2026-01-13 14:34:49

Ripple has filed a significant response arguing that securities regulations apply specifically to enforceable contractual rights rather than shared economic participation. The distinction centers on what actually triggers regulatory classification—a nuanced legal position that challenges how certain digital assets have historically been treated under securities frameworks. This move comes amid ongoing deliberations about how existing financial laws apply to blockchain-based tokens and their utility characteristics.

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

11 Likes

Reward
11
9
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

consensus_failure

· 01-14 21:19

Ripple's recent legal arguments are indeed fierce, directly questioning the very definition of securities from the ground up... But to be honest, whether the SEC will buy it or not is still uncertain.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropHunterZhang

· 01-13 21:36

Haha, Ripple's recent legal move is truly impressive. They separate contractual rights from economic participation... Basically, they just want to shake off the securities label, got it. If this really turns around, a bunch of projects could leverage it, and it will be quite lively then.

View OriginalReply0

OnchainDetective

· 01-13 15:04

Haha, Ripple's legal approach this time is quite interesting. Can the line between contractual rights and economic participation be clearly distinguished?

View OriginalReply0

LiquidityWitch

· 01-13 15:02

Ripple's recent legal move is really ruthless, directly attacking the regulatory logic with the angle of "contractual rights vs. economic participation"... It feels like paving the way for the entire crypto industry.

View OriginalReply0

GrayscaleArbitrageur

· 01-13 14:54

Hmm, this Ripple logic is indeed quite interesting... but regulation will probably still hold them back.

View OriginalReply0

MidnightSeller

· 01-13 14:47

Haha, Ripple's move this time is quite clever, playing both sides.

View OriginalReply0

0xSoulless

· 01-13 14:47

Lawyers are starting to play word games again, "enforceable contractual rights" vs "economic participation," sounding just like the rhetoric of cutting leeks—it's all about how big funds set the tone.

View OriginalReply0

FlashLoanLarry

· 01-13 14:45

Haha, Ripple is trying to play word games here—contract rights vs. economic participation. Can regulation really be bypassed so easily?

View OriginalReply0