Telegram Vs SEC: Investors Seeking Redaction in Telegram Case

Priyanka Kulkarni
Priyanka Kulkarni, post-graduated in Business Administration holds worthy experience in market research and investment banking. She is passionate to flaunt her perception towards cryptocurrencies.
  • Over 12 investment firms are looking for the redaction of documents that specify their strategic analyses in the SEC’s case against the messenger platform Telegram.
  • However, the other 11 firms are seeking redaction of their propriety analysis of the Telegram initial coin offering (ICO) from the case
  • Investor Z filed a motion to seal on February 4 that defines as revealing sensitive information such as the identity of the firm, its employees, and its patented investment approach.

Over 12 investment firms are looking for the redaction of documents that specify their strategic analyses in the SEC’s case against the messenger platform Telegram.

Revealing their Strategies is similar to Exposing the Recipe for Coca Cola publicly

Among those firms, an anonymous investment firm Investor Z is battling with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to save its Gram token investment strategies undisclosed.

However, the other 11 firms are seeking redaction of their propriety analysis of the Telegram initial coin offering (ICO) from the case. The Investor Z notified that revealing their strategies is similar to exposing the recipe for Coca Cola publicly.

In this case, the SEC has granted an injunction against the global distribution of Grams tokens as they have considered securities under US law. On March 30, the SEC penned a letter to Judge Castel stating that the injunction explicitly, and properly, applies to Telegram’s token Gram to any person or entity and requires no clarification.

Investor Z’s Concludes Three Arguments in Telegram Case

Investor Z filed a motion to seal on February 4, that defines as revealing sensitive information such as the identity of the firm, its employees, and its patented investment approach.

On the other side, the SEC has agreed to redact the names of certain investors and potential investors. The Investor Z pointed out, the SEC argued that redacting identifying information pertaining to several non-parties involved in the communication is enough to protect the privacy interests. As per Investor Z, the SEC is wrong.

In order to seal the disputed documentation, Investor Z comes up with three arguments.

The first one says the filing claims that the court regularly protects the categories of non-party proprietary information from public revelation. This includes trade secrets along with other proprietary information.

Secondly, the firm claims it willingly complied with the request information from the SEC expecting confidentiality.

Finally, the firm notifies by rejecting the Motion could possibly damage law enforcement by suppressing the contribution of non-parties in future SEC investigation.

We Recomaned

Top Rated Trading Platforms

Top Rated Cryptocurrency Exchange

Partners