Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
Hewlett-Packard chair to step down
She is resigning at the end of the year over the brewing scandal regarding the investigation of telephone records of employees, but the California AG warned that company insiders are likely to face criminal charges.
Tags:
Thursday, September 7, 2006
No Problem with Data Collection and Privacy?
It seems to me that too many people are unconcerned about the erosion of our privacy rights, and the data collection that is going on every minute of every day - not only by the government, but by private businesses. My point in all of this, aside from the simple and obvious constitutional violations when the government is involved is that the collection of such data is dangerous because that data will be abused.
And now it starts, Hewlett Packard is being investigated for purchasing, reviewing and investigating the private cell phone records of its own board members. Folks are calling for the head of HP Chairwoman Patricia Dunn, criminal charges are being considered. California Attorney General Bill Lockyer said "I don't have a settled view on whether it was illegal yet, but it certainly was colossally stupid."
Other comments from the article
Still think the government employees are not going to abuse the records that they have to further their own political, business or personal interests? Are the days of Watergate, Hoover and domestic spying so far behind us that we have forgotten how far government and business leaders will go to further their own agenda?
And now it starts, Hewlett Packard is being investigated for purchasing, reviewing and investigating the private cell phone records of its own board members. Folks are calling for the head of HP Chairwoman Patricia Dunn, criminal charges are being considered. California Attorney General Bill Lockyer said "I don't have a settled view on whether it was illegal yet, but it certainly was colossally stupid."
Other comments from the article
Peter Morici, professor at the Professor Robert H. Smith School of Business at the University of Maryland: If the chairman thinks this is the way business ought to be conducted, maybe it's time for her to take a sabbatical. It's arrogant and inappropriate.
John W. Dienhart, business ethics professor at Seattle University: This sends a message to employees that the company is willing to do just about anything to protect itself... [t]his sends a bad message to existing employees, and it's bad for attracting good employees from outside the organization.
Still think the government employees are not going to abuse the records that they have to further their own political, business or personal interests? Are the days of Watergate, Hoover and domestic spying so far behind us that we have forgotten how far government and business leaders will go to further their own agenda?
Tags:
Saturday, August 19, 2006
Quattrone Cuts Deal - No Finding of Guilt
Reuters is reporting that the NYT is reporting that Quattrone has entered into a defferred prosecution agreement the criminal prosecutors to resolve his criminal case. No finding of wrongful conduct, no fine, no penalty, no jail.
I assume this is great news for him, as he has prevailed on the NASD side and the criminal side, but at what cost to him, his career and his family? And does anyone have any idea how much money this one case cost the NASD and the taxpayers?
I assume this is great news for him, as he has prevailed on the NASD side and the criminal side, but at what cost to him, his career and his family? And does anyone have any idea how much money this one case cost the NASD and the taxpayers?
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Ex-Comverse CEO On the Lam
Oh boy - from InvestmentNews.com -
Comverse Technology Inc.'s former chief executive Kobi Alexander is on the run from charges of conspiracy, and is considered a fugitive by the U.S. government, according to published reports.
Mr. Alexander, who was investigated for illegal activity related to backdating stock options, reportedly transferred more than $57 million into a bank account in Israel and has fled to the country.
Sunday, August 13, 2006
SEC Clarifies the Effect of Goldstein on Hedge Fund Managers
In an unusual release, the SEC has issued a no-action letter, not to a particular entity or individual, but in response to a request by the American Bar Association. The no-action letter addresses particular issues arising from the DC Circuit Court's opinion in Goldstein vs. SEC, which vacated rule 203(b)(3)-2 under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. An analysis of the Goldstein decision is at SECLaw.com.
The decision threw a significant amount of doubt into the registration of hedge fund advisers. Advisers who registered under the rule were left questioning the impact of the decision on their obligations, if any, under the Act.
To the Commission's credit, the no-action letter clarifies much of the uncertainty, and answers most of the outstanding questions.
I will post a detailed review of the no-action letter at SECLaw.com as soon as possible. The link above will take those who cannot wait directly to the no-action leter.
The decision threw a significant amount of doubt into the registration of hedge fund advisers. Advisers who registered under the rule were left questioning the impact of the decision on their obligations, if any, under the Act.
To the Commission's credit, the no-action letter clarifies much of the uncertainty, and answers most of the outstanding questions.
I will post a detailed review of the no-action letter at SECLaw.com as soon as possible. The link above will take those who cannot wait directly to the no-action leter.
Monday, August 7, 2006
Martha Stewart Settles Civil Insider-Trading Case - New York Times
The New York Times is reporting that Martha Stewart has settled the insider trading case with the SEC - agreeing to pay $195,000. No other details of the settlement were mentioned in the article.
I am assuming that the settlement is without admitting or denying the allegations of the SEC Complaint, but what is interesting is that the settlement is over 4 times the amount of her profits, as reported in early press reports.
