According to a medium post published by Alex Liu from Tezos Commons, the Tezos lawsuit is not yet over. This is after widespread speculation on social media that the federal lawsuit against Tezos had been wrapped up. Liu noted that the confusion on social media had emerged after another class-action suit was dismissed in federal court. He noted that while that would be great news for everyone, it was not true. That class-action suit was dismissed after an attorney argued the state of California had no jurisdiction over Tezos.

Not Much Progress

Liu noted that the ongoing federal case against Tezos has not seen much progress. The only significant progress in the case was the fact that it had been pushed to early 2020. Initially, a conference was supposed to take place on December 12 but that will now happen on February 6, 2020.

Liu emphasized that his goal of updating the Tezos community about the case was not to influence their belief about the case. Rather, it was to share facts and information about what was unfolding in court. Armed with the facts, members of the Tezos community would be able to make their own decisions. He likened what he was doing to fight Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD), which is an important metric in determining price movements in the crypto market.

The SEC is Not Pursuing Tezos

While this is a federal lawsuit, the SEC is not the one suing Tezos, as has been the case with many other federal lawsuits in the crypto sector. Instead, private parties who are concerned about the status of Tezos as a security filed this lawsuit. They want to be refunded and paid damages for investing in Tezos.

Once the SEC sues crypto projects, they usually give in quite fast and opt for an amicable settlement with the SEC. The result is that they usually straighten things up and gain regulatory approval. Good examples of such projects are Sia and EOS. However, Tezos has nothing to gain from giving in to the demands of their accusers. It might be the reason why the case has dragged on since 2017. This latest delay seems to have been as a result of the holiday season, according to Liu. In most cases, courts tend to avoid complex litigation at this time and try to push it into the next year.

The SEC is Not Pursuing Tezos

SEC usually gets involved when a token offering has traits of a security. This usually comes with extra restrictions if the project is indeed ruled to be acting in the capacity of a “security”. However, Liu has previously posted that the SEC is not pursuing legal action against Tezos.

Tezos wants things to remain as they are. Most projects that attempt to launch their tokens these days are considered securities. One of the reasons why the SEC might not be going after Tezos is that in the past, it has declared it has no interest in pursuing a listing on an exchange. It is also worth noting that the Tezos token is not directly related to whether firms can use the Tezos platform to run their Security Token Offering. Various STOs have already been hosted on the platform with the most prominent being the tZero STO.

Image Source: Shutterstock

Notice: Information contained herein is not and should not be construed as an offer, solicitation, or recommendation to buy or sell securities. The information has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable; however no guarantee is made or implied with respect to its accuracy, timeliness, or completeness. Authors may own the crypto currency they discuss. The information and content are subject to change without notice. Visionary Financial and its affiliates do not provide investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. This material has been prepared for informational purposes only and is the opinion of the author, and is not intended to provide, and should not be relied on for, investment, tax, legal, accounting advice. You should consult your own investment, tax, legal and accounting advisors before engaging in any transaction. All content published by Visionary Financial is not an endorsement whatsoever. Visionary Financial was not compensated to submit this article Please also visit our Privacy policy; disclaimer; and terms and conditions page for further information.