News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Congress: Stop Trying to Limit EFF’s Ability to Challenge Patents.

Re:Congress: Stop Trying to Limit EFF’s Ability to Challenge... by im3w1l on Friday April 24, 2015 @10:22AM (#9433475)
>Specifically, a few people have publicly challenged some important patents with the intent of making a quick buck by shorting the patent owner’s stock.

Shouldn't that be against insider trading laws somehow?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Congress: Stop Trying to Limit EFF’s Ability to Challenge... by Someone1234 on Friday April 24, 2015 @10:26AM (#9433505)
Why would an external entity to a company be subject to insider trading allegations on that company's stock?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insider_trading#Definition_of_...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Congress: Stop Trying to Limit EFF’s Ability to Challenge... by belorn on Friday April 24, 2015 @12:32PM (#9434389)
I would find it relevant since insider trading laws are intended to catch individuals with access to nonpublic information about a company and that then uses that information in a unfair way on the stock market.

Even in countries that don't use civil law, intentions should still be relevant in discussing the law or its enforcement.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Congress: Stop Trying to Limit EFF’s Ability to Challenge... by wmeredith on Friday April 24, 2015 @11:25AM (#9433972)
It's not insider trading, because the person challenging the patent is not an insider. It is, however, market manipulation and it is illegal in the US. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_manipulation
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Congress: Stop Trying to Limit EFF’s Ability to Challenge... by tedunangst on Friday April 24, 2015 @03:56PM (#9435665)
It's funny that page lists "bear raid" as an example. That's basically how shorting is done. You short a stock, then you tell the world why as loudly as possible.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Congress: Stop Trying to Limit EFF’s Ability to Challenge... by copsarebastards on Friday April 24, 2015 @12:30PM (#9434377)
Not insider trading laws, but yes, this is covered by existing legislation. If that's really a concern, they should fund the SEC better.
[ Parent | on HN ]