I think it is very unlikely that this would "work". The "business judgement rule" means that boards get a huge amount of latitude in how they run their busines

I think it is very unlikely that this would "work". The "business judgement rule" means that boards get a huge amount of latitude in how they run their business, especially absent "disloyalty" to the business (like enriching themselves at the company's expense). In a 2005 case (re Walt Disney Co. Derivative Litigation), the Court said "not entitled to any remedy unless the transaction constitutes waste... [that is,] the exchange was so one-sided that no business person of ordinary, sound judgment could conclude that the corporation has received adequate consideration." Your valuation has all sorts of uncertainties. Is there actually a market for the data? Even if it is from old, proprietary sensors? How comparable are those privacy experiments to a situation in which the sensor package is literally roaming your house 24/7? Is customer interest in privacy increasing (particularly in iRobot's target demographics?) and are there sales/reputational benefits for being one of the first companies to adopt this policy first? Any one of these is enough to ruin your case. It would have to be something really egregious, like a contract in which the data transfers to the CEO's brother-in-law, for it to be a breach of duty. * Business Judgement Rule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_judgment_rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_judgment_rule * Dodge v. Ford is where this idea of shareholder profits first comes from. However, look at the discussion under "Significance" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.#Significance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.#Signif... * Article by a law prof at UCONN: https://medium.com/bull-market/there-is-no-effective-fiduciary-duty-to-maximize-profits-939ae50d0572 https://medium.com/bull-market/there-is-no-effective-fiducia...