Netflix Facebook Comment Triggers Possible SEC Civil Action

[exfileme]

Here's a good example of how you should watch what you say on Facebook.

Netflix Facebook Comment Triggers Possible SEC Civil Action : Read more

 

[davewolfgang]

Really? I mean REALLY??? Did the people at the SEC who REALLY inside trade "not make enough money" because they didn't get a pre-warning of this news?

And yes, I did mean exactly what I typed.

 

[Star72]

[citation][nom]davewolfgang[/nom]Really? I mean REALLY??? Did the people at the SEC who REALLY inside trade "not make enough money" because they didn't get a pre-warning of this news?And yes, I did mean exactly what I typed.[/citation]

They are coming after you next for that comment. 😉

 

[mrmaia]

This is the most ridiculous thing I read this week.

Such "data" would be published by the media the very next day, and so happened. If one investor learned about it thru a site such as Tom's, will it be sued as well?

 

[Guest]

Facebook CLEARLY states that any material posted on facebook is their property and not the property of the owner any more, and facebook are free to do with it what they want, and sell I, etc etc.

Facebook should be paying this fine for their post about Netflix, which they allowed people to see. Assuming anyone should even have to pay for pondering their thoughts on facebok

 

[wanderer11]

You can't really get any more public that posting it to facebook. This just shows how outdated the SEC is.

 

[jojesa]

[citation][nom]davewolfgang[/nom]Really? I mean REALLY??? Did the people at the SEC who REALLY inside trade "not make enough money" because they didn't get a pre-warning of this news?And yes, I did mean exactly what I typed.[/citation]Those
Old farts they should get into the program. They're mad cause they did not find out first...

 

[arnoldlouie]

Just like that they can increase the stock. It is not allowed since sensitive data are not allowed in facebook like nude photos and the like. Yes, we don't see sensitive information on facebook.

 

[guruofchem]

This doesn't seem like something the SEC should attack, but using online postings to manipulate stocks has gone on, and the SEC needs to get into the 21st century in dealing with it.

 

[ddpruitt]

I guess the SEC thinks that people who know how to use Facebook are a selective group, Democrats 😉

 

[f-14]

why isn't the SEC going after congress members who openly violated regulations. they can't be convicted of any crime while holding office but they can be charged and can also be forced to give up and give back all they stole from insider trading as well as brought to congressional hearings and censure.

 

[blurr91]

[citation][nom]f-14[/nom]why isn't the SEC going after congress members who openly violated regulations. they can't be convicted of any crime while holding office but they can be charged and can also be forced to give up and give back all they stole from insider trading as well as brought to congressional hearings and censure.[/citation]

Cutting off their own meal ticket?

 

[yeesh]

[citation][nom]f-14[/nom]why isn't the SEC going after congress members who openly violated regulations. they can't be convicted of any crime while holding office but they can be charged and can also be forced to give up and give back all they stole from insider trading as well as brought to congressional hearings and censure.[/citation]
I'm guessing it's because what the hell are you talking about?

 

[jhansonxi]

[citation][nom]mrmaia[/nom]This is the most ridiculous thing I read this week.Such "data" would be published by the media the very next day, and so happened. If one investor learned about it thru a site such as Tom's, will it be sued as well?[/citation]It's not the goal they care about, it's the process. They're bureaucrats - having a worthy goal isn't the point.

 

[ubercake]

Too many 'little people' must have made too much money. When that happens, the SEC is there to put a stop to such a distribution of wealth. The proper channels meaning to let politicians know first as they are immune to insider trading laws.

 

[yeesh]

[citation][nom]ubercake[/nom]Too many 'little people' must have made too much money. When that happens, the SEC is there to put a stop to such a distribution of wealth. The proper channels meaning to let politicians know first as they are immune to insider trading laws.[/citation]
I'd just like to explain to anyone who might wonder about the above comment that, in fact, nothing like the situation therein described ever happens. No one has ever accused the SEC of being particularly effective in ANY of its enforcement roles, and there's certainly no Robin Hood angle to this story. It's not as if some public Facebook post were a font of free money and that mean old scary government moved in to shut it down at the behest of shadowy overlords. Here in America, the financial overlords are right there in your face, and their agendas are perfectly clear and public.

When the SEC does go after somebody, it is never a "little person", and it's certainly never a benevolent insider who was spreading wealth to "little people." Because real insiders are inevitably out to enrich themselves.

In what way were "little people" making money? In no way. What are some times the SEC has somehow stopped a (downward) redistribution of wealth? There are none. In what way are politicians immune to prosecution? They aren't. What insider trading are you talking about? Wall street doesn't give politicians secret stock tips; wall street publicly donate cash money and hooks politicians up with very sweet.jobs when they leave office.

I'm just sayin'.