According to a recent update shared by James K. Filan in the LBRY case, the SEC filed a supplemental summary of an amendment to the request for relief in response to LBRY’s proposal to “limit the Commission’s remedies.”
The committee also said it had retracted its earlier statement on the grounds that “LBRY is underfunded and virtually non-existent”.
#XRPCommunity #Ripple In LBRY, the SEC filed a supplemental summary of remedies seeking a $111,614 civil penalty and asking the court to restrain LBRY from violating Section 5 of the Securities Act. https://t.co/I8dzNmVqpP
— James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪 (@FilanLaw) May 12, 2023
According to the summary, the SEC states:
“While compensation was available as a remedy in the circumstances, the Commission, taking into account the information and affidavits received during the additional discovery phase, withdrew its claim. The refund was due to LBRY’s (including its subsidiaries) lack of funds and being caught in a nearly A state of stagnation.”
However, the Commission asked the court to order a civil penalty of $111,614 and an order prohibiting LBRY from violating Section 5 of the Securities Act and conducting unregistered crypto asset securities offerings, at least until LBRY cancels its holdings of LBC and dissolves, as this is The company promised in court.
LBRY lost its case with the SEC, and the regulator proceeded to impose a fine equal to $22,151,971 in all of LBRY’s revenue.
The SEC said the total fines LBRY paid for its Section 5 violations equaled the value the company received for selling 280 million LBCs created from pre-mining and marketplaces on multiple platforms. Crypto asset trading platform, valued at over $22 million.
As the crypto community contemplates what the outcome of the LBRY lawsuit might mean for the ongoing Ripple-SEC lawsuit, crypto attorney Bill Morgan said he sees absolutely no connection between the burning of LBC and XRP.
He fails to mention that LBRY’s LBC sales are even close to Ripple’s current XRP sales to ODL customers.
According to the lawyers, ODL clients do not invest in XRP, but use it for cross-border payments; therefore, such sales do not qualify as investment contracts.
“If the court does not prohibit Ripple from selling XRP to ODL customers, there is no need to destroy XRP escrow.”
- SEC criticized for ‘arbitrary, chaotic’ approach to regulating crypto industry
- Ripple Spent $200M In SEC Case – Charles Hoskinson Talks Conspiracy Theories
According to USA Today