4 ms·

I’m not “mad” about anything? I’m saying, “no no no, this was designed to be ambiguous ergo can’t touch it” is a clear misunderstanding of how laws work, how th

I’m not “mad” about anything? I’m saying, “no no no, this was designed to be ambiguous ergo can’t touch it” is a clear misunderstanding of how laws work, how they get their teeth, and why we have them.

monero-xmr 3y ago
We are debating legal definitions and the court said you are wrong. We can debate philosophy but you are not speaking about reality because the court already said you are incorrect.
- ethanbond 3y ago
  It’s not quite that simple, even in XRP’s case specifically. The court said that secondary algorithmic sales of XRP did not constitute trading investment contracts, however they also ruled that Ripple sold an unregistered security in their initial offer of XRP. What was that security? XRP! Look, we found a grey area again.
- RandomLensman 3y ago
  In this specific case the court handed a (partial) victory to Ripple, not sure this simply translates into other situations.