4 ms·

> But some of Ms Wong's scoops are so big that they threaten to impact the stock market, leading some to accuse her of insider trading. Can anyone with a good

> But some of Ms Wong's scoops are so big that they threaten to impact the stock market, leading some to accuse her of insider trading. Can anyone with a good understanding tell me if that really qualifies as insider trading or market manipulation? As I understand it, she reverse engineers a publicly available app, something that anyone with the technical know-how could do. So even if she bought stocks before releasing this information, anyone could have done the same and learned the information the same way. I would be really surprised if big investment firms aren’t already doing that (but just don’t release this information publicly). I don’t see how this is any different from collecting other public information and placing bets based on that information. (e.g. reading import lists from container ships and estimate the production volume from a company before they announce it). Otherwise, Jane’s efforts seem to be pretty cool and I am honestly surprised that more people aren’t doing it. I can’t wait to get read her blog later!

evrydayhustling 7y ago
This is a really interesting question. IANAL and I am not sure a decisive answer even exists, but here is another thread to pull: Lots of traders work with satelite data to estimate non-disclosed info about energy and agriculture companies: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/05/stock-value-satellite-images-investing/586009/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/05/stock-v... That article suggests that there is a consensus that high tech surveillance doesn't count as inside information, and I can't see why Jane's reverse engineering would be different. There's also an argument that she is publicizing the material, so depending on the order of operations maybe it is public? A separate question is what kind of trouble you might be able to get into with specific companies due to license agreements. Would love legal take on any of above as well.
- Matt3o12_ 7y ago
  Thanks for the answer! Really helpful. > A separate question is what kind of trouble you might be able to get into with specific companies due to license agreements. Would love legal take on any of above as well. I believe you are allowed to reverse engineer software you own in most countries despite what the TOS says. But they might ban you from their platform which doesn’t stop reverse engineering because Apple/Google is distributing the software.
jsty 7y ago
As ever, Matt Levine comes in handy here: "The law doesn’t say that any time you trade on material nonpublic information it’s illegal. The law, to oversimplify a complicated area, makes it illegal to trade on material nonpublic information that you obtained in violation of a duty to someone" [0] Unless Ms. Wong was cracking into companies and stealing pre-release versions of their apps, or had received them on promise of confidentiality, it's hard to see how this would reasonably class as insider trading. As to the market manipulation angle, even if she were trading on the information she uncovered, would this be materially different to short sellers publishing their research on a company to push the stock down? IANAL [0] - https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-03-13/you-have-to-pay-the-right-person https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-03-13/you-ha...
fjsolwmv 7y ago
Anyone can accuse anyone of anything. Guardian loves sexing up their articles with innuendo

evrydayhustling 7y ago

This is a really interesting question. IANAL and I am not sure a decisive answer even exists, but here is another thread to pull: Lots of traders work with satelite data to estimate non-disclosed info about energy and agriculture companies: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/05/stock-value-satellite-images-investing/586009/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/05/stock-v... That article suggests that there is a consensus that high tech surveillance doesn't count as inside information, and I can't see why Jane's reverse engineering would be different. There's also an argument that she is publicizing the material, so depending on the order of operations maybe it is public? A separate question is what kind of trouble you might be able to get into with specific companies due to license agreements. Would love legal take on any of above as well.

Matt3o12_ 7y ago
Thanks for the answer! Really helpful. > A separate question is what kind of trouble you might be able to get into with specific companies due to license agreements. Would love legal take on any of above as well. I believe you are allowed to reverse engineer software you own in most countries despite what the TOS says. But they might ban you from their platform which doesn’t stop reverse engineering because Apple/Google is distributing the software.

jsty 7y ago

As ever, Matt Levine comes in handy here: "The law doesn’t say that any time you trade on material nonpublic information it’s illegal. The law, to oversimplify a complicated area, makes it illegal to trade on material nonpublic information that you obtained in violation of a duty to someone" [0] Unless Ms. Wong was cracking into companies and stealing pre-release versions of their apps, or had received them on promise of confidentiality, it's hard to see how this would reasonably class as insider trading. As to the market manipulation angle, even if she were trading on the information she uncovered, would this be materially different to short sellers publishing their research on a company to push the stock down? IANAL [0] - https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-03-13/you-have-to-pay-the-right-person https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-03-13/you-ha...

fjsolwmv 7y ago

Anyone can accuse anyone of anything. Guardian loves sexing up their articles with innuendo