Yes, you heard it right, a Federal Judge has ruled that a Rocket Ship Emoji, Money Bag Emoji, and Stock Chart Emoji are financial advice.
Here is a Former SEC Branch Chief shedding light on the issue;
Here’s the court case info;
And the court finds that tweets, to the public, are considered financial advice.
Objectively, if you look at the tweets in question. The Emoji’s were merely stating facts. The Numbers are going up, insert a rocket ship. The Price is going up, insert a stock market Emoji. The sales are $10M+ sales in beta, Money Bag.
By defining these tweets with objective reports as financial advice when they are objectively showing trends, would imply that ANY media site that represents ANY value change would constitute as investment advice. If Yahoo, Motley, CNN, etc were to say X company had Y% Gains or Losses, that would then constitute as investment advice.
Also, Finding tweets, that are non direct, as financial advice doesn’t sit well with me.
And finding Emojis are admissible evidence for financial advice, also doesn’t sit well with me.
In short, I hate how stupid people are, and people also make up ‘the court’. Those are two separate objective statements.
Here are the tweets in question so you can agree with me too;
So Far “Chart Emoji” “Chart Emoji”, is not a forward looking statement, it is -in fact- an objective statement of past events. Even if you combine the evidence of forward looking statements elsewhere, the tweets presented here are not constructive to any such arguments. These Tweets should not be admissible as evidence, it only serves fluff and makes the Court look ridiculous.
And why come there is no comment on the Fire Emoji? Is it because it could be interpreted as a bearish sentiment when shit is on fire? Where is the consistency? Is this a Clown Court? Why assign value judgements to some Emojis in a tweet, but not others? Clown World.
By that judgement, on tweets, someone yelling their favorite company from their roof tops like a Town Crier would be considered giving financial advice.
This is the fine folks on Federal Payroll making these absurd rules on technology they probably don’t understand. I mean, this tech is as old as their supposed grand children, maybe even younger.
What you can also get from this court case, is that someone was shilling their NFTs and that constituted as a sale of securities to the public and not filed with the SEC. Which, to my knowledge, there was no set precedence for filing such NFTs as ‘securities’ at all.
What’s worse, it was a Canadian venture business that was shilling NFTs on International Twitter, and then being taken to court by New York. You know, not Canada. For Tweets and other alleged false promises.
Idk about you, but this seems like a push to have more federal and SEC enforcement actions taken against NFTs and Crypto. Ontop of limiting the public domains’ ability to tweet.
Some side rants;
I personally think the current use model of NFT’s are shit. But I also firmly believe the SEC should not enforce the idea of NFTs and Crypto as a Blanket Catch-All Security. That would be as dumb as defining art as a security, which is volatile, illiquid, and subjective.
I also personally don’t like the SEC, and they haven’t done a stellar job regulating the Stock Market. So when they can enforce their current securities, then maybe -just maybe- they can look into enforcing on Block Chain Tech. Until then, Fuck no.
Based on my findings of court findings, I stand within reason that this is Kangaroo Court, but of course, that’s my opinion. If citing literal facts with Emoji’s is financial advice, than citing literal facts with percentages and the words ‘gains’ or ‘losses’ would also constitute investment advice. So, hopefully we iron out these issues.
I also am not a believer that non-direct and non-specific public information should be admissible in court. Like If I tweet “Don’t Fight the FED” with rocket ship Emojis, how the fuck you gonna use that as valid evidence? News Outlets and Media would be sued.
Clown Ass world, I tells ya.
When it comes to securities lawsuits, no one is more antsy and angst filled than the courts in New York.
Going out of their way to side against a Canadian Company for Tweets (among other arguably valid things). Gotta love NY.
*Not Valid Financial, Legal, Life, or Any Advice