Ripple Lawsuit Outcome Favors the Company
Ripple Lawsuit Outcome Favors the Company, Analyst Claims
According to analyst John Deaton, the outcome of the ongoing lawsuit between Ripple and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) strongly favors Ripple. Deaton refuted the notion that the result was a 50-50 split, arguing instead that it leaned closer to a 90-10 advantage in favor of Ripple.
The lawsuit revolves around the SEC’s allegations that Ripple conducted an unregistered securities offering through its XRP cryptocurrency. Ripple has consistently denied these claims and has worked tirelessly to defend its case.
Ripple’s Strong Defense
Ripple’s legal team has been working diligently to dismantle the SEC’s arguments. They have highlighted various flaws in the SEC’s case, including the lack of clarity concerning the regulatory status of cryptocurrencies like XRP.
One of the key arguments presented by Ripple’s defense is that XRP is more akin to Bitcoin and Ethereum, both of which the SEC has deemed not to be securities. Ripple contends that XRP serves a similar utility function and should therefore be exempt from securities regulations as well.
John Deaton, who also represents over 11,000 XRP holders as part of a separate motion to intervene in the lawsuit, holds a positive outlook on the eventual outcome. He believes that Ripple’s strong legal arguments, combined with the growing support from the XRP community, favor a favorable resolution for Ripple.
Deaton’s analysis suggests that the outcome leans heavily in Ripple’s favor, with a 90-10 advantage. This indicates that Ripple’s defense has a significant edge over the SEC’s case.
As the Ripple vs. SEC lawsuit continues to unfold, analyst John Deaton is confident that the outcome will favor Ripple. While the final verdict is still pending, Ripple’s strong legal defense and rallying community support bode well for a positive resolution.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or legal advice. The views expressed in the article are solely those of the author.