The recent approval of spot Ethereum products by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has sparked a heated debate among legal experts, leaving many wondering whether ether is indeed a commodity or a security. The SEC's decision to greenlight eight Ethereum ETFs has only added fuel to the fire, with some arguing that this move confirms ether's status as a commodity, while others believe that the agency's stance remains ambiguous.

According to Coinbase's Chief Legal Officer, Paul Grewal, the SEC's approval of Ethereum ETFs is a "watershed moment" in the long-running debate over ether's status. Grewal asserts that since issuers used the Form S-1, a certain percentage of assets in the fund can be securities, implying that ether is not a security. However, others, including Coy Garrison, former counsel for SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce, argue that the SEC's approval order confirms that ETH is a commodity.

Despite the SEC's approval, the agency's Chair, Gary Gensler, has not explicitly stated that ether is a security. In fact, Consensys alleged that the agency has considered ether to be a security in a complaint filed last month. Meanwhile, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) Chair, Rostin Behnam, has asserted that ether is a commodity. This conflicting stance has created a legal quagmire, leaving many to wonder whether the SEC's approval of Ethereum ETFs has changed anything.

Legal experts are divided on the issue, with some arguing that the SEC's approval of Ethereum ETFs means that ether is not a security, while others believe that the agency's stance remains unclear. Ashley Ebersole, general counsel at 0x Labs, notes that the SEC's approval order doesn't mean the agency has decided how to categorize ether, and that the door is still open for the SEC to say ETH is a security down the road. Martin Auerbach, of counsel at Withersworldwide, agrees, citing gold-based ETFs as an example of how the contents of an ETF don't need to be a security.

To further complicate matters, the classification of staked ether is likely an entirely different matter. The SEC has brought several lawsuits and reports of pending enforcement actions that suggest staked ETH, or even just ETH that is staked through a third party, could be classified separately from ether. According to a report from Galaxy Digital Holdings, staked ether likely qualifies as an investment contract, making it a security.

In conclusion, the SEC's approval of Ethereum ETFs has raised more questions than answers, leaving the status of ether unclear. While some argue that the move confirms ether's status as a commodity, others believe that the agency's stance remains ambiguous. As the legal landscape continues to evolve, one thing is certain – the debate over ether's status is far from over.