[apphacker]

Did MG Siegler just violate SEC laws by not disclosing if he owns Apple stock and telling thousands of his readers that Apple stock will continue to increase?

[hugh3]

Are SEC laws that easy to violate?

Hey everybody, I think Apple stock is going to continue to increase! I may or may not own Apple stock.

[ekanes]

It makes sense. Without a law like that, people with circulation/influence could manipulate the markets by buying, boosting and selling.

[eru]

Just buy some of everything (index fund), and always put the disclaimer in, and it will become meaningless.

(Or do you have to reveal your net position, with shorts netted against longs?)

[windsurfer]

That's a pretty crappy design.

[apphacker]

Yes, I think so. People have been forced to settle with the SEC for comments made on forums for example.

http://news.cnet.com/SEC,-teen-settle-Net-stock-scheme-case/...

[jedberg]

I own a fund that owns shares of every public company on the market (VTI). Does that mean I have to say "I own this" any time I talk about stock?

[werrett]

The diference between a managed fund, where you're just investing in a basket that someone else controls, and a self-direct investment defines went to disclose or not.

[hugh3]

Crud. Well in that case... hey everybody, I don't own any Apple stock!

[ryanwaggoner]

Perhaps he doesn't own the stock. Surely you can't be forced to disclose if you have no financial interest, right? If so, HN is a treasure trove of SEC violations :)