Jonnyboy85 wrote: If you're into the regulatory changes going on right now that will affect shorting and a lot of other unlawful activities like what you're seeing on this board I've attached the link for the report by the
Ontario Capital Markets Modernization Taskforce. it's dry but theres a lot of good info there. #25 and #26 on shorting is good and #57 applies directly to stockhouse and public spaces such as these. quoted below
https://files.ontario.ca/books/mof-capital-markets-modernization-taskforce-final-report-en-2021-01-22-v2.pdf 57.Create a prohibition to effectively deter and prosecute misleading or untrue statements about public companies and attempts to make such statements
There have been cases where a series of unsubstantiated statements are made publicly for financial gain, and misleading or false information is introduced into the market to intentionally or recklessly affect the share price of public companies and influence the investment decisions of investors. Such schemes are sometimes referred to as “short and distort” campaigns (where there is profit from falling share prices) or as “pump and dump” schemes (where there is profit from increasing or inflated share prices).
The advent of technology in recent years, including for example the use of social media, has changed the nature and tactics of these schemes. In addition to accessing a much wider audience, campaigns can be sustained with many misleading or false statements made over a prolonged period. British Columbia recently enacted legislation that will help combat such abusive schemes. Many commenters indicated support for this recommendation.
Recommendation:
The Taskforce recommends creating a new and specific prohibition on making misleading or untrue statements about public companies. This will make it easier for the OSC to effectively deter and combat abusive practices intended to affect share prices or influence investor decisions, such as “short and distort” campaigns and “pump and dump” schemes. The prohibition would also cover attempts to make “misleading or untrue statements about public companies” to address the abusive practices that may not be successful, but which are still egregious.
The prohibition would allow the OSC to take enforcement action targeting any person or entity who makes one or more statements about a public company, where those statements are known to be (or there is a reckless disregard for whether these statements are) misleading or untrue, and when those statements, taken on their own or together, would be expected to either affect the market price or value of the securities of the public company or derivatives based on such securities, or influence the investment decision-making of a reasonable investor in respect of these securities or derivatives.
To enforce the prohibition,
the OSC would not need to prove that the market was distorted by the statement or statements (i.e., there would be no causation requirement).
An intention to impact the market or influence a reasonable investor’s decision-making would be sufficient. This prohibition is not meant to capture analysts who frequently provide their researched views on reporting issuers’ securities, and who may omit facts without the intent to mislead. It is also not meant to stifle the legitimate dissemination of public information by analysts or reputable activist short sellers. Indeed, the Taskforce acknowledges that reputable activist short sellers’ public comments can be important for price correction of a public issuer’s securities.