SEC P2

November 18, 2008

On behalf of

Mark Cuban

RE: SEC Civil Action in the United States District

for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division

The SEC knows their case centers on one telephone conversation between two individuals- 4 years ago. The SEC claims there was an agreement between these parties to the conversation to keep certain information confidential. We interviewed Guy Faure, the former CEO of Mamma.com Inc., with whom the SEC claims Mr. Cuban made an agreement. We had a court reporter transcribe the interview. There was no agreement to keep information confidential. Here is a relevant excerpt from the interview with Mr. Faure:

CHRISTOPHER CLARK :

1) Q- We spoke earlier about you were telling Mr. Cuban in words or substance : “I have confidential information for you”.

A- Right.

2) Q- Do you recall anything Mr. Cuban said in response or reply to that statement by you ?

A- No, I do not.

The SEC knows this-they have the transcript, yet they brought the case anyway. Why? Do they have a different statement from Mr. Faure ?

Why did the SEC end their multi-year investigation of Mamma.com Inc. for alleged securities laws violations days before interviewing present and former Mamma.com Inc. executives about this matter? Was the timing a coincidence? We think not.

Any inquiries respecting this release should be directed to Stephen Best at Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP (202) 346-8735.

——————————

——————————

Stephen A. Best

Partner

Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP

1101 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 1100

Washington, D.C. 20005

148 thoughts on “SEC P2

  1. To Mark Cuban:

    A word of advice from someone who has been litigated by the SEC on far more substantial matters:

    Don’t try your case in public. If your attorneys disagree with me, you are respectfully advised to find new attorneys.

    Note: I am not commenting (at least at this time) about the relative merits of your case.

    Respectfully,

    Sam E. Antar (former Crazy Eddie CFO and a convicted felon)

    Comment by Sam E. Antar (former Crazy Eddie CFO and a convicted felon) -

  2. Why does by blog comment get deleted every time I post? 3 time and counting….

    What kind of network nazi’s do we have here?

    A former mavs fan,

    Wild Man Wiley

    Comment by Your Daddy -

  3. Go Mark! We at LibertyManiacs.com are fully behind you and are slapping on our href=”http://www.zazzle.com/free_mark_cuban_bumper_sticker_bumpersticker-128891884094199352?rf=238630728040783772″>”Free Mark Cuban” Bumper Stickers!< Hang in there!

    Comment by Dan -

  4. Mark I have always been impressed by the way you speak the truth. The topics you touch on one would never see a man of your means comment on – and I thank you for it. You could keep it to yourself – gosh knows you don’t need to educate others to how the world really works. Including the Ponzi scam that is Wall Street – can’t help to think that because of your abilty to speak out like you did on Fox the other day – calling Wall Street criminals to the mat. Things you nary hear the so called pundits mention. Not mention your movie. This stinks to high heaven – here they are releasing this nonsense on you while the Wall Street criminals who literally blow up the world with FAKE, COUNTERFEIT, FRAUDULAUNT financial vehicles go unscathed. Unbelievable. I hope this does not change you…we need you to shine the light of truth on this scum.

    Comment by Carter -

  5.     Mr. Best     What I have read about this case so far leads me to make an observation about Mr. Cuban’s dilemma that nobody seems to hve observed from what has been stated or commented about. To me Mr. Faure in initiating the contact with Mr. Cuban and revealing proprietary information to him was criminal on Mr. Faure part. As Mr. Faure’s revealed this proprietary information in order to induce Mr. Cuban to invest in the new issue he (Mr. Faure) might have actually been engaging in an extortion of Mr. Cuban. This gambit of Mr. Faure’s had two purposes, one was to induce Mr. cuban into buying the new issue or if he refused to than have him locked in knowing this information which would prevent the sale of his shares until the Pipe was introduced. Mr. Cuban, not owning a sufficient amount of shares or being directly or indirectly connected to the company is not subject to the SEC rules. Mr. Cuban was only protecting his personal property, the shares in mamma, from what he believe was a reckless business decision on the part of Mr. Faure. Mr. Cuban had know solid knowledge that the stocks would go up or down.
    The only similarity between Mr. Cuban and Martha Stewart is that both are being used to divert action from something. In Mr. Cuban’s case it could be the Cubs purchase. In the Stewart case it was diverting attention for the Bush appointee at the FDA who released proprietary information to the CEO of Bristol-Myers who in turn told Sam Waskel. That appointee snuck back to Texas and never hit the spotlight and got a better job. Yet everybody else went to jail.

