4 ms·
Do I have this right?: 1. Robinhood's TOS explicitly gives them the right to do this. 2. Robinhood is free. 3. Any alleged harm could be mitigated by using anot
by tiahura 6y ago
Do I have this right?:
1. Robinhood's TOS explicitly gives them the right to do this. 2. Robinhood is free. 3. Any alleged harm could be mitigated by using another service.
And attorneys wonder why we're held in lower regard than used car salesman.
- vorpalhex 6y agoA TOS isn't law. What Robinhood did altered the market price of several major stocks including AMC and BB. They will almost certainly be getting yet another SEC investigation. Being free doesn't allow you to commit crimes.
- gowld 6y agoWSB altered the market price far more than RH did.
- antonzabirko 6y agoWSB is not an entity though
- paulddraper 6y agoWSB isn't a brokerage; it's an investment forum. But sure, sue Reddit too if you want. You'd still have the RH manipulation.
- zucker42 6y agoWSB is a forum, not a person or company.
- gowld 6y agoIt's a group of people coordinating activity.
- Lewton 6y agoBy participating in the market
- sofixa 6y agoWSB isn't a single, regulated ( brokers are), entity, it's just a bunch of people getting together. The entities that altered the price were notably - the shorting hedge funds and the broker that failed to do its job ( broker trades) in a blatant conflict of interest.
- jjtheblunt 6y agoIs a TOS a contract once agreed to?
- throw_m239339 6y ago> Is a TOS a contract once agreed to? A contract is only valid if its clauses are legal. TOS are regularly deemed invalid by regulators/courts and contracts made void. Ask the EU and their huge fines on FAANGS...
- bpicolo 6y agoToS terms can't permit you to break the law, in either case. Same as contracts.
- dathinab 6y agoContracts still don't allow you to brake laws including anti-marked manipulation regulations. But besides that in many countries (idk. about the US) TOS are quite more limited in what they can contain then "normal" contracts. E.g. if you write in that the user agreeing to it must allow the company to buy their house (if they have one) for marked value anytime the company wants would be not legal, but could be legal in a contract. (And could also be non-legal in a contract under some circumstances). Anyway it's widespread and common for TOS to contain non-legal clauses which due to the way a TOS is made are as if they are not written in there (i.e. they just invalidate themself not the whole contract). So in the end the question is: - Is it directly against a law/regulation, in which case TOS doesn't help at all. - Or if it's not against law per-see is it still not legal because it's in the TOS and due to <enter TOS related laws> not legal binding (I wouldn't put hope into this in the US, but I don't know US law wrt. this aspect).
- Cyph0n 6y agoAccording to Reddit, several other trading services are also closing access to these stocks. It seems to be a concerted effort.
- doublerabbit 6y agoTrader212 in the UK has also suspended AMC and GME stocks.
- PartiallyTyped 6y agoIt is, citadel appears to be blocking trading with fidelity/robinhood while they are artificially tanking the stock with low volume trading.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- rusl1 6y agoTry to use another service: you have to sign up, upload documents, autenticate your identity and wait for your account to be activated. I lost 4 days for this. 4 days in the trading is a tons of time and Game Stop can go from 400 to 200 in the whiletime. This is unfair.
- Cyph0n 6y agoNot to mention the fact that many other trading services are following suit.
- gowld 6y agoWhy is your lack of preparation unfair? Melvin isn't using Robinhood to trade, they chose a method that provides more reliable service.
- tiahura 6y agoSince you’ve paid nothing, why does Robinhood owe you anything?
- kart23 6y ago1 is right. Read section 16. https://cdn.robinhood.com/assets/robinhood/legal/Robinhood%20Customer%20Agreement.pdf https://cdn.robinhood.com/assets/robinhood/legal/Robinhood%2...