Connect with us

Regulation

Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse Predicts XRP ETFs Arrival by 2025

Published

on


During an interview on Fox Business, the CEO of Ripple, Brad Garlinghouse, disclosed some of his views on the developments that are likely to occur in the future of cryptocurrencies including the launching of XRP ETFs.

His predictions are based on the recent launch of Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs; hence there are high chances that other cryptocurrencies, such as XRP, will also have ETFs by 2025.

Garlinghouse Emphasizes Certainty of XRP ETFs

Brad Garlinghouse’s recent comments have been made in the backdrop of increasing curiosity and rumours regarding the possible launch of an XRP ETF. In the course of the interview, he said,

‘It is only a matter of time and it is inevitable there’s going to be an XRP ETF.’

He says that the recent approval of Ethereum ETFs gives him confidence that XRP will soon be approved as well. He also elaborated on the expansion of investment possibilities not limited to Bitcoin and Ethereum, suggesting that XRP has potential for inclusion in crypto ETFs.

The Ripple CEO also commented on the need to have a clear legal framework which he said is critical in advancing and accepting of the cryptocurrency ETFs. Garlinghouse explains that the possible of cryptocurrencies is still viable if the right regulatory environment is put in place. He emphasized the importance of the regulators to change and grow as the market expands, implying that proper regulation will highly enhance the chances of an XRP ETF.

Regulatory Developments on Crypto ETFs

The discussion of XRP ETFs cannot be separated from the broader context of cryptocurrency regulation in the United States. Ripple and other prominent names in the cryptocurrency industry, like Coinbase and Grayscale, have advocated for a more accommodating regulatory approach by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Their efforts are to convince the SEC to update its regulatory framework to reflect the realities of the modern digital asset market.

The push for regulatory clarity is partly driven by the legal challenges faced by Ripple, which recently contended with a significant SEC lawsuit alleging improper sale practices of XRP to institutional investors. This lawsuit underscores the complexities and uncertainties surrounding cryptocurrency regulations in the U.S., which could impact the timing and feasibility of introducing XRP ETFs.

XRP price Performance

Amid these conversations, XRP’s price has been on a bullish note, with prices moving between a 24-hour high and low of $0.53 and $0.5185 respectively.

At press time, the XRP price was exchanging hands at $0.5254, a 0.92% surge from the support level. 

Concurrently, XRP’s market capitalization and 24-hour trading volume surged by 0.92% and 6.43% respectively to $29,127,941,177 and $1,161,873,100. 

Read Also: MiCA Regulations: Tether CEO Criticizes Bank Deposit Requirement for Stablecoins

✓ Share:

Kelvin is a distinguished writer specializing in crypto and finance, backed by a Bachelor’s in Actuarial Science. Recognized for incisive analysis and insightful content, he has an adept command of English and excels at thorough research and timely delivery.

The presented content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market condition. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.





Source link

Regulation

FTX Founder Sam Bankman-Fried’s Family Accused Of $100M Illicit Political Donation

Published

on

By


New allegations have surfaced surrounding Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF), the founder of the now-collapsed crypto exchange FTX. SBF’s family is now accused of being involved in a $100 million illicit political donation scheme. Moreover, these claims can lead to intense legal trouble for the accused.

Sam Bankman-Fried’s Family Accused Of Illegal Political Donation

Emails disclosed by The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) have brought to light the extensive involvement of SBF’s family in orchestrating these political contributions. Furthermore, an important point to note is that these donations were allegedly funded by misappropriated FTX customer assets.

Prosecutors asserted that Bankman-Fried orchestrated a sprawling influence campaign ahead of the 2022 election, leveraging stolen customer funds to the tune of over $100 million. The newly revealed emails suggest that key family members played pivotal roles in the scheme. These include SBF’s parents, Joe Bankman and Barbara Fried, along with his brother, Gabriel Bankman-Fried. They managed these funds and directed donations to various political causes and candidates.

Moreover, Joe Bankman, a Stanford University law professor, is accused of advising on financial strategies to facilitate these political donations. The WSJ reports that emails show Joe Bankman’s direct involvement in the illicit operations, indicating he was well aware of the illegal straw-donor scheme.

Barbara Fried, who co-founded the political action committee (PAC) Mind the Gap, allegedly used her position to channel funds towards progressive groups and initiatives. Meanwhile, Gabriel Bankman-Fried is accused of directing donations to pandemic prevention efforts. This coordinated effort to disperse funds across the political spectrum aimed to amplify their influence and support favored causes without drawing attention to the origin of the donations.

Also Read: Fmr Obama Solicitor Says Regulators Are “Deliberately Debanking Crypto”

Former FTX Execs Also Involved

David Mason, ex-chairman of the Federal Election Commission (FCE), weighed in on the matter. Mason highlighted that the evidence presented in the emails constituted “strong evidence” of Joe Bankman’s knowledge and participation in the scheme.

The political donation scheme, as detailed by the WSJ, also involved Ryan Salame and Nishad Singh, two former FTX executives. They have already pleaded guilty to participating in the illegal straw-donor scheme. According to prosecutors, Salame directed funds to Republican candidates to dissociate the contributions from Bankman-Fried, while Singh supported liberal candidates.

The allegations have led to several legal proceedings, with the potential for significant legal liabilities for those involved. Moreover, Mason’s remarks underscore the gravity of the situation. It suggests that Joe Bankman could face direct legal consequences under campaign finance laws if the allegations are substantiated.

Despite the mounting evidence, a spokesperson for Joe Bankman has refuted claims of his involvement. They stated that Bankman had “no knowledge of any alleged campaign finance violations.” This defense, however, stands in stark contrast to the detailed emails that have surfaced.

