ChainCatcher reports that Coinbase Chief Legal Officer Paul Grewal has revealed that footnote 6 of the SEC's amended complaint against Binance clarifies: "As this Court has noted and the SEC reiterates, the SEC's use of the term 'crypto asset securities' does not mean that a crypto asset is itself a security; rather, as the SEC has consistently held since the first crypto asset Howey case, the term is merely shorthand. See Telegram Case (“While helpful as a shorthand reference, the securities in this case are not merely the crypto assets, which are nothing more than alphanumeric strings of code… the securities in this case include the full contracts, expectations, and understandings surrounding the sale and distribution of the crypto assets.”).

However, to avoid any confusion, the amended complaint no longer uses that shorthand term, and the SEC regrets any confusion it may have caused.

As the Court explained, the crypto assets are the subject of investment contracts. Defendants seem to argue that even if ten crypto assets were issued and sold as securities during their Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs), they do not remain securities forever. The SEC has not made that argument. The SEC’s allegations regarding the ten crypto assets in the secondary market are that their marketing and economic substance have not changed materially under the Howey test, and therefore they continue to be issued and sold as investment contracts.