Crypto researcher SMQKE has recently proved that XRP was created before Ripple, the San Francisco-based cross-border payment firm, emerged.
In an X post, SMQKE wrote, “Yes, XRP was created before Ripple. Documented.” Alongside the post, he shared an image of a passage from the SMU Science and Technology Law Review.
The section, titled “Difference Between Ripple and XRP,” contains detailed commentary on the relationship between the two, noting their separate purposes and histories.
Yes, XRP was created before Ripple.✅
Documented.📝👇 pic.twitter.com/wOXHqUNTA7
— SMQKE (@SMQKEDQG) September 15, 2025
Details from the Referenced Legal Review
The academic review explains that Ripple and XRP are often incorrectly used as if they mean the same thing, when in reality they are distinct.
Ripple is described as a privately owned company focused on developing solutions such as software and platforms to facilitate global money transfers at a lower cost. In contrast, XRP is defined as an independent cryptocurrency designed to operate as a bridge currency across various platforms.
The review makes clear that while Ripple employs XRP in its products to provide banks and financial institutions with liquidity, the company does not own or control the technology behind XRP.
Instead, XRP runs on open-source technology that is not controlled by any single entity and can be utilized or modified by anyone. This separation is central to the legal review’s conclusion, which emphasizes that XRP operates independently of Ripple and that the two cannot be interchanged.
We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1
— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025
Emphasis on Independence
The review further distinguishes Ripple’s governance from XRP’s structure. Control over Ripple is held by its founders, directors, employees, and investors. By contrast, XRP is open to anyone who chooses to use it, with no centralized ownership.
This distinction highlights the broader framework in which XRP functions, where governance is distributed and access is not dependent on corporate involvement. The review positions Ripple as a company that builds financial products, and XRP as a digital asset that stands on its own.
The Core Point Presented
By highlighting the statement from the SMU Science and Technology Law Review, SMQKE’s post underscores the documented fact that XRP predates Ripple. This chronology is presented in the review as evidence that the two should never be considered the same.
The distinction carries implications for how XRP’s role is discussed within the broader financial and regulatory environment, as it emphasizes its independence from the corporate entity.
Disclaimer: This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are advised to conduct thorough research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses.
Follow us on X, Facebook, Telegram, and Google News
