Quote from the NY Times: “In his 35-page ruling, Fitzwater wrote that the SEC didn’t accuse Cuban of promising not to trade based on the confidential information he received. Thus, the commission could not hold him liable for illegal insider trading, the judge wrote.” I had to read this twice from two different news sources to see if I got this right. My understanding is that because Cuban did not promise not to trade, that his trades were not illegal insider trading. Is that right?
bump. I find this interesting as I thought I was aware of what qualified as illegal insider trading. Obviously, I was wrong. Thoughts?
This don’t jive with my understanding of the law, either. I am interested in hearing more about this case…