[adventured]

Your theory rests on a faulty understanding of insider trading laws. The SEC rules simply do not work the way you think they do based on what you said.

Trading on perceived insider information is not always illegal. There are very specific situations in which it is illegal.

Cuban is going to win because he didn't agree to hold the information in confidentiality, he didn't leak the information (which could have caused all sorts of other ramifications), and he also was not a director / employee / CEO / executive etc.

The SEC needs to get him on Rule 10b5-2, and they will not be able to.

[foobarqux]

I can't understand why they are pursuing this case since presumably the SEC is going to argue that he agreed to confidentiality but they almost certainly cannot prove that. If they had convincing evidence (e.g. a signed document) Cuban would have almost certainly settled.

On the other hand Mamma would have been breaking the law if they didn't enforce confidentiality so maybe the case does have some kind of legs.

[drakaal]

I think we said the same thing, but you did so with more of the technical stuff.

Because he wasn't a director/employee/exec he was "just another seller" like my analogy.

But thank you for the citation of the rule I would have had to look it up.

[jacquesm]

Great to see you guys agree, I'll call the SEC to tell them they can skip the proceedings and save everybody time and dough.