7 ms·
Judge in Nokia and Apple lawsuit owned Apple stock during proceedings
- sharmin123 5y ago5 Things To Check Before Taking Divorce Decision Or Separate: https://www.hackerslist.co/5-things-to-check-before-taking-divorce-decision-or-separate/ https://www.hackerslist.co/5-things-to-check-before-taking-d...
- supermatt 5y ago> If tech companies fail to comply with the new law, they could face fines of up to 3 percent of their South Korea revenue. Is this appstore revenue or total revenue? If they charge a 30% commission, is a 3% fine incentive to stop?
- jamessb 5y agoI think you meant to post in this thread instead: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28366063 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28366063
- sillysaurusx 5y agoI once accidentally posted a comment in the wrong thread, and someone replied with a link to the thread I meant to post it in. I spent the rest of the day wondering how the hell I'd managed to write an entire reply to the wrong thread. Bet they're going through a "what... but how...?" feeling right about now. (I still don't really know. It must be a combination of having HN tabs open, interleaved with articles, but then closing one of the comment tabs while reading its corresponding article, at which point you think of something you wanted to say about it. Presto, wrong HN thread?) It's interesting to me that it happens on HN, but not any other site. Never seen it on Reddit, doubtful it ever happened on Slashdot, etc. There's something interesting going on with HN's simple design – simple enough that you don't realize you're in the wrong thread – plus some kind of common reading pattern that involves closing or mixing tabs. Occasionally wondered about that over the years...
- supermatt 5y agoThanks! no idea how that happened!
- saagarjha 5y agoProbably in like a 401k or something?
- carbocation 5y agoOwning Apple stock in a 401k wouldn’t reduce the appearance of impropriety. Having exposure to Apple because it’s a component of a broad market ETF that one owns, on the other hand, would.
- tbrownaw 5y ago> "Judge Conley informed me that it has been brought to his attention that while he presided over the case he owned stock in Apple," writes Joel Turner, the court's chief deputy clerk. That definitely makes it sound like it was a component of something else.
- enkid 5y agoMuch more likely to me is that he had a financial advisor handling his money. The article specifically talks about the number of shares purchased, and for most vehicles like this that makes no sense. Also, what I have read about for these conflicts of interest is that broad based index funds and such don't require disclosure. Something like an ETF that was specifically heavy in Apple might, but something that is just tech stocks probably would not.
- durnygbur 5y agoWho doesn't own, nowadays?
- spywaregorilla 5y agoMost people
- gruez 5y agoMost people probably have some sort of pension/retirement plan/stock portfolio that contains APPL.
- JohnJamesRambo 5y ago"His ownership of stock neither affected nor impacted his decisions in this case." Like any human can ascertain this about themselves.
- kace91 5y agoI mean, it is possible and even likely for a person to own stock in a company without knowing it. Indexes are a very common way of investing nowadays, and many people don't go below that layer of abstraction to see in which companies the money ends up. Not to say that good intent should be assumed in legal matters, but I can see it happening.
- enkid 5y agoThis is not talking about index funds. You would not call out a specific stock inside an index fund in a disclosure like this. You could figure it out, bit it's just simply not considered a conflict of interest.
- bryanrasmussen 5y agoIf he wasn't aware he owned it at the time seems a pretty reasonable supposition.
- Beldin 5y agoOf course, perhaps he was aware and considered ways to hide that. I'm not saying this is the case - I am saying you need rules that work for that specific case.
- Waterluvian 5y agoI just checked. I own Apple stock through my RRSP mutual fund. Looks like 0.5% of my investment is Apple. Can I ascertain, about myself, that this wouldn’t affect my decision making?
- pc86 5y ago
- pembrook 5y agoProbably a good idea to pass a law that certain key government employees can only own index funds (here's looking at you, congress). However, with the benefit of hindsight, we can all take solace in the fact that, regardless of the outcome of this lawsuit, Nokia was doomed to failure anyways. Turns out a bureaucracy built around selling hardware might be liable to underestimate the rising importance of software.
- spaniard89277 5y agoOr just force judges to disclose conflicts of interests.
- enkid 5y agoIsn't that exactly what this is?
- colejohnson66 5y agoEach state bar’s ethics rules already prohibit it. It’s grounds for losing your law license.
- tssva 5y agoA law license isn't required to be a federal judge.
- chaz6 5y agoNokia were doing well developing their new platform Meego based on Linux, but then Stephen Elop came from Microsoft and decided to put a stop to it and instead concentrate on Windows Phone. I believe that is what ultimately killed Nokia's phone division.
- tsjq 5y agoit was widely alleged / believed that S.E was sent to Nokia with a specific goal that would benefit M$
- 5y ago
- PragmaticPulp 5y agoThis article doesn’t answer the real questions: How much stock did he own, how did he own it, and what percentage of his portfolio was it? Apple is one of the biggest companies in the US, so it comprises a significant portion of large-cap index funds. If any of your 401K or other portfolio includes an ETF or other fund with large-cap US companies, you own Apple stock. If you’re invested 100% in a simple S&P 500 index fund, your portfolio is over 6% AAPL. If the judge is simply reporting that he held large-cap index funds during this time, I think this is a non-story. Even a 10% drop in a company that makes up 6% of your portfolio is going to be negligible in your overall finances. On the other hand, if he had something strange like options on AAPL around the time of his verdict, that would be a huge concern. However, I think these stories would have led with those details if they existed. This is probably nothing.
- beervirus 5y agoDoesn’t look like this is just an index fund situation. >ownership in a mutual or common investment fund that holds securities is not a “financial interest” in such securities unless the judge participates in the management of the fund https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-unit...
- marcinzm 5y agoThey could have someone managing their portfolio that basically does the same strategy as a mutual fund but technically isn't one. Unless they paid attention they wouldn't know what was being invested in at any given point in time.
- Lamad123 5y agoWhat a malformed title!!!
- ckline 5y agoThis is like saying a judge wore Calvin Klein underwear while presiding over a case against Calvin Klein.
- kennywinker 5y agoActually that sounds more like the case if the judge was a long time apple product user. I don’t stand to financially benefit in any way if fruit of the loom stock goes through the roof today.
- fny 5y agoCorrection: I got the time line wrong. Comment below is right.
- Nbox9 5y ago>Judge William M. Conley of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin disclosed the potential conflict of interest in a letter to both parties dated Aug. 27. It’s hard to “Assume goof faith”[0], because it looks like you avoided adding the next 3 words to your sentence because it makes it seem like the judge disclosed it before the trial and not four days ago. I feel like this context is vitally important because Nokia might simply need more time to react to this news. We don’t know what they think about this yet. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- fny 5y agoI made a mistake reading it. You're right, thanks for catching that!
- gpayan 5y agoHow did he only find out about it 10 years after? And how do you find out about something like that so long after?
- dhosek 5y agoIt's not uncommon for people, especially high net-worth individuals, to not manage their own stock portfolios. Even without a professional manager, it might be the case that the spouse is dealing with the investment accounts (I know that my wife could not say what stocks we own because I've handled that and she's been happy to pass it on to me).
- NotEvil 5y agoRead https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28368078 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28368078