• A federal judge has ruled that non-fungible tokens (NFTs) of NBA Top Shot Moments could be considered securities under United States securities laws.
• An American lawyer, MetaLawMan, clarified that this ruling will not affect the ongoing Ripple v. SEC lawsuit.
• The latest on the Ripple-SEC case is that journalist Roslyn Layton requested access to the Hinman speech materials in support of her request for disclosure.
Ruling on NFTs Under U.S Securities Law
A federal judge has ruled that non-fungible tokens (NFTs) of NBA Top Shot Moments could be considered securities under United States securities laws. The ruling came as the judge denied a motion from Dapper Labs CEO Roham Gharegozlou to dismiss a class-action lawsuit claiming that its NBA Top Shot NFTs are securities.
Connection Between NFT Ruling and Ripple vs SEC
An American lawyer, MetaLawMan, clarified that this ruling will not affect the ongoing Ripple v. SEC lawsuit. According to MetaLawMan, the Top Shot decision was a ruling on a motion to dismiss the complaint and assumed all allegations in the complaint were true, whereas the Ripple case is at the summary judgment stage, where the judge looks at the evidence submitted by both parties. The Judge’s decision indicates that not all NFTs are securities and each scheme must be assessed on a case-by-case basis. Ultimately, this opinion could be considered a net positive for Ripple as it does not address secondary market sales of Top Shot NFTs and emphasizes that not all NFTs offered or sold by any company would constitute a security.
Latest Developments in Ripple vs SEC Case
The latest on the Ripple-SEC case is that journalist Roslyn Layton filed an updated request to intervene to ask the court for access to records from Hinman’s speech which was mistakenly supplied by SEC in support of its own summary judgment petition.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it can be said that even though there are some similarities between Dapper Labs‘ NFT lawsuit and Ripple’s legal battle with SEC, these two cases should not be seen as directly connected due to differences in their circumstances and facts presented before court so far .
Takeaway
It is important to remember that what constitutes an investment contract depends upon specific facts surrounding individual cases and cannot necessarily be generalized across all digital asset offerings or non-fungible token issuances. Furthermore, while there may have been some speculation regarding how this ruling may impact other digital asset cases including those involving Ripple’s XRP token – ultimately it appears unlikely at this point given enough distinctions between them which is why lawyers like MetaLawMan continue to emphasize caution when making such conclusions without sufficient information or evidence being available yet