cease to exist for The company not not the LBC token but Library So all that but if you're an exchange You look at the judge's ruling it's it's It only applies to Library and then whoever that would have Got the other sales would have gone to So if you're an exchange and you just Have LBC now And your or your second Market you know In secondary markets clearly and the Judge says he's going to make this Crystal Clear the way he writes it You're not part of that so exchanges Should be real estate but you see the Fear here right and this is gonna this Could happen in the Ripple case too the Fear is Is that going to be sufficient for Exchanges to re-list LBC and I sure as Hell hope the answer is yes we just Don't know for sure Because you know the the Only thing that would have been a little Bit nicer is if you declare that the Token itself isn't a security but the Judge wouldn't technically do that Because he said he's a minimalist as Reported by Attorney John Deaton

But it has the same net result because Again if if those aren't violations that Means just by simple logic they can't be Secured because the asset itself or Security then every transaction would be A security so it's clearly the case that The asset itself is not a security just Using simple logic Um based on what the judge has said here So it should be the end of this I just Don't know for sure because then are you Going to worry because you know how Terrible and vindictive the SEC is if You're in exchange that re-lists are Going to get attacked anyway Now that would be a hard harder one for The the judge to for uh for the I'm Sorry for the SEC rather to win but That's something where like we as extra People we could be put in that situation Like say Ripple loses and judge annalize The Torres ends up coming to the same Conclusion and words it similarly okay Well our exchange is then going to Re-list xrp Right and then there's other ways it Could go too because you know there Could be an agreement between Ripple and The SEC like say Ripple loses and I Don't know they're going to lose but say Ripple does lose Well you could have a situation Agreement in which uh Ripple says okay We agree you know just

In so many words you know acknowledge That the token itself is not a security Or that this just applies to Transactions specific transaction I do With ripple and then we won't appeal and I don't know if the SC would agree to That but if they would Then that could be a password for xrp Holders too but is it is it going to be Enough To uh outside of that is it going to be Enough for xrp to be relisted even That's the concern Uh and so then Library also so they Tweeted this out and this is what got Everybody talking including myself of Course Library just yesterday tweeted Out coinbase should re-list xrp under The secv library standard xrp sold by Secondary holders is not a security and Folks that is true by the library Standard not a Securities violation Definitely not So we'll see what happens here and then A library also tweeted this out Why as why SEC is going against Ripple And now against Library You know why question mark they don't Like the idea of decentralization Because Library LBC does to publishing What Bitcoin does to money but guess What they hit the wall thank you John Deaton thank you all yeah and so I do Like how I would agree to watch the xrp

Community has rallied around uh what's Been happening with the library that Sure as hell is true And as far as the reasons I'm perfectly Happy to speculate on on what's going on I have But I it's to me it just seems like personal Motives I mean yeah there may be some People I'm not saying the library is Wrong here there could be a piece of it It just depends on which individual You're talking about like in the case of Kim jong-gins are I just think he's Doing what's in his own personal Self-interest and he's carrying the Torch that was lit by uh Jay Clayton Former SEC chair and you know Bill him And all them But and so that may very well have been The case here but I also think there Could be other stuff like attorney Dean Was talking about in terms of their Friends in Legacy finance that haven't Gotten a crack at crypto yet is is that Something to consider as well well it's Certainly worth discussing that's very Well possibility so there's a lot of Things that it could be it's perfectly Reasonable speculation regardless here Either way it's not right and it's Outside of what legal precedent would Have you believe should be done right if You're for being intellectually honest

Here uh now into this and this impacts From a legal perspective some xrp Holders and you'll see why let me go Through this thing but this is Interesting Um so there's a headline from from Bloomberg coinbase wins dismissal of Lawsuit over unregistered Securities Coinbase Inc one dismissal of a lawsuit By consumers alleging The cryptocurrency Exchange facilitated the sale of Unregistered Securities on its platform The proposed class action suit filed in Federal court in New York in October 2021 seeks damages arising from the sale Of soliciting of 79 digital assets that The consumers say amounted to Illegal Contracts because the platform is not Registered with the U.S Securities and Exchange Commission U.S District Judge Paul a inglemeyer didn't make a Determination about whether the digital Tokens were actually Securities though He said he assumed they were for the Purposes of the dismissal request by Coinbase so I'll pause it that might Sound bad on the surface but it's from a Legal perspective effectively Non-consequential there's nothing Binding about whether something is there Is not a security just for the sake of The argument he made the assumption that They were so he could get to the Conclusion that he needed to get to to

