Last edited Wed Jan 7, 2026, 07:09 PM - Edit history (1)
regardless of how related or unrelated you are to the origins of the info or or how you came to possess it (remember Martha Stewart's prosecution – she simply profitted from inside info that a broker told her about a biological sciences co.)
However, I take your point about the nature of activity in predictions markets, which I understand to be currently treated more like credit derivatives.
That said, I happen to believe that credit derivatives should be MUCH more restricted and much more heavily regulated and policed than they currently are.
Fwiw, speaking broadly, traditional principles of fraud generally hold that in situations in which one party possesses info that the other party couldn't discover with reasonable due diligence, the party possessing the info usually has a duty either to disclose the secret info to the other party or to refrain from taking advantage of it.
I understand the law contains many exceptions to this general principle, but I think it should apply unless clear, specific reasons can be shown justifying an exception on the basis of what will likely yield the best result for society as a whole and over the longer term.
= new reply since forum marked as read