Ripple News: Is XRP’s Security Classification Irrelevant Due to Pre-Existing Nature?

Lawyer Bill Morgan recently took to Twitter to raise an intriguing argument regarding the classification of XRP as a security. In a series of thought-provoking tweets, he challenges the significance of XRP’s pre-existing nature and questions whether it is entirely irrelevant to consider it a security.

In his first tweet, Morgan ponders whether it is entirely irrelevant to consider XRP as a security, even if it existed before any sale or offer that could be deemed an investment contract or security. This raises an important question about the relationship between the timing of XRP’s creation and its classification as a security. 

Morgan’s argument challenges the assumption that XRP’s pre-existing nature should be disregarded when determining its regulatory status. While XRP was not initially created through a sale or investment contract, the lawyer suggests that this fact alone may not be sufficient to exclude it from being classified as a security.

Morgan speaks about a hypothetical airdrop scenario

Continuing his line of inquiry, Morgan presents a hypothetical scenario in his second tweet. He wonders what the classification of XRP would be if its creators had chosen to airdrop the entire supply in 2012 to anyone who set up a trust line, without any subsequent sale or offer. In this hypothetical situation, all the individuals currently developing projects on the XRP network would have received their XRP holdings in 2012, effectively eliminating the need for any investment contracts or sales agreements.

In his final tweet on the subject, Morgan emphasizes that the relevance of XRP’s pre-existing nature should not be conflated with whether Ripple’s sales constitute investment contracts. He acknowledges that Ripple’s sales may fall under the purview of investment contracts, as previously asserted by Marc, presumably referring to a known legal expert in the field. However, Morgan highlights that it is crucial to distinguish between the regulatory status of Ripple’s sales and the inherent nature of XRP itself.

Lawyer Bill Morgan’s thought-provoking tweets have ignited a new wave of discussions regarding the classification of XRP as a security. By challenging the significance of XRP’s pre-existing nature, Morgan prompts us to reevaluate the traditional criteria for determining regulatory status in the cryptocurrency realm.