> There was obviously a reason that the tippers ... leaked confidential information to the defendants ... > I don't see why it's material whether this reason w

> There was obviously a reason that the tippers ... leaked confidential information to the defendants ... > I don't see why it's material whether this reason was friendship/status-boosting or some sort of tangible, cash benefit. Mainly because they're facing prison time. I can think of other laws that make similar distinctions. For instance, the punishment for receiving stolen goods will depend on the value of the goods in question. Why should somebody get a lighter punishment for receiving, say, an iPod compared to a car? In both cases, they knew the person giving them the item wasn't the owner. In this case, it isn't a question of how harsh the punishment is, but whether the people will be punished at all. However, if the SEC wishes to create lesser penalties to cover this kind of thing, it has the regulatory authority to do so. If that's not enough, Congress can always reconsider the law, but I can't imagine people getting all that worked up about it.