Ripple’s Post-Lawsuit NDA Drama: Legal Expert Bill Morgan Drops Truth Bombs

Ripple’s legal battles might be over, but the fallout is just heating up. Lawyer Bill Morgan—no stranger to crypto’s courtroom circus—just ripped the lid off Ripple’s NDA obligations in a post-lawsuit world. Here’s why it matters.

### The NDA Tightrope: What Ripple Can (and Can’t) Say Now

Morgan’s take? NDAs don’t magically dissolve after a lawsuit. Ripple’s legal team is still gagged on certain details—unless they want a sequel nobody asked for. Spoiler: Wall Street’s compliance departments are taking notes (between martini lunches).

### Crypto’s Favorite Legal Whiplash

XRP holders wanted clarity. What they got? A masterclass in legal fine print. Morgan’s analysis cuts through the jargon: Ripple’s victory lap comes with strings attached—like every ‘win’ in crypto.

### The Punchline? Finance Never Learns

Meanwhile, traditional banks are still using NDAs from the dial-up era. But hey, at least crypto’s chaos is transparent. *Adjusts tinfoil hat.*

Bill Morgan Take on Ripple NDA Responsibilities

In his recent comments on X, Bill Morgan questioned whether Ripple could easily bypass its confidentiality obligations tied to various NDAs signed over the years. He emphasized that the NDAs were likely drafted before the SEC lawsuit began and may extend beyond the conclusion of legal proceedings.

Bill Morgan’s remarks suggest that these confidentiality agreements, which have been part of Ripple’s extensive network of contracts, could still be enforced.

When those NDAs were drafted, probably all before the lawsuit was commenced, do you really believe the confidentiality and non-disclosure obligations, no matter which party or both parties owed and benefitted from the obligations, were drafted to expire at the end of the lawsuit.… https://t.co/IVM6I1AIeB

— bill morgan (@Belisarius2020) August 8, 2025

Morgan’s comments came shortly after Ripple and the SEC filed to dismiss their appeals, officially closing a chapter in the legal battle that has spanned years. With Ripple’s legal challenges fading, questions are now arising about the future handling of its contracts with financial institutions. As Ripple continues to expand its influence, its obligations under these NDAs could affect how it shares information moving forward.

Ripple Expanding Regulatory Presence

Another aspect Morgan discussed was Ripple’s increasing regulatory footprint. Ripple has already signed over 1,700 NDAs with major banks and financial institutions. Many of these agreements are likely still in effect, and the firm may face limitations on what it can disclose publicly. The lawyer pointed out that the expiration of these confidentiality obligations is not necessarily tied to the SEC lawsuit’s resolution.

The expansion of Ripple’s regulatory presence also adds complexity to its position. Ripple’s recent acquisition of Rail, a company with multiple money transmitter licenses in the U.S., enhances Ripple’s regulatory bandwidth.

By gaining further licenses, Ripple positions itself to navigate financial regulations more effectively. This MOVE could give Ripple an advantage over competitors, like Custodia Bank, which holds only a single license in Wyoming. However, the ongoing validity of NDAs may limit Ripple’s ability to share key details about its operations or future moves.

Continued NDA Obligations for Ripple and Its Clients

Bill Morgan also raised an important question: Do Ripple’s NDA obligations benefit Ripple alone, or are they designed to protect its clients as well? Morgan’s perspective suggests that Ripple WOULD not be able to breach these agreements without consequences, especially since they likely include confidentiality provisions that extend well beyond the SEC case’s conclusion.

The growing list of the firm’s partners and clients has reinforced its role in the financial technology space, and the firm must navigate these complex obligations carefully.

While Ripple is pushing forward in its business dealings, it’s important to note that the company may still be bound by strict non-disclosure terms. Ripple’s legal obligations under these agreements could affect how they manage proprietary information and share data with the public and stakeholders.