    Comment by richard rainey -

  6. I am pretty sure you are on top of things and most likely have read
    this piece. Here’s the link:

    http://www.corporatecrimereporter.com/hueston112108.htm

    You should take the SEC to trial over this. I’m a currently taking
    some public relations courses. One of them is reputation management.
    In my opinion, I would say that being aggressively proactive with this
    is the right way to ensure that your name and business does not get
    entirely sullied; even when you are innocent of all charges. Future
    business dealings may be affected regardless of that fact that you
    did nothing wrong.
    Public relations is simply performance plus communication. I say that
    you aggressively communicate through your actions. Press charges!!!

    Cheers

    Comment by Lakes -

  7. Mark Cuban you are innocent!….too many haters out there

    Comment by Fan -

  8. Mark, don’t let your blog get bogged down by publishing legal briefs
    otherwise you’ll become today’s Lenny Bruce.

    Comment by Thomas Molitor -

  9. The insider trading rule is completely stupid. If you are given information that your stock is about to drop in value how can you not act on it? How can the SEC not expect someone to act on this kind of information?

    http://www.ballardpresents.com

    Comment by ballardpresents -

  10. Pingback: If Only He Wasn’t So Kooky! « Blog Of Fire

  11. Mark Cuban,

    I am completely on your side. The key to defeat SEC is to fight against them hard with facts, willpower, and determination.

    SEC hopes you will cave in. Do not do that. Do the Cuban way: only bend over you should do is to show your ass to SEC people. :)

    Here is an article that speaks a support for you:

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w59.html

    Know that people in Austrian school is cheering for you!

    For the love of liberty,
    Charles

    Comment by Charles -

  12. I have to agree that the timing of this is simply too perfect to believe.

    This is exactly the kind of slime that Selig needs to finalize a play to keep you out of baseball.

    Stay strong and I hope through your efforts you expose more corruption this regime has laid on this this country.

    Comment by Dave -

  13. Federal prosecutors don’t bring cases they don’t think are slam dunks.

    We haven’t heard the whole story yet.

    Just wait.

    Comment by You're A D-Bag -

  14. Mark, you’re case is covered on our podcast – http://www.gelfmagazine.com/archives/the_meltdowns.php.

    Thoughts?

    Comment by seth hart -

  15. Rock on Mark! Go Mavs!

    Comment by Alex -

  16. Like Terry Johnson said…..33% of the people seem to be against Mark. Here is the problem…..100% of those 33% don’t know their ass from their head and don’t have law degrees so what they think isn’t relevant to anyone when it comes to securities law.

    Typical government BS. The bad part about it is the government does this because so many of you are so gullible. It’s no secret the non-gullible citizens are the ones who aren’t experiencing financial problems regardless of what banks, stocks, etc. do.

    Comment by matt -

  17. So because Cheney is VP of the country we can’t charge him
    for insider trading or war crimes?

    Oh Wait, that’s what the movie Loose Change was about-
    and we all know Cheney wouldn’t do that either because he owns the country.

    Well Mark… the only way to settle this is
    to challenge Cox to a round of Dancing
    With the Stars – loser gets to drop the soap for life
    with no presidential pardons.

    Comment by Kayla Kerry -

  18. I would knock Cox’s slimy bribe taking breath out faster than
    you can say presidential pardon if I saw him on the street.

    Comment by Jon Girarde -

  19. This story is right out of Ayn Rand’s “Why Businessmen need Philosophy”
    If they play with you I will make a martyr out of myself on national
    tv faster than you can say socialist scare tactic.

