The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has claimed that the attorney-client privilege protects internal documents pertaining to Hinman’s speech.

As a result, the SEC has provided the court with three categories of documents related to its motion in order to have the court conduct an in-camera review of those documents.

There is a connection between these three papers and the controversial Ethereum lecture that Bill Hinman gave in 2018. The SEC has broken the filing down into three distinct groups based on its contents.

The court issued an order on June 14, 2022, requiring the Securities and Exchange Commission to submit internal records to support its argument that it is protected by attorney-client privilege.

This particular contribution may be broken down into three distinct pieces. The first group comprises emails sent by David Frederickson to explore the legal repercussions of his remarks. The submission also includes Hinman’s receipt of legal counsel in relation to the speech, which is included in the submission.

The second category contains memoranda of emails that date back to June 2018 and were sent by Hinman’s attorney. Michael Seaman, who serves as Hinman’s Counsel, sent the aforementioned emails to Hinman, Frederickson, and Szczepanik respectively.

An attachment to the email contains numerous versions of speeches, each of which contains the legal advice provided by a different division of the SEC.

The email that Hinman sent to the attorney’s TM, IM, and OGC is included in the third and final category of submissions. The enclosed version of the manuscript is comparable to the one that Seaman provided to Hinman on June 11, 2018. In addition to that, e-mails about the final remarks are included.

For context: In 2020, the SEC filed a lawsuit against Ripple Labs on the grounds that the company had issued and sold unauthorized securities to the general public in the form of XRP tokens. Ripple has stated that the sale of XRP was legal and did not violate any laws in doing so.

The lecture given by William Hinman in 2018 in which he declared that Ethereum is not a security has been a crucial factor in the lawsuit.

The defendants have asked the Commission on many occasions to differentiate between Ripple’s XRP and Ethereum’s ETH, and they have done so while maintaining the same line of argumentation. The judge also thought that the speech was extremely pertinent to the matter that they were hearing.

Share