Prominent crypto expert Digital Asset Investor has spotlighted a long-standing debate within the crypto community regarding the SEC's handling of Ethereum. The differing treatment of Ethereum's ICO compared to Ripple raises questions.

SEC's Regulatory Inconsistencies

At the heart of the issue is the question of fairness in regulatory enforcement. Ethereum's ICO, akin to Ripple's XRP sales, involved token exchanges for funding, considered by some as unregistered securities sales under U.S. law. However, while Ripple has faced high-profile legal battles, Ethereum has not been scrutinized similarly by the SEC. This disparity leads to questions about the reasons behind the Commission's different approach.

Possible Reasons for SEC's Selective Approach

One potential reason for Ethereum's regulatory exemption could be the 2018 speech by former SEC Director William Hinman. He suggested Ethereum had reached sufficient decentralization and thus was no longer considered a security. Critics argue this does not clarify why Ethereum's ICO wasn't examined like other projects such as Ripple. Some propose that Ethereum benefitted from preferential SEC treatment, creating a double standard in the enforcement of U.S. securities laws.

Crypto Community's Reaction

The XRP community expresses growing frustration with the SEC's inconsistency, especially given the significant impact on companies like Ripple. Cardano creator Charles Hoskinson has stated that while Hinman may have favored Ethereum, there is no evidence of corruption.

Discussions about the SEC's approach to Ethereum and Ripple highlight broader regulatory issues within the crypto sphere and the ongoing debate over the need for fairness and transparency in regulatory actions.