Recent Developments in Regulatory Framework: Ripple vs SEC Settlement and its Implications on Confidential Agreements
news
2 min read
Bill Morgan Debunks XRP NDA Expiry Theory After Ripple vs SEC Settlement
The recent conclusion of the Ripple vs SEC lawsuit has sparked a flurry of speculation surrounding non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) tied to the company. Specifically, some have suggested that the 1,700 NDAs reportedly associated with Ripple could now be revealed, citing the end of the legal battle as a catalyst for this supposed ‘exposure’. However, prominent lawyer Bill Morgan has come forward to debunk this notion, labeling it “nonsense”.
Morgan’s argument centers on the fact that these agreements were drafted and signed before the lawsuit even commenced. Consequently, it is illogical to assume that NDAs would be structured in such a way as to expire only when the lawsuit is resolved. Instead, he emphasizes that NDAs typically have expiration dates set well in advance of any legal proceedings.
The lawyer further highlighted that these agreements are not solely focused on protecting Ripple’s interests but rather serve the purpose of safeguarding institutions, banks, and companies that have partnered with the firm. Morgan underscores the significance of maintaining confidentiality in such agreements, stating that breaking an NDA could result in serious legal and financial consequences for all parties involved.
The claim surrounding NDAs has been fuelled by the idea that these documents may be hiding monumental news, including partnerships with major banks or undisclosed technology developments. However, expert insights from Yale Law professor Alan Schwartz have shed light on the true nature of these agreements. It is essential to note that not all 1,700 agreements are strictly NDAs; they fall into four main categories: direct XRP transfers in commercial deals, trading agreements where partners sold XRP on Ripple’s behalf, service payments made in XRP, and a mixed bag of other contracts.
Morgan’s statement serves as a reality check for the XRP community, dispelling any notion that the recent settlement would lead to an immediate revelation of the company’s dealings.
Source: coinpedia.org
