Fair reporting emphasis from judge: SEC is inconsistent…

While the victory of the Ripple company against the SEC yesterday is still talked about in the crypto world, the detail notes of the judge Analisa Torres in the text of the decision began to come to light.

As the “unregistered securities/investment contract sale” lawsuit filed by the SEC against Ripple in December 2020 has come to an end, the details of yesterday’s “bomb decision” have begun to emerge. As it is known, the biggest factor that Ripple company has clung to since the beginning of the case was that the SEC did not warn them in advance. The Ripple company stated that it would take action if the SEC warned them in the past. The SEC, on the other hand, stated that it had no obligation to warn about it.

Here, one of the trial judges, Analisa Torres, also touched on the fair notification debate, which is one of the most talked about issues. In the footnote shared by Stuart Alderoty, the chief legal counsel of Ripple, on his Twitter account, there are the following statements:

The Court notes that only institutional sales fall under investment contract status and therefore do not include the defense’s claims for fair notification in this corporate investment contract sale order. The court’s decision only concerns institutional sales, and the SEC’s theories regarding other sales outside of these sales are largely inconsistent when looking at past digital asset lawsuits.

Alderoty explains this decision note of the judge as follows:

Here, the court notes that the SEC’s theories outside of corporate sales should be included in fair reporting.