One would think the SEC might have other, more important things to be looking into now given the fact that a lot of non-"murky" laws are being broken every day on Wall Street.
Honestly, I think it's a fair thing to investigate. Yet, it would seem that there must be some privacy issues at stake. How much does the shareholding set really need to know. What isn't necessary to disclose? I have a feeling that because Jobs is such a pivotal figure from a product development standpoint, that these disclosures are more meaningful for Apple, but perhaps not for Acme Tool & Die, for example.
@ninjagin: They don't have to disclose anything. They just cannot mislead investors. For instance, they said that Steve Jobs was having a "hormone imbalance" when he was getting a liver transplant. If the SEC believes that Jobs' health is material to stockholders, then this might be considered fraudulent.
@NurseDave: You don't have to. Its like any law, you apply it to the case at hand. If your CEO is so ingrained in not only the day to day of the company but the very image of the company of course its going to be different then the CEO of a company who does little more then sit back and pull a paycheck.
@Hello Mister Walrus: Well I think thats part of the question. In a case like this is not disclosing something like this misleading by its very nature? There is defiantly a balance of opposing ideals but thats true of nearly any legal question.
Look, people, Steve Jobs not showing up to work does not imply that he is dying. It only implies that he feels unwell enough to not feel like going to work. If I have a headache, I don't feel like going to work, but I have to as I need to pay bills. Steve has no such constraint - he is worth $5 billion. He does whatever the hell he wants, even if it means lounging around at home in his black turtleneck pajamas.
@Hello Mister Walrus: Fair enough, but why are we not constantly updated on the health of other just-as-if-not-more-so-influential... technology leaders/pioneers/icons. Is Jobs the only one with health problems? No.
Yes, I am interested in when Sergey Brin has a cold. I'd also like to know when Linus Torvalds has the runs. Where can I find the fanboy blogs for them?
@marm0lade: It's because Steve Jobs has been the center of Apple's marketing campaign over the past few years. He is a famous personality, unlike say, Jerry Yang from Yahoo who no one really cares about (as much). As a cancer survivor, he also has a dramatic story that makes the news more interesting. Remember, news needs to market itself!
@marm0lade: Fact is that no one gives a wet slap about the others - in fact, most people can't even name anyone other than Monkey Boy and Mosquito Man!
And we know that Monkey Boy has a severe sweating condition, and Mosquito Boy doesn't have Malaria...
Wow. Can you spell Hearstian? "like Madoff's alleged $50 billion fraud." <-- That's great comparison to Jobs having cancer :rolleyes: (lost any kind of sympathy right there). Also could you please quote where Jobs says his condition is "worse"? I think you'll find that he actually said that it was more "complicated" - despite the fact that he may (or may not) actually need a liver transplant - of which there is /no/ actual, hard evidence of, it's still bad reporting and bad fact checking. There's a difference between spinning and just being factually incorrect in a malicious manner. I think you're overreacting to being called out. A good reporter keeps a level head. You could have avoided these pitfalls if you'd only stopped to think first.
It seems like a suit like this was inevitable, but I think it's doomed to fail because ultimately Steve Jobs will be given wiggle room in the timing of his own understanding of his condition, whether he misrepresented it or not.
In other words, even assuming Steve is guilty of everything they say he is, unless they can show he intentionally described something like metastasis as a hormone imbalance, it will be virtually impossible for them to prove their case.
@kurupt: I'm no lawyer, but I think since there are competing legal interests, medical privacy vs. corporate disclosure, the reality is it's a gray area, and different experts will argue from different points of view.
However, I would guess that while there may be enough of a corporate disclosure issue to bring a suit, given his medical privacy and, to the extent that his doctors testify they will inevitably support his account (even if it's something along the lines of "we tried to convince Steve of the magnitude of the problem, but he dismissed our concern") it would be very hard to prove he intentionally mislead investors about his health. Even if he did.
Don't they have something better to do than mess with a company that didn't help with the financial crisis. I'm all for some regulation, but this is a bit of a fist pumping session to detract from the fact that theses SEC guys, and gals, didn't do anything to protect the consumer, investors or the economy from companies involved in the meltdown. Now they are going after a working company with a sick guy at the helm... why don't they just beat on Timmy's legs with a 2X4 while knocking down his community run lemon aid stand?
@howman: I agree to the extent that health related issues are nearly impossible to investigate. While it is interesting that the SEC is going to take a crack at it, HIPAA and other regulations are going to make it nearly impossible to get anywhere.
That said, if Apple did stretch the truth or re-arrange the facts, it should be investigated whether we think this is an important issue or not. If true, it is still stock manipulation and exactly the sort of thing the SEC should be looking into.
Still, I don't think they will get anywhere due to health regulations in this country.
@Monty: HIPAA has no bearing in this case. The privicay portion of his health records are no longer an issue once legal investigations and proceedings have begun. They will not become public record..... but HIPPA dies when you are suspected to have broken the law. [www.hhs.gov] See the Permitted Uses and Disclosures section. Happens all the time where I work. Especially with Cancer patients and insurance policies
07/08/09
07/08/09
07/08/09
07/08/09
07/08/09
07/08/09
@Hello Mister Walrus: Well I think thats part of the question. In a case like this is not disclosing something like this misleading by its very nature? There is defiantly a balance of opposing ideals but thats true of nearly any legal question.
07/08/09
07/08/09
05/27/09
Oh, wait, he does. Forget it.
05/27/09
05/27/09
Yes, I am interested in when Sergey Brin has a cold. I'd also like to know when Linus Torvalds has the runs. Where can I find the fanboy blogs for them?
05/27/09
05/27/09
And we know that Monkey Boy has a severe sweating condition, and Mosquito Boy doesn't have Malaria...
Case closed - next patient!
05/27/09
05/27/09
05/27/09
05/27/09
01/21/09
01/21/09
No. :)
01/21/09
If it doesn't make money, it doesn't make cents.
Leave the poor guy alone. You can wait until he's better. Geezmodo!
01/21/09
01/21/09
01/21/09
In other words, even assuming Steve is guilty of everything they say he is, unless they can show he intentionally described something like metastasis as a hormone imbalance, it will be virtually impossible for them to prove their case.
01/21/09
01/21/09
However, I would guess that while there may be enough of a corporate disclosure issue to bring a suit, given his medical privacy and, to the extent that his doctors testify they will inevitably support his account (even if it's something along the lines of "we tried to convince Steve of the magnitude of the problem, but he dismissed our concern") it would be very hard to prove he intentionally mislead investors about his health. Even if he did.
01/21/09
01/21/09
That said, if Apple did stretch the truth or re-arrange the facts, it should be investigated whether we think this is an important issue or not. If true, it is still stock manipulation and exactly the sort of thing the SEC should be looking into.
Still, I don't think they will get anywhere due to health regulations in this country.
01/21/09
Reset Password
Please enter your email address to have your password reset.
Register
Registering will give you a user profile and the ability to add other users as friends. To become a commenter, however, you need to audition.
Want to know more? Consult the Comment FAQ and legal terms.
Submit Your Comment
You don't need to login to comment. Just enter your email address below.
See how your address will be displayed in the Comment FAQ.
Login with your Facebook or Gizmodo account.
Sign up here.
-
- Archives
- About
- Advertising
- Legal
- Help
- Report a Bug
- FAQ
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.