While hindsight is always 20/20, for others, the entire case should be a lesson in dealing with prosecutors and government investigators. My original article on the case, The Story of Martha and The Telephone Call -Proving Aesop Right Once Again - We Often Give Our Enemies the Means of Our Own Destruction is online at SECLaw.com
I am assuming that the settlement is without admitting or denying the allegations of the SEC Complaint, but what is interesting is that the settlement is over 4 times the amount of her profits, as reported in early press reports.
While hindsight is always 20/20, for others, the entire case should be a lesson in dealing with prosecutors and government investigators. My original article on the case, The Story of Martha and The Telephone Call -Proving Aesop Right Once Again - We Often Give Our Enemies the Means of Our Own Destruction is online at SECLaw.com
Wednesday, August 2, 2006
Twenty Five Years Is A Long Sentence for a White Collar Crime
In upholding the conviction of Bernard Ebbers, the Second Circuit stated[
And it certainly is, in particular when we compare such a sentence to other "more serious" types of crimes.
The sentence presents a number of interesting questions about what is worse in society - violent crime or corporate crimes which cost thousands of people significant financial losses. Couple this statement with Judge Jed Rakoff's rejection of an 85 year sentence for 42 months, and the Booker decision which tossed the federal sentencing guidelines, and we have a very interesting area of debate.
It also presents a significant area of uncertainty for defendants charged with securities fraud crimes.
For those interested in the theoretical side of this issue, the White Collar Crime Professor Blog has a number of posts, and a number of questions.
t]wenty-five years is a long sentence for a white collar crime, longer than the sentences routinely imposed by many states for violent crimes, including murder, or other serious crimes such as serial child molestation.
And it certainly is, in particular when we compare such a sentence to other "more serious" types of crimes.
The sentence presents a number of interesting questions about what is worse in society - violent crime or corporate crimes which cost thousands of people significant financial losses. Couple this statement with Judge Jed Rakoff's rejection of an 85 year sentence for 42 months, and the Booker decision which tossed the federal sentencing guidelines, and we have a very interesting area of debate.
It also presents a significant area of uncertainty for defendants charged with securities fraud crimes.
For those interested in the theoretical side of this issue, the White Collar Crime Professor Blog has a number of posts, and a number of questions.
Tuesday, August 1, 2006
NASDAQ Becomes Operational as a National Securities Exchange
The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. has become operational as an exchange in NASDAQ-listed securities, effective today. NASDAQ plans to become operational as an exchange in other exchange-listed securities on October 1, 2006.
One important effect of this event is that issuers who are listed on NASDAQ and and registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or the Investment Company Act of 1940 have become registered under Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act.
The SEC has granted those companies that were exempt from registration under the Exchange Act a temporary three-year continuation of the exemption, until August 1, 2009, to allow these companies to become registered under Section 12(b).
One important effect of this event is that issuers who are listed on NASDAQ and and registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or the Investment Company Act of 1940 have become registered under Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act.
The SEC has granted those companies that were exempt from registration under the Exchange Act a temporary three-year continuation of the exemption, until August 1, 2009, to allow these companies to become registered under Section 12(b).
'Super Lawyers' and 'Best Lawyers' Hire Big Guns to Battle Ad Ban: Financial News - Yahoo! Finance
According to the New Jersey Law Journal, Super Lawyers and Best Lawyers in America have retained attorneys to attempt to reverse an ethics opinion that put them out of business in New Jersey.
The firms were hired last week to reverse or win modification of Opinion 39 of the state Supreme Court's Committee on Attorney Advertising, published July 24 and referenced here. It bars lawyers from advertising they are in the "Best Lawyers" or "Super Lawyers" rankings and participating in the voting for such honors.
The opinion is based on ethics rules which prohibit ads that create an unjustified expectation about the results the lawyer can achieve. The opinion also found that "Best" and "super" are manufactured titles that could lead unwary consumers to believe lawyers so described are superior to other lawyers, a violation of rules against misleading ads.
While the debate over whether such designations are ethical rages, the most significant comment comes from Larry Bodine, a legal marketing consultant:
The firms were hired last week to reverse or win modification of Opinion 39 of the state Supreme Court's Committee on Attorney Advertising, published July 24 and referenced here. It bars lawyers from advertising they are in the "Best Lawyers" or "Super Lawyers" rankings and participating in the voting for such honors.
The opinion is based on ethics rules which prohibit ads that create an unjustified expectation about the results the lawyer can achieve. The opinion also found that "Best" and "super" are manufactured titles that could lead unwary consumers to believe lawyers so described are superior to other lawyers, a violation of rules against misleading ads.
While the debate over whether such designations are ethical rages, the most significant comment comes from Larry Bodine, a legal marketing consultant:
"I've always thought that promoting yourself as a 'super lawyer' or 'best lawyer' was pathetic, self-aggrandizing and meaningless," legal marketing consultant and blogger Larry Bodine said on his Web site last week. "I counsel law firm clients not to hype this designation, because it preys upon lawyer egos to publicly praise themselves, and leads to expensive advertising campaigns. It is also weak, because it meant the only source that said you were any good was a silly directory."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)