Top VC Claims XRP Is a Security

An influential venture capitalist and businessman named Jason Calacanis has taken to Twitter to voice his opinion that XRP, the digital currency that is associated with the blockchain company Ripple, is “obviously a security.” In a tweet, Calacanis criticized a blockchain company for its failure to register its token as a security, arguing that doing so would have been a straightforward process that other businesses operating in the same industry have followed. 

The criticism that was offered by Calacanis was a reaction to the fact that the blockchain company had failed to register the coin. Ripple is now engaged in a legal battle with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) of the United States, and this tweet by Mr. Calacanis adds fuel to the flames of this conflict. 

The influential regulatory agency has leveled the claim that the blockchain company with its headquarters in San Francisco is involved in the unregistered sale of securities by way of the sale of XRP. This allegation was made in the context of the agency’s investigation into the activities of the company.

At the center of the ongoing discussion regarding the appropriate classification of the cryptocurrency known as XRP lies the question of whether it should be regarded as a security or a kind of digital currency. Ripple has vigorously defended its view that the controversial token is a digital currency, while the SEC has remained staunch in its assessment that the token comprises security. 

Ripple’s view that the token is digital money has been the subject of much debate. The Securities and Exchange Commission has not wavered from its stance that the token is a security. According to the CEO of the company, Brad Garlinghouse, who just divulged this information at the Dubai Fintech Summit, the digital currency firm Ripple is bracing for eye-popping large legal fees. The extremely intricate nature of the litigation, as well as the participation of well-known law firms in Ripple’s defense, both contributed to the tremendous cost that was incurred as a direct result of the legal dispute.