bait. they are to decide if those NFTs were issued in a securities transaction asset types themselves are not securities and neither a judge or the regulator i

bait. they are to decide if those NFTs were issued in a securities transaction asset types themselves are not securities and neither a judge or the regulator is trying to decide that. transactions involving those assets can be securities and are tightly regulated. some assets are standardized and only issued in a specific set of transactions 100% of the time, such that its redundant to call them anything other than securities. for assets that aren't standardized, the sequence of transactions has to be analyzed to determine if that set of transactions constituted a securities transaction. this can be corroborated by how the courts have been reaching the conclusion that crypto asset's primary market (the initial sell or distribution from the creator to purchasers) has to be treated different from the secondary market trading (where the prices are listed on exchanges and fluctuate all day, everyday, which attracts most headlines and mindshare). clarity from Congress about what level of consumer and investor protection is desired is what's really lacking here. The "securities" framework doesn't do that.