奥里克和杰克逊法官对 SEC 的加密代币分类进行了打击

Orrick 法官在 SEC 诉 Payward Inc.（Kraken 案）中加入了这一讨论，向 SEC 发出了强烈的信息。

Pro-XRP lawyer Bill Morgan highlighted a crucial development in the SEC vs. Ripple case, where Judge Torres made a key distinction, reminding the SEC that the XRP token itself is not classified as a security. This pivotal moment in the legal saga directly challenges the SEC's stance on the nature of cryptocurrencies.

支持 XRP 的律师 Bill Morgan 强调了 SEC 诉 Ripple 案件的一个关键进展，托雷斯法官在该案中做出了关键区分，提醒 SEC，XRP 代币本身并不被归类为证券。法律传奇中的这一关键时刻直接挑战了 SEC 对加密货币性质的立场。

Moreover, in the SEC vs. Payward Inc. (Kraken case), Judge Orrick added to this discourse, delivering a pointed message to the SEC. Using an analogy, he stated, "Orange groves are no more securities than cryptocurrency tokens are." Orrick emphasized the need to differentiate between the nature of the cryptocurrency asset and its sales.

此外，在 SEC 诉 Payward Inc.（Kraken 案）中，Orrick 法官补充了这一论述，向 SEC 传递了尖锐的信息。他打了个比方，“橘子林并不比加密货币代币更安全。”奥里克强调需要区分加密货币资产的性质及其销售。

"The SEC should be careful going forward to maintain this distinction," he cautioned. Continuing, he noted that if the SEC insists on arguing that individual tokens used in Kraken transactions are investment contracts or securities, their case will fail.

“美国证券交易委员会应该谨慎行事，以维持这种区别，”他警告说。他继续指出，如果 SEC 坚持认为 Kraken 交易中使用的单个代币是投资合约或证券，他们的案子就会失败。

In another significant case, SEC vs. Binance, Judge Jackson roundly rejected the SEC's "embodiment theory," which posits that a crypto token is the embodiment of an investment contract.

在另一个重大案件中，SEC 诉币安，杰克逊法官彻底驳回了 SEC 的“体现理论”，该理论认为加密代币是投资合约的体现。

Jackson's dismissal of this notion underscores a growing judicial reluctance to accept the SEC's broad interpretation of securities laws as they pertain to digital assets. The pattern emerging from these cases suggests that courts are unlikely to deem the crypto asset itself to be a security, contrary to the SEC's arguments.

杰克逊对这一概念的驳回凸显出司法机构越来越不愿意接受美国证券交易委员会对涉及数字资产的证券法的广泛解释。这些案件中出现的模式表明，法院不太可能将加密资产本身视为证券，这与 SEC 的论点相反。

This begs the question: how many more judicial remarks like these will it take before the SEC abandons its failing embodiment hypothesis? The courts' continuous rejections may ultimately force the SEC to reconsider its approach or face the reality that the judiciary is unlikely to support its sweeping interpretations.

这就引出了一个问题：在 SEC 放弃其失败的体现假设之前，还需要多少次这样的司法评论？法院的持续拒绝可能最终迫使美国证券交易委员会重新考虑其做法，或者面对司法部门不太可能支持其全面解释的现实。

On a separate note, as we previously reported, legal expert Fred Rispoli raised an interesting point regarding the financial implications for the SEC if Ripple were to win on all counts in their court case.

另外，正如我们之前报道的，法律专家 Fred Rispoli 提出了一个有趣的观点，即如果 Ripple 在法庭案件的所有指控中获胜，对 SEC 的财务影响。

He wondered whether the SEC would be liable to pay statutory interest, which could set a precedent for how penalties are handled in future cases. This potential financial impact on the SEC might influence its strategy in ongoing and future cryptocurrency cases.

他想知道美国证券交易委员会是否有责任支付法定利息，这可能为未来案件中如何处理处罚树立先例。这种对 SEC 的潜在财务影响可能会影响其在当前和未来的加密货币案件中的策略。

In other news, CNF reports that OpenSea, the leading NFT platform, has received a Wells notice from the SEC, signaling upcoming enforcement action. The platform is set to contest the SEC's claim that NFTs are securities, allocating $5 million towards its legal defense.

在其他消息中，CNF 报道称，领先的 NFT 平台 OpenSea 已收到 SEC 的 Wells 通知，表明即将采取执法行动。该平台将针对 SEC 关于 NFT 是证券的说法提出质疑，并拨款 500 万美元用于其法律辩护。