#六家区块链机构吁sec定义数字商品
【Six major blockchain networks jointly pressure the SEC: clarify which tokens are not securities】
The six organizations behind Chainlink, Hedera, Aptos, Avalanche, Stellar, and Cardano are urging the SEC to formally include a definition of “digital commodities” in its regulatory rules. An interpretive document issued in March pointed the way, but the industry is not satisfied with regulators simply explaining things verbally—it wants rules that are harder to change at will.
The key distinction is that a token not being a security does not mean that every issuance or transaction involving it falls outside securities laws. The six organizations want the SEC to clarify that even if a token has been involved in an investment contract, that should not automatically make the token itself a security; secondary-market transactions should also be subject to clearer criteria.
This has practical implications for ecosystems such as $LINK , $ADA , and $AVAX : project financing, exchange listings, and institutional participation all require more predictable legal boundaries. But this joint letter does not mean regulators have approved anything, nor does it mean these tokens are now immune from regulation.
The industry is not fighting over a flattering label; it wants to know whether it can do business with confidence over the next few years. The real catalyst is whether the SEC’s final rules adopt these requests. Until they are formally implemented, treat this as progress toward greater regulatory certainty—not as a direct signal that token prices will rise.
【Six major blockchain networks jointly pressure the SEC: clarify which tokens are not securities】
The six organizations behind Chainlink, Hedera, Aptos, Avalanche, Stellar, and Cardano are urging the SEC to formally include a definition of “digital commodities” in its regulatory rules. An interpretive document issued in March pointed the way, but the industry is not satisfied with regulators simply explaining things verbally—it wants rules that are harder to change at will.
The key distinction is that a token not being a security does not mean that every issuance or transaction involving it falls outside securities laws. The six organizations want the SEC to clarify that even if a token has been involved in an investment contract, that should not automatically make the token itself a security; secondary-market transactions should also be subject to clearer criteria.
This has practical implications for ecosystems such as $LINK , $ADA , and $AVAX : project financing, exchange listings, and institutional participation all require more predictable legal boundaries. But this joint letter does not mean regulators have approved anything, nor does it mean these tokens are now immune from regulation.
The industry is not fighting over a flattering label; it wants to know whether it can do business with confidence over the next few years. The real catalyst is whether the SEC’s final rules adopt these requests. Until they are formally implemented, treat this as progress toward greater regulatory certainty—not as a direct signal that token prices will rise.