Ripple Resolves Long Time Lawsuit Against YouTube

0
69
SBI CEO: Ripple to Go Public After the SEC Lawsuit

Ripple filed a lawsuit against Youtube for failing to stop XRP giveaway scams almost a year ago. Ripple Labs resolved the issue but did not provide any further details.

Ripple Settled With YouTube

In April 2020, Ripple had taken legal action against YouTube, the largest platform for video sharing. It claimed the Google company failed to protect its customers from an increasing number of fraudulent gifts.

In particular, Ripple is focused on impersonations of its executives who are allegedly willing to double up on any XRP tokens sent to certain addresses. In reality, however, these are just blatant scams as the perpetrator has no intention of sending anything back to the user.

Ripple said at the time that YouTube should be responsible for not doing its own thing. Brad Garlinghouse, CEO of Ripple, announced that the two parties have now settled the lawsuit about a year later.

Although he pointed out that the exact terms of the settlement are still confidential, the executive said YouTube and Ripple “have now come up with a solution to work together to prevent, detect and eliminate these scams”.

SEC Strikes Back at Ripple for Lawsuit Dismissal

Today, Ripple’s name seems to have become synonymous with litigation. Another such case went into effect in late 2020 when the US Securities and Exchange Commission filed allegations of unregistered securities issuance against Ripple.

Since then, payment processors have repeatedly insisted that XRP tokens are not securities and vowed to put the committee at a disadvantage. Ripple also filed a motion for dismissal earlier this month.

However, the SEC decided to take revenge by mailing back a letter in which attorney Jorge Tenreiro asked the judge to deny the motion because Ripple was trying to “avoid liability for his actions”.

“The SEC therefore respectfully requests that the Court set a joint briefing schedule for the SEC’s motion to strike and the upcoming motions to dismiss by Defendants Bradley Garlinghouse and Christian Larsen, given the significant overlap in “fair notice” issues raised by both sets of motions.”

In addition, the letter found that Ripple’s attempted defense strategy was “not legally appropriate” because Ripple did not obey the law. Instead, the company believes that SEC employees must warn industry participants of violations by other participants, even if the employees are conducting private investigations. This is a requirement that does not exist in our legal system.