The XRP[1] community was left fuming on 3 September after the United States Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC] filed its opposition[2] to Ripple’s motion[3] compelling the regulator to produce information about SEC employees’ XRP, Bitcoin, and Ether holdings.
On 7 September, Ripple[4] filed its reply,[5] touching upon three of the SEC’s reasons for refusal,[6] to further support its own motion.
Defense lawyer and former federal prosecutor James K. Filan shared[7] a redacted copy of Ripple’s filing on Twitter.
A question of privacy
The SEC had previously explained[8] that its employees’ trading information is collected by an office called the “Ethics Counsel.” According to the agency, handing over the “sensitive data”[9] – even in aggregate form[10] – would be an intrusion into the privacy of SEC employees.
In its reply, however, Ripple claimed[11] the SEC’s opposition “ignores or misstates key issues” relevant to the court.
Responding to the SEC’s privacy concerns, the blockchain firm clarified[12],
“Defendants seek production only of aggregate, completely anonymized information of a narrow scope and for a limited period of time.”
What’s more, the defendant also asserted that there is no Privacy Act which would block the court from ordering the production of the aforementioned information.
Burden of production
Another bone of contention was the SEC alleging that material from up to nine years ago[13] might have to be produced. As per its filing, this “burden of production”[14] would strain the resources of the “Ethics Counsel.”
Needless to say, Ripple disagreed with the agency, claiming that as per its understanding, the SEC’s XRP records spanned