Throw this damn thing out because it is Nonsense and so the peace continues had The suit been allowed to proceed the Question of whether they are Securities Would have been a central Battleground He said That would have been interesting it Definitely would have been not Necessarily good but it would have been Interesting uh inglemeyer said the terms Of coinbase's user agreement flatly Contradict allegations in the lawsuit That the company holds title to the Digital assets that are both bought and Sold on the exchange the judge also Found that the the platform didn't Actively solicit Investments Um Yeah so this is the so that's the part That ends up makes it relevant to Certain xrp holders because again the Part that says Um Exactly uh the company holds Uh yeah so the coinbase user agreement Flatly contradicts allegations in the Lawsuit that the company holds title to The digital assets that are bought and Sold on the exchange right so it's the Users that hold this the um the crypto Which is why whether or not their Securities is inconsequential because It's not the exchange's property it's Not a contract with them and in that

Sort of regard it's the user's stuff Effectively even though they're Facilitating transactions that's the Conclusion effectively that the judge Came to which is why it was thrown out But How what does that mean for uh Songbird Tokens and flare tokens because coinbase Hasn't handed out any of that now they They've they have not said a peep about The existence of Songbird in terms of Distribution nothing whatsoever they Haven't said they're going to or not Going to and Songbird was distributed in September of 2021. so they're just Pretending that it didn't even happen That's how terrible they are that's from A customer service perspective it's Repulsive and disgusting And as far as Flair they say that They're going to have it distributed by The end of the first half of this year Other exchanges they distributed it the Day that they received it so I they gave It to their customers Coinbase just isn't treating customers Well and for some reason they don't give A damn they just don't we could talk About the reasons why maybe in a Separate video but they don't give a Damn So but again here Coinbase has already argued that they Don't hold title to the digital assets

That are bought and sold in the exchange And in fact take a look at this this is A tweet from Paul gruel the chief legal Officer at coinbase and he said in this Tweet uh just yesterday we appreciate The federal Court's careful Consideration and affirmation of what Our user agreement makes abundantly Clear coinbase does not hold title to Customer assets well that's interesting Because they're holding uh customer Assets they're holding Songbird tokens And they're holding flare tokens that They've not distributed and it doesn't Look like they have any intention of Distributing Songbird tokens and Hopefully they follow through with flair They should have done it by now but they Just haven't and so xrp Community member And Attorney Fred raspoli retweeted that And um and mind you he's going after uh Coinbase here uh literally like from the Line Casey hadn't heard like there's he Filed the lawsuit because they've not Distributed Songbird or flare tokens and So Frederick spauli wrote coinbase you Win some you lose some if you don't hold Title to customer assets then you are Literally stealing customers Flair and Songbird which title flows through Customers xrp and by the way that sounds In line with what Fred raspoli argued in The lawsuit against coinbase So think just imagine it like this like

A somewhat reasonable analogy here I Think imagine if um you know something Say sam say I want to send you a gift Say it could be any number of things I Don't care what it is it could be a Fancy new really expensive computer That's a couple of thousand dollars Let's say that that's it and I want to Send this gift to you and I send it to You But it ends up uh whether maybe I sent It to the wrong address or somebody else Did uh somebody else got it delivered to The wrong address but then it goes to Somebody else it goes to somebody else And that person's like oh well it was That to me it's mine now It's not a Perfect Analogy but it's it's I think it's reasonable there are a lot Of important similarities there So you send something you know and it's Intended for somebody else it but it Goes to You know it's it's intent for someone But it goes to somebody else and then That somebody else just keeps it because It's sent there You can't do that as something to sit it Gets an unintended recipient I'm sorry if it's a hassle for you but You can't then just keep the product Like you you can't do that And yes it would be a hassle for you if That was sitting and then you have to

Get it to the right person it's the same Thing if like males accidentally Delivered to the wrong address in the United States anyway you can't open that It's not yours literally it's not yours And so just imagine if something of of You know notable value is sent to an Unintended recipient Well again I admit it's not a Perfect Analogy but you get the idea Not yours damn it but they're they're Just they're just keeping it because why Not they're coinbase and they're awful I mean it's pretty gross what they're Doing isn't it and I understand it's Unfair that they're put in that Situation just like it's unfair when you Receive mail that's not yours and then You have to deal with it and you're Supposed to get it to the right person Or if it's an expensive package that's Not yours and it's supposed to be sent To somebody else or somebody expects you To hand it to them I get it that's Unfair and that's an inconvenience but It doesn't make it right to then take it That's the problem Really grinds my gears folks so I'm glad That attorney rispoli is going after Coinbase because I think it's just Especially from just an ethical Perspective it's disgusting what they're Doing and here you have coinbase Acknowledging that any any crypto

Um You know from customer it's it's Customers it's not theirs and if and Again it's because of the expert that Was held on the on the platform so this Actually I think just gives extra ammo To attorney respoli from a legal Perspective so we'll see what happens Here but this is going to directly Impact some xrp holders as a result Because you know this is going to be our Key I'm not a financial advisor you Should not buy yourself anything because Of anything I say right that would be a Very very very bad idea until next time To the Moon family sedan

You May Also Like