Does this really need saying:
If you're going to commit a crime, don't document it.
Some might wish they could go back to the onset of the pandemic and invest in online communication tools. The problem for three software developers facing charges of insider trading is that they worked for one of these companies. The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) said on Monday that the three engineers were …
True, but maybe they might not of thought they were committing a crime.
This seems to be a crime because of the timing of their actions.
"It is alleged the developers, as employees, agreed to keep such information confidential and were subject to a "black out policy," which prohibited trading for insiders during specific windows of time in the financial reporting cycle."
If they had done it outside of the "financial reporting cycle" it may not be a crime. If they did not access the end of year Financial Report before it was released have they committed the crime of Insider trading?
One place I worked (UK but US listed company) we used to get told end of year Financial Report before it was released but we were not allowed to impart that information to anyone, or act on it ourselves before the report was released as it would be Insider trading.
If they were not privy and have not accessed the Financial Report before it was released have they committed insider trading?
I'm not an expert but I'm fairly sure that trading based on any insider knowledge that an outsider wouldn't have access to ( such as in this case the contents of the database ) is illegal.
Such as if you know there's a big scandal coming, shorting the company or dumping your stock would be illegal. I think.
As a kid I learned that when Banks started to use computing to track accounts and calculate interest, a software developer wrote code to calculate all the monthly interest payments. When the account interest payment was a third of a pound, he made the bank deposited 33 pence in the customers account and moved 0.3333 pence to his account ... he was caught when they discovered that he had become incredibly wealthy.
Datacenter operator Switch Inc is being sued by investors over claims that it did not disclose key financial details when pursuing an $11 billion deal with DigitalBridge Group and IFM Investors that will see the company taken into private ownership if it goes ahead.
Two separate cases have been filed this week by shareholders Marc Waterman and Denise Redfield in the Federal Court in New York. The filings contain very similar claims that a proxy statement filed by Switch with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in regard to the proposed deal omitted material information regarding Switch's financial projections.
Both Redfield and Waterman have asked the Federal Court to put the deal on hold, or to undo it in the event that Switch manages in the meantime to close the transaction, and to order Switch to issue a new proxy statement that sets out all the relevant material information.
A US congressional hearing on "combating tech bro culture" in the venture capital world is will take place this week, with some of the biggest names in startup funding under the spotlight.
The House Financial Services Committee's Task Force on Financial Technology is scheduled to meet on Thursday. FSC majority staff said in a memo [PDF] the hearing will focus on how VCs have failed to invest in, say, fintech companies founded by women and people of color.
We're told Sallie Krawcheck, CEO and cofounder of Ellevest; Marceau Michel, founder of Black Founders Matter; Abbey Wemimo, cofounder and co-CEO of Esusu; and Maryam Haque, executive director of Venture Forward have at least been invited to speak at the meeting.
Elon Musk still hopes to quash a 2018 settlement agreement with the SEC requiring Tesla-related tweets to be approved by a lawyer before he can post them: on Wednesday, he took his case to the US Court of Appeals after a lower court denied this request.
The Tesla CEO landed himself in hot water with the watchdog when he tweeted he was thinking of taking the company private at $420 a share, and claimed to have already secured the necessary funding (sound familiar?) In reality, however, Musk did not have the funding or approval to do so. Investors, however, took him seriously and they started buying more shares, bumping up the stock price over 10 per cent.
The SEC accused Musk of fraud, saying his tweets were false and misled the public and caused disruption in the market. Musk was sued by the US regulator; he later settled the lawsuit by agreeing to pay $40 million in penalties, step down as chairman of the automaker's board, and accepted that any tweets discussing Tesla would have to be screened from now on.
Elon Musk is prepared to terminate his takeover of Twitter, reiterating his claim that the social media biz is covering up the number of spam and fake bot accounts on the site, lawyers representing the Tesla CEO said on Monday.
Musk offered to acquire Twitter for $54.20 per share in an all-cash deal worth over $44 billion in April. Twitter's board members resisted his attempt to take the company private but eventually accepted the deal. Musk then sold $8.4 billion worth of his Tesla shares, secured another $7.14 billion from investors to try and collect the $21 billion he promised to front himself. Tesla's stock price has been falling since this saga began while Twitter shares gained and then tailed downward.
Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Barclays, and others promised to loan the remaining $25.5 billion from via debt financing. The takeover appeared imminent as rumors swirled over how Musk wanted to make Twitter profitable and take it public again in a future IPO. But the tech billionaire got cold feet and started backing away from the deal last month, claiming it couldn't go forward unless Twitter proved fake accounts make up less than five per cent of all users – a stat Twitter claimed and Musk believes is higher.
America's financial watchdog is investigating whether Elon Musk adequately disclosed his purchase of Twitter shares last month, just as his bid to take over the social media company hangs in the balance.
A letter [PDF] from the SEC addressed to the tech billionaire said he "[did] not appear" to have filed the proper form detailing his 9.2 percent stake in Twitter "required 10 days from the date of acquisition," and asked him to provide more information. Musk's shares made him one of Twitter's largest shareholders. The letter is dated April 4, and was shared this week by the regulator.
Musk quickly moved to try and buy the whole company outright in a deal initially worth over $44 billion. Musk sold a chunk of his shares in Tesla worth $8.4 billion and bagged another $7.14 billion from investors to help finance the $21 billion he promised to put forward for the deal. The remaining $25.5 billion bill was secured via debt financing by Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Barclays, and others. But the takeover is not going smoothly.
Appian has been awarded more than $2 billion in damages from Pegasystems for "trade secret misappropriation."
It's an eyewatering sum, and came in a verdict received from a jury in the Circuit Court for Fairfax County, Virginia following a seven-week trial.
Appian is all about building apps and workflows rapidly with its low-code platform. The Pega platform is similarly concerned with speedy software building with a low-code approach. However, it appears that one party was a bit too interested in the other, resulting in a violation of the Virginia Computer Crimes Act and a misappropriation of Appian's trade secrets.
More Chinese tech companies including Tencent, JD.com, and China Mobile face delisting by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) thanks to opaque disclosures.
Tencent-affiliated gaming outfits Huya and Douyu, internet datacenter services provider Vnet Group, and online game services provider NetEase were among more than 80 fresh additions to a provisional list of companies on May 4.
The grouping is presented as part of the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act (HFCAA). The act requires some companies that issue securities in the US to allow local auditors to understand how many of its shares are owned by governments, whether governments exercise control over the company, and whether any officials or regulations are connected to the Chinese Communist Party.
Chinese ride-hailing company Didi Global is under a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigation regarding its $4.4 billion June 2021 initial public offering (IPO) in the United States.
Details of the investigation were revealed in the company’s annual SEC filings on Monday. The document showed Didi Global had been named as a defendant in several putative securities class action cases in both federal and New York state courts. The alleged offense was material misstatements and omissions in IPO-related registration statements and prospectus that were in violation of various laws.
Didi Global has asked for a stay in state court action pending the outcome of a dismissal motion in federal court that is still pending. Both actions are in preliminary stages, said the company, which also intends to "vigorously defend [itself] against these claims."
The US Securities and Exchange Commission intends to fill an additional 20 positions in a special unit that polices cryptocurrency fraud and other cybercrimes.
This brings the newly renamed Crypto Assets and Cyber Unit's total to 50 roles as the SEC hopes to crack down on miscreants trying to profit from growing interest in digital assets and marketplaces.
"As more investors access the crypto markets, it is increasingly important to dedicate more resources to protecting them," SEC Chair Gary Gensler said in a canned statement. "By nearly doubling the size of this key unit, the SEC will be better equipped to police wrongdoing in the crypto markets while continuing to identify disclosure and controls issues with respect to cybersecurity."
Activision Blizzard is under investigation for possible insider trading including claims CEO Bobby Kotick tipped off some investors to buy more shares before the $68.7bn Microsoft acquisition deal was announced.
The American games maker, known for top series such as World of Warcraft and Call of Duty, said it was cooperating with the Securities Exchange Commission and the Department of Justice, according to a securities filing.
"Activision Blizzard received a voluntary request for information from the SEC and a grand jury subpoena from the DOJ, both of which appear to relate to their respective investigations into trading by third parties – including persons known to Activision Blizzard's CEO – in securities prior to the announcement of the proposed transaction," the company stated on Friday in an 8-K submission.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022