lol, what laws? The article goes: "Someone thinks his mistress is a spy and he did not take that into account. Or he might have but we don't know if he broke-up immediately or a bit later, it's unclear. Either way lets sack him". It's complete BS: your either have facts or you don't and they don't, they just want to oust him out most likely because of his position on open-weight models.

If only the economist was equally "concerned" about other CEO misconducts...