A recent legal analysis from William & Mary Law School, the oldest existing law school in the United States, suggests XRP buyers procured a slice of Ripple’s future cash flow.
The report, authored by University of Texas law professor James C. Spindler and published in May 2025, asserts that XRP buyers essentially acquired an economic interest in Ripple’s future revenue streams. However, it also suggests a legal gray area that complicates the situation.
SMQKE, an independent crypto researcher, first brought the academic report to public attention in a post on X, triggering discussions within the XRP community.
XRP Holders Have Bought a Slice of Ripple’s Future Cash Flow
The report argues that XRP, while not conferring legal ownership or entitlements like dividends or voting rights, still functions like a vehicle for sharing in Ripple’s future business success.
It suggests that investors are seen as betting on Ripple’s long-term profitability, specifically, revenue from its blockchain-based transaction settlement system, when they purchase XRP. The report argued that XRP’s value hinges on the success of Ripple’s infrastructure.
Ripple and XRP Commentary on William and Mary Law Review
Despite this, the report also calls attention to an important nuance. It claimed XRP doesn’t provide formal investor protections typically associated with securities, such as enforceable rights or disclosures under SEC regulations.
This creates a paradox. While the economic relationship resembles an investment in Ripple, the legal structure avoids traditional oversight.
XRP’s Utility Differentiates It from Normal Bonds
Meanwhile, Ripple has long maintained that XRP is a functional token used to facilitate cross-border payments, not an investment contract. Interestingly, the report acknowledged the strength of this argument.
The paper credits Ripple for constructing a system where XRP serves an actual use case, fueling transactions within its payment ecosystem, rather than merely existing as a speculative asset.
It points out that XRP is essential to the system’s operation, with users required to utilize the token to process transactions on the XRPL, and as an optional bridge asset in Ripple Payments. This utility-focused design supports Ripple’s claim that the token is fundamentally different from a stock or bond.
The legal scholar also highlights the broader implications if Ripple’s approach becomes widely adopted. According to the report, companies might tokenize segments of future cash flows and distribute them through crypto markets, potentially bypassing regulatory scrutiny.
Still, the report concedes that Ripple is one of the few crypto firms with a real, revenue-generating business, which lends credibility to its model.
Ripple and SEC Already Looking to End the Age-old Lawsuit
The report surfaces as Ripple and the SEC have recently agreed to abandon their appeals in the ongoing legal dispute. Both parties are now seeking court approval to finalize a settlement, indicating a possible end to one of the most high-profile crypto enforcement battles in recent years.
Ripple’s partial legal victory in 2023, which found that certain XRP sales did not violate securities laws, bolstered its standing in the crypto industry.
The report from William & Mary suggests that while the company may have skirted traditional frameworks, its operational transparency and real-world use case put it in a different category from purely speculative ventures.
