Value Microcaps Motherboard

[gilead23]

Your link doesn't seem to come up with anything but thanks

Im still not sure if thats correct though.

For kicks I went and looked at the SEC website

Heres their definition
"General. The "manipulative and deceptive devices" prohibited by Section 10(b) of the Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder include, among other things, the purchase or sale of a security of any issuer, on the basis of material nonpublic information about that security or issuer, in breach of a duty of trust or confidence that is owed directly, indirectly, or derivatively, to the issuer of that security or the shareholders of that issuer, or to any other person who is the source of the material nonpublic information."

http://www.law.uc.edu/CCL/34ActRls/rule10b5-1.html

They define fiduciary responsibilities here

# Scope of Rule. This section shall apply to any violation of Section 10(b) of the Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder that is based on the purchase or sale of securities on the basis of, or the communication of, material nonpublic information misappropriated in breach of a duty of trust or confidence.

# Enumerated "duties of trust or confidence." For purposes of this section, a "duty of trust or confidence" exists in the following circumstances, among others:

1. Whenever a person agrees to maintain information in confidence;

2. Whenever the person communicating the material nonpublic information and the person to whom it is communicated have a history, pattern, or practice of sharing confidences, such that the recipient of the information knows or reasonably should know that the person communicating the material nonpublic information expects that the recipient will maintain its confidentiality; or

3. Whenever a person receives or obtains material nonpublic information from his or her spouse, parent, child, or sibling; provided, however, that the person receiving or obtaining the information may demonstrate that no duty of trust or confidence existed with respect to the information, by establishing that he or she neither knew nor reasonably should have known that the person who was the source of the information expected that the person would keep the information confidential, because of the parties' history, pattern, or practice of sharing and maintaining confidences, and because there was no agreement or understanding to maintain the confidentiality of the information.
http://www.law.uc.edu/CCL/34ActRls/rule10b5-2.html

Now the SEC is pretty clear that none of these paragraphs are exclusive and case law will govern. Without seeing the case law or a really good summation of case law I don't know what is legal and what isn't but as you may know case law is often messy and full of nuance.

Keep in mind Im not saying that any inside information is legal. Im saying I don't know and a system based on rulings and case law is often alot more complex than a couple of paragraphs would show.

The safer thing of course is not to trade on info if you aren't sure.