Saw this on CNN: Anonymous Stock tips over IRC as bad???

[Perry E. Metzger]

Jeff Barber writes:
> IANAL, but I think you must be wrong about this, Perry.

Nope, I'm not.

> If this were the case then, as an employee of company XYZ, I would
> never be permitted to buy XYZ stock (which is clearly not the case)
> since I *always* have information that others outside the company do
> not (about staff changes, product plans and such).

Funny, that, ain't it.

Well, yes, as I noted, the law is very broad, and selectively
enforced. However, yes indeed -- if you know that Secure Ware is
introducing SuperBozo 2000 next week by virtue of your employment, and
you know it will drive up the stock price, and SuperBozo 2000 is a
deep dark secret, and you load up on shares in the expectation of
making money from that rise, you are indeed cruising for a visit from
the friendly boys at Stock Watch.

> I suspect the deciding factor must have to do
> with the ability to execute actions which have substantial direct effects
> on the stock price (i.e. buying a company, declaring dividends, having a
> massive downsizing, etc.).

There is no real deciding factor other than what a jury will buy. The
law is very broad and extremely vague. It is selectively enforced. A
lot of what is and isn't a violation is based entirely on
prosectorial discretion.

Welcome to the world of securities regulation, where you live under a
government of men, not of laws, and SEC edicts, er, no-action letters
are needed before you sneeze because everything you do every day is
probably a crime somehow.

Perry