Hacker News Reader

Comment by mlindner | Hacker News Reader

Canned by the company yes, not canned by the government.

Government isn't canning Musk. They're fining him for releasing material misinformation about his company. This has been well established in the law.

Not misinformation, guidance was 350 - 500. This is a technicality of not getting approval for a tweet that could be interpreted as saying they are definitely hitting 500k 8 months from now. This is stupid.

https://twitter.com/_jameshatfield_/status/11001772987230945...

In the time between Elon's two tweets, enough trades could have occurred based on the misrepresentation that investors were financially harmed.

The point of the SEC is to prevent harms like that. The point of the SEC's 2018 settlement with Elon was to prevent him from investor-harming tweets like the one he made by requiring tweets about Tesla to be reviewed for accuracy and correctness before posting.

> In the time between Elon's two tweets, enough trades could have occurred based on the misrepresentation that investors were financially harmed.

Does it matter that it was outside of trading hours?

After hours trading is a thing, money can still be made or lost outside of trading hours.

If he didn't want to be bound by the requirement to have all his tweets go through a legal review, then he shouldn't have agreed to a settlement with the SEC that required him to do so. It's really that simple. Doesn't matter if it's stupid or not; he signed a legally-binding court document agreeing he'd do it.

> If he didn't want to be bound by the requirement to have all his tweets go through a legal review, then he shouldn't have agreed to a settlement with the SEC that required him to do so.

A lot of people don't realize this is industry-standard. Any reasonable CEO wants to make sure they aren't inadvertently committing securities fraud with the send of a tweet.

Tweets being reviewed by the legal department are par for the course at any publicly-traded company.

The parent comment says "Can a corporation demand an employee ..." so that's exactly what we're talking about. The company, not the government.

GP clearly asked about a company.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com