> “Gill’s deceitful and manipulative conduct not only violated numerous industry regulations and rules, but also various securities laws by undermining the integrity of the market for GameStop shares,” the suit said. “He caused enormous losses not only to those who bought option contracts, but also to those who fell for Gill’s act and bought GameStop stock during the market frenzy at greatly inflated prices.”

As a regular person (with perhaps a higher-than-average exposure to various hazardous memes), this claim look bizarre. Taking out adjectives, a part of this reads:

"Gill's <adjectives> conduct not only violated <blah> regulations and rules, but also various securities laws by undermining the integrity of the market for GameStop shares"

How do I read this?

> Gill's conduct violated regulations and rules.

> Gill's conduct undermined the integrity of the market, and therefore violated various securities laws.

Was it really Gill's conduct that undermined the integrity of the market? It doesn't look like that to me, but IANAL.

As for his conduct violating regulations and rules, I'd really like to read these regulations and rules that govern how someone is expected to conduct themselves on r/WSB and youtube.