News View Non-AMP

Crypto Expert Bill Morgan Questions SEC’s Cryptocurrency Definitions

Published by
Elena R

Bill Morgan, a renowned attorney and crypto enthusiast, recently took to social media to express his confusion and exasperation over a statement by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in a legal brief related to a crypto case involving Coinbase.

A Bewildering Statement

The passage from the SEC’s document that caught Morgan’s attention raised questions about the difference between crypto assets and digital tokens. It suggested that while crypto assets might hold some inherent value, the digital token allows access to that value. Moreover, the document indicated that they wouldn’t hold any worth without the affiliated services or intellectual property these crypto assets represent.

Morgan’s Interpretation

Bill Morgan was dismayed at the passage, questioning its clarity and legal rationale. He was especially puzzled by the statement, which essentially seemed to convey that if digital assets hold any intrinsic worth, it’s the digital asset itself that unveils this value. Morgan found this representation to be redundant and perplexing.

Furthermore, Morgan scrutinized the assertion that a digital token’s only worth is linked to its associated investment contract. To him, it appeared as a roundabout way of suggesting that the value of a token solely stems from a shared venture where the worth arises from collective contributions.

He also highlighted the ambiguity of the statement that tokens are devoid of value without connection to a service or intellectual rights. Morgan remarked that this notion seemed inconsistent when applied to the analysis of an investment contract. He concluded that the passage might be one of the most puzzling explanations the SEC has ever produced concerning the essence and valuation of cryptocurrency.

Expert Chimes In

Anders, a recognized digital asset researcher, responded to Morgan’s post, hinting at the SEC’s possible ulterior motive. He posed a question wondering if the SEC’s statement was a veiled attempt to counter Torres’ “in dicta” ruling in the Ripple case, which stated that XRP itself isn’t a security.

Bill responded, suggesting that the SEC desperately tries to build a conceptual framework to convince courts that any crypto sale amounts to an investment contract. He warned that only XRP and Bitcoin would be recognized as not being securities if the SEC succeeds, leaving the rest in murky waters.

Elena R

Elena is an expert in technical analysis and risk management in cryptocurrency market. She has 10+year experience in writing - accordingly she is avid journalists with a passion towards researching new insights coming into crypto erena.

Recent Posts

When Will the XRP ETF Be Approved?

The wait for a spot XRP ETF is far from over, but there’s now a…

April 30, 2025

UK Crypto Regulation Introduces New Rules

The UK is stepping up its crypto game — with clear rules, bold reforms, and…

April 30, 2025

U.S. SEC. Delays Decision on Bitwise Dogecoin ETF Until June 15

Wall Street analysts project that the U.S. SEC will approve a bunch of spot crypto…

April 30, 2025

Ethereum Eyes $2000 Breakout Amid Surging On-Chain Metrics: Is a Bigger Rally Ahead?

Ethereum's price has been going up due to the rising buying pressure following overall market…

April 30, 2025

Avalanche Poised for a 250% Upswing—Here’s the AVAX Price Prediction for 2025

Ever since the crypto markets have shown some stability, altcoins like Avalanche have refrained from…

April 29, 2025

U.S. SEC Delays Decision-Making on Franklin Templeton’s Spot XRP ETF: What Next?

The U.S. SEC recently approved XRP futures ETF, thus dramatically increasing the odds for a…

April 29, 2025