[hedora]

It is difficult to prove intent, especially if the press release is absurd, released on April 1st, and you’re attempting to prove it wasn’t intended as a prank.

Having said that, I’m holding a bag of SO stock because I thought they really were going to start monetizing by charging for copy-paste. /s

[addicted]

Why do you think the SEC has to prove intent, or even that it being a prank, even if you prove that, protects you?

[juotlrjrb]

> When it comes to being charged with fraud, demonstrating that the defendant lacked the intent to commit a crime (i.e. that he or she acted in good faith) is a key defense because, in order to convict the defendant, the prosecutor needs to prove that he or she had fraudulent intent.

https://www.baezlawfirm.com/two-recent-cases-highlight-impor...

> U.S. Supreme Court Rules That Securities Fraud Suits Must Be Dismissed Unless Plaintiffs Plead Fact Establishing a "Cogent and Compelling Inference" of Fraudulent Intent

https://www.jonesday.com/en/insights/2007/07/us-supreme-cour...

[addicted]

The SEC does more than just fraud, which is what those links speak to.

https://www.sec.gov/news/speech/2014-spch033114mjw

"We, for example, often bring cases based on negligence, while most criminal statutes require intent or at least willful blindness. Some of our statutes are also strict liability, which do not require intent, recklessness, or negligence."

[juotlrjrb]

And if you look at those strict liability violations, it's stuff like filing required forms and reports by financial officers, not what we were talking about.