Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Galapagos Islands -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (47861)	9/29/2003 9:13:20 PM
From: mph	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 57110

it's probably like a probation order. Probationers are prohibited from violating any laws. (Actually, it's usually stated in the inverse---obey all laws) Violation is then a reason to revoke probation. I don't know much about SEC proceedings, but I'll infer that, by adding an injunctive provision, this would give the court an opportunity to retain jurisdiction and lower the boom in the case of any future violations. Dolts or not, I can see where this would be puzzling since the laws are already in place and an injunction against violation would therefore seem superfluous. Ask Smithee since he may have more exposure to these kinds of matters. Being a semi porn director and all. :-)