Also Read: Just-In: Mt. Gox Starts Repaying Creditors, Bitcoin To Dip Further?

✓ Share:

Kritika boasts over 2 years of experience in the financial news sector. Currently working as a crypto journalist at Coingape, she has consistently shown a knack for blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies. Kritika combines insightful analysis with a deep understanding of market trends. With a keen interest in technical analysis, she brings a nuanced perspective to her reporting, exploring the intersection of finance, technology, and emerging trends in the crypto space.

The presented content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market condition. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.





Source link

Continue Reading

Regulation

OpenAI Challenges NYT to Prove Originality of Articles in Copyright Case

Published

on

By


In a notable legal confrontation, OpenAI has requested that the New York Times (NYT) validate the originality of its articles. The AI firm demands the court mandate NYT disclose detailed source materials for each copyrighted article. This move is part of an ongoing lawsuit in which the NYT accuses OpenAI of using its content without permission.

OpenAI Requests Transparency from NYT

OpenAI’s legal team has approached a New York court with a significant demand. They insist that the NYT provide comprehensive details about the creation process of its articles. The request includes access to the reporter’s notes, interview records, and other source materials. OpenAI argues that this information is crucial to determine the originality and authorship of the articles in question.

 

The court filing by OpenAI aims to explore the depth and authenticity of the NYT’s journalistic process. Their lawyers argue that the NYT’s claim of substantial investment in high-quality journalism prompts a need for transparency. They believe understanding the creation process is essential for the court to make a fair judgment.

 

OpenAI argues that such disclosure is necessary for its defense. Detailed insight into the NYT’s authorship process will help ascertain whether the articles are original works. The NYT made this request following allegations that OpenAI unauthorizedly used its content to train AI models.

 

Also Read: German Lawmaker Wants Government To HODL Bitcoin (BTC), Not Sell

NYT Fights Back on Copyright Infringement

Responding swiftly, the NYT’s legal team filed a motion to dismiss OpenAI’s request on July 3. They argue that OpenAI’s demands are excessive and could set a troubling precedent for copyright law. The NYT contends that the intricacies of their journalistic practices are irrelevant to the issue of copyright infringement.

 

The NYT’s opposition stresses that the request undermines the basic principles of copyright law. They believe that proving the content creation process does not pertain to the alleged misuse. The NYT’s lawyers highlight that the focus should remain whether OpenAI used the copyrighted articles without authorization.

 

Furthermore, the NYT accuses OpenAI of attempting to divert the court’s attention from the real issue at hand. They maintain that the lawsuit should concentrate on the legality of OpenAI’s use of the NYT’s copyrighted content. The newspaper defends its rights to its intellectual property, arguing that the creation process should remain protected.

Also Read: Core Scientific Founder Claims Bitcoin’s True Value Not Yet Realized

✓ Share:

Maxwell is a crypto-economic analyst and Blockchain enthusiast, passionate about helping people understand the potential of decentralized technology. I write extensively on topics such as blockchain, cryptocurrency, tokens, and more for many publications. My goal is to spread knowledge about this revolutionary technology and its implications for economic freedom and social good.

The presented content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market condition. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.





Source link

Continue Reading

Regulation

Former Solicitor General Paul Clement Joins Crypto Industry Fight

Published

on

By


A week after Custodia Bank filed an appeal in the 10th Circuit Court challenging the Fed’s power to deny it a master account, former Solicitor General Paul Clement has now filed an amicus brief on behalf of the crypto industry.

Paul Clement Takes Custodia Bank vs Fed Fight Ahead

As said, in the recent Custodia Bank vs. Fed case, Paul Clement filed an Amicus brief on Wednesday, July 3, while supporting the crypto industry. Clement has gained popularity in his recent success in overturning the Chevron Defence in the Supreme Court case in the Supreme Court case involving Loper Bright fishermen.

Also Read: US SEC Takes Major Blow In Chevron Howey Test Case, Implication For Crypto

In this ongoing legal fight, The Digital Chamber (TDC) and the Global Business Blockchain Council-USA (GBBC-USA) have expressed their significant interest and unique perspective. With extensive experience in the digital assets industry, the two organizations have argued that denying state-chartered banks a reliable path to participate in the national banking just because of the involvement with digital assets will threaten the growth and success of the trillion-dollar blockchain industry.

The two organization argue that upholding the lower court’s decision will give politically unaccountable federal officials and unchecked power to stiffle innovation thereby cutting off legitimate businesses from having crucial access to the global financial system.

The District Court stated that the “Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (“FRBKC”) has unreviewable discretion to denynonmember depository institutionsa master account”.

TDC and GBBC argued that despite following the legal boundaries, this court decision set dangerous precedence for any industry that might fall out with the Fed officials.

Paul Clement Raises Constitutional Concerns on Fed’s Structure

In the amicus brief, the former Solicitor General has raised some constitutional questions regarding the Fed’s structure. Clement states: “In sum, by affording Federal Reserve Bank presidents significant and largely unconstrained discretionary power, the district court’s decision raises serious constitutional questions under Article II.”

“The district court’s decision threatens the dual system by granting Federal Reserve Bank officials unreviewable discretion to “effectively crippl[e]” state-chartered banks operating legally,” he added.

Also Read: Custodia Bank CEO Predicts “Rip Roaring” Bitcoin Bull Market

✓ Share:

Bhushan is a FinTech enthusiast and holds a good flair in understanding financial markets. His interest in economics and finance draw his attention towards the new emerging Blockchain Technology and Cryptocurrency markets. He is continuously in a learning process and keeps himself motivated by sharing his acquired knowledge. In free time he reads thriller fictions novels and sometimes explore his culinary skills.

The presented content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market condition. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2024 coin2049.io