Judge Castel asked the SEC not to impose labels on the Telegram token and not impose its point of view before the court during the trial.

The federal judge in charge of the case of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) against the Telegram company dismissed the allegations of the regulatory body in which it assures that the company carried out an illegal sale of securities.

After the start of the recent hearing, Judge P. Kevin Castel invited the parties involved in the legal dispute to consider the economic landscape under which the sale of Telegram tokens took place, ensuring that complaints and labels provided by the SEC do not influence how the court sees the asset traded.

Arguments of the SEC and Telegram during the trial

During their participation, SEC representatives placed special emphasis on the trial in which Telegram violated federal securities laws by selling its GRAM token. Specifically, the lawyer of the regulatory body, Jorge Tenreiro, said that although the company conducted this campaign privately, there were no measures to prevent the resale of assets in secondary markets, which resulted in additional profits and a violation of Section 5 of the securities law.

For his part, Telegram’s lawyer, Alexander Drylewski, assured that the token launched by the company in the pre-sale campaign does not meet the criteria to be considered a value, because the asset does not apply for the Howey Test unless it had been offered to Those interested with the promise of administrative supervision that would increase its value over time. In the case of GRAM, tokens lose meaning as values ​​once the Blockchain TON network is fully operational.

Regarding the accusations by the SEC, Judge Castel noted that Telegram included a clause to restrict the resale of the GRAMs before its official launch, but Tenreiro said that this seemed to be a mere verbal agreement without real guarantees of compliance. , since there is not enough evidence that this promise was to be kept over the months.

In this regard, Drylewski indicated that they should apply certain exemptions for the presale of GRAM, since private investors confirmed that they did not resell the tokens in secondary markets before the launch of TON, and that Telegram could not be held responsible for those owners who made agreements without Have the company’s consent.

GRAM similar to gold?

Evaluating the conditions of the case and the facts reported, Judge Castel compared the sale of the GRAM token with the gold market, since he does not doubt the interest of investors in the asset in question and about the possibility of speculating about it.

Before the comments of Castel, the lawyer Tenreiro assured that after the private sale organized by the directors of Telegram, the subsequent campaigns were suspended for more than a year, for which there was no reasonable justification, contributing to generate spaces for the token it would be revalued more and initial investors traded their assets in other markets.

The trial continues

Although the trial on its first day was loaded with endless accusations, Castel said there would be a resolution for this case before April 30, so the analysis of the case will continue to be able to make decisions about the future of the campaign Telegram-driven commercial.

Both Telegram and the investors wait for the resolution of the case to be able to continue with what was stated in the project roadmap, whose next step would be the official launch of the GRAM token for marketing in authorized exchanges and the opening of the Blockchain TON network in Mainnet phase

What's your reaction?
Happy0
Lol0
Wow0
Wtf0
Sad0
Angry0
Rip0
Leave a Comment