[lukejduncan]

Matt Levine talks a lot about insider trading, and the emphasis he always puts on it is about theft. Insider trading, in the US, isn’t about trading on uncommon knowledge or inferences. That’s actually many professional traders job: information arbitrage. It’s about trading on information that is owned by your employer. Your responsibility as an employee or executive is to the company and using inside corporate information for personal gain rather than corporate gain is a form of theft. Here’s his piece on the distinction between thinking about insider trading as being about fairness vs theft.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/opinion/a...

[perl4ever]

However, he also writes about how, say, being a golf buddy of an insider has been argued to somehow be a "position of trust" that can be betrayed by using inside information. It sounds like there is a nebulous area that you don't want to get caught up in, if you are the sort to pal around with executives and such. Winning after years in court, on appeal, could easily be a pyrrhic victory.

There's a reason he says don't take anything as legal advice.

[ThePowerOfFuet]

Could you please try to post direct links, rather than AMP links which are privacy-violating?

[sharken]

A Javascript warning when using AMP links in a post could help.

[_wk3u]

I actually prefer to post amp links for paywalled articles. It’s the only legal way around the paywall.