[fnpiop]

The nypost's articles are being written by reporters who don't understand what they are writing. The same authors wrote the original article ("https://nypost.com/2019/04/01/early-lyft-investors-are-betti...) which is full similar errors.

Obviously, if the investor engages in a transaction that leads to them to not benefiting from a rise in the stock, they've reduced their economic interest!

The answer (as I note elsewhere) is that the investors believe Lyft's lock-up language does not per se bar them from reducing "economic interest". The loose agreement only bars selling and presumably short-selling shares.

[NelsonMinar]

Hacker News: where anonymous commenters ask you to believe them over the professional financial reporter.

You've put your finger on the core of the legal dispute, what "reducing economic interest" means. The reporter did an excellent job explaining that. Now it'll be up to a court to figure it out.