Conclusion of section 2: "the Court concludes that Ripple’s Programmatic Sales of XRP did not constitute the offer and sale of investment contracts."
If it's not an investment contract, it's not a security. That's one of the major points of the whole decision. Section 1 details ways that sales to institutional buyers did involve a contract.
The footnote just says the decision does not directly address exchanges. But it's hard to see how the arguments in section 2 wouldn't apply to exchanges just as well.
Sure - The point is it’s not as simple as “w00t Ripple won it’s not a security”, as the conduct of exchanges with respect to the token was explicitly not examined.
If it's not an investment contract, it's not a security. That's one of the major points of the whole decision. Section 1 details ways that sales to institutional buyers did involve a contract.
The footnote just says the decision does not directly address exchanges. But it's hard to see how the arguments in section 2 wouldn't apply to exchanges just as well.