Ripple lawyer Bill Morgan says claims by Bitcoin maxis that XRP lacks legal clarity are flawed and illogical.
Bill Morgan, a counsel for Ripple, has refuted the assertion that XRP lacks legal clarity due to the absence of formal classification.
For some time, Bitcoin enthusiasts have been promoting the idea that the Ripple cryptocurrency is legally ambiguous due to its lack of classification.
Morgan provided a logical explanation that characterized this as inherently flawed.
Ripple Lawyer Disputes Bitcoin Maxis’ Classification Of XRP
Ripple lawyer Bill Morgan refutes Bitcoin maximalists’ claims that XRP lacks legal clarity, calling their classification argument flawed and illogical.
However, the status of XRP was in limbo for four years during the SEC litigation.
This situation was resolved recently when Judge Torres determined that retail XRP sales do not qualify as investment contracts; however, institutional sales do.
For an extended period, Bitcoin enthusiasts have maintained that the lack of classification regarding XRP results in inadequate legal certainty.
According to Ripple lawyer Bill Morgan, the presumption that an unclassified entity lacks legal clarification is a “logical misstep.”
He observed that the argument is entirely unfounded because “classification” is not defined.
Ripple lawyer Bill Morgan emphasized that courts do not indulge in classification for their own sake.
Instead, they address specific legal matters that are presented to them.
He underscored that Judge Torres’ emphasis in the groundbreaking Ripple case was solely on determining whether Ripple’s sales of XRP were investment contracts rather than whether XRP was a commodity or security.
The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act passed last week was commended by Ripple’s Chief Legal Officer, Stuart Alderoty, for its efforts to establish explicit crypto regulations in the United States.
He emphasized that clarity should not be a topic of controversy.
Morgan Asserts That There Is No Dilemma Regarding Legal Clarity Of XRP
The Ripple counsel asserted that the court’s decision offers adequate legal clarification regarding XRP.
Bill Morgan stated that the conclusion reached by Judge Torres that Ripple crypto is not a security provides the precise level of necessary legal clarity.
Morgan also noted that even basic legal concepts like “property” are not subject to strict definitions.
Bitcoin has been classified as “property” in Australia, according to the XRP counsel.
Consequently, the court’s determination that XRP is not a security provides legal clarity for XRP if Bitcoin’s classification continues to evolve.
Bill Morgan concluded, “We have the legal clarity of what XRP is not: it is not a security, even if we do not know exactly what it is.”
Brad Garlinghouse, the co-founder of Ripple, donated the “Skull of Satoshi” to the Bitcoin community to maintain harmony between the XRP and Bitcoin communities.
