Oh BTW for all the attorneys on this thread...
Is it against the law to PM earnings news before the announcement??
And should I continue to hold those PM's..<VBG>
Rich, I wouldn't know for sure, since I'm just a movie director, and a bad one at that, but you might want to take a look at Section 21A of the Securities Act of 1934, which provides in part:
Judicial actions by Commission authorized
Whenever it shall appear to the Commission that any person has violated any provision of this chapter or the rules or regulations thereunder by purchasing or selling a security or security-based swap agreement (as defined in section 206B of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act) while in possession of material, nonpublic information in, or has violated any such provision by communicating such information in connection with, a transaction on or through the facilities of a national securities exchange or from or through a broker or dealer, and which is not part of a public offering by an issuer of securities other than standardized options or security futures products, the Commission--
may bring an action in a United States district court to seek, and the court shall have jurisdiction to impose, a civil penalty to be paid by the person who committed such violation; and
may, subject to subsection (b)(1) of this section, bring an action in a United States district court to seek, and the court shall have jurisdiction to impose, a civil penalty to be paid by a person who, at the time of the violation, directly or indirectly controlled the person who committed such violation.
It appears to these old movie director eyes that what is illegal is trading on material, nonpublic information. If you found yourself in possession of information that you reasonably believed to be material, nonpublic information about a stock, and you traded on it, you could have liability yourself.
As for the means of communication, I don't think Congress or the SEC have spoken on the subject of PM'ing information. I seem to recall having heard about an early insider trading case where some schmoe who worked for a financial printer was held liable for insider trading when he traded on information that he knew to be material inside information. Again, there's that hook - it's the trading on insider information that is illegal.
Just an observation.
Have a nice weekend. |