    Comment by Clayton Silva -

  20. **OWNED**
    In May 2007, after the Mavericks lost in the first round of the NBA playoffs, Norris posted a comment on a Time.com blog that attempts to be a parody of “Loose Change” and says that Mark Cuban himself “orchestrated the Mavericks’ loss.” Norris then emailed the comment to Cuban.

    After calling the blog comment “scary,” Cuban sent an email to Norris and SEC Chairman Christopher Cox, noting that “sending [an] unsolicited email to me, basically accusing me of being a traitor and lacking in patriotism, from your sec email account and during working hours is exactly how taxpayer dollars should be spent.”

    Comment by Clayton Silva -

  21. Mark and America FTW

    SEC or America’s Greed Council touches you we will kill for you
    buddy- keep up the good work and publish that god damn film.

    Comment by Clayton Silva -

  22. Pingback: Most Popular Blog Online

  23. oh and Mark. Get your legal team to work around the stupid MLB owners
    association and buy the cubs already.

    Comment by kyu -

  24. “It’s still insider trading if the information is not public. Once
    you learn the info, you can’t act. If Mr. Cuban wished not to learn
    “confidential” info he should have hung up the phone.”

    actually this is not true, please do research before you post and make wrong claims
    please check http://seclaw.blogspot.com/ the last 3 posts.

    Comment by kyu -

  25. Pingback: uglychart.com: a blog about stocks » Blog Archive » links for November 20th

  26. this says it all.
    good luck mark.

    from:

    http://tinyurl.com/6q66t2

    “This case is a travesty,” said Alex Epstein, an analyst at the Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights. “Cuban is accused of selling his stock in Mamma.com after the CEO told Cuban that the company would be making a new stock offering that Cuban thought was a bad idea. But there is nothing wrong with this whatsoever—unless Cuban had a contractual obligation or fiduciary duty not to act on the information. And if Cuban violated a contract, which there is no evidence of, then that is the injured party’s—the company’s—job to pursue, not the SEC’s. In all likelihood, if there is anyone who violated a contractual obligation, it is the CEO who divulged confidential, unsolicited information—not the famous billionaire recipient who just happens to make a juicy target for SEC bureaucrats thirsting for another high-profile case to justify their regulatory power.

    “The question of ‘insider trading’—when employees and investors of a company can act on certain information—should be left entirely up to private contract, such as restrictions on CEOs shorting their own stock. The criminalization of ‘insider trading’ has authorized the SEC to terrorize those whose only sin was to be a savvy investor. The Mark Cubans of the world deserve to be left free to make investment decisions under a government with clear laws against force, fraud, and breach of contract—not to spend years of their lives enduring witch hunts and prisons.”

    Comment by elmas -

  27. Would the SEC have gone after Mark Cuban for insider non-trading
    as well? Why does the SEC continue to ignore this issue?

    Comment by Insider Non-trading Watch -

  28. Below is my comment to Gary Weiss guy who asks whose worse Mark Cuban or the SEC as well as my comments to Peter J. Henning who the NY Times gives a soapbox to comdemn Mark Cuban in advance of a fair hearing.
    I now know Christopher Cox’s SEC is blatently political a la the style of Joseph McCarthy and this SEC character Jeffrey B. Norris at the Fort Worth SEC office explains why and how Steve Forbes pal James Dale Davidson,Judge Ken Reilly,banker David P Summers,Houston attorney John O’Quinn,the Israeli Grin brothers,and even supposedly ethical Stanford University researchers Chris Heeschen and John Cooke et.al. can run a ‘biotech’ fraud like Endovasc out of Montgomery,Texas for so many years and be treated like VIPS by the likes of Jeffrey B. Norris’,et.al.’s Texas and Chris Cox,et.al.’s Washington, D.C., SEC.

    And if Norris and his SEC Chair scam buddy Chris Cox can justify stock fraud and lie about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac being ‘naked shorted’ with no proof and with the whole purpose being to misinform and defraud investors regardless of their political or anti-war beliefs then no wonder I’m in such trouble.Cox and Norris definitely don’t like what I’m saying about the SEC’s culpability,in my humble opinion,for allowing both Israeli stock scamsters in the ICTS International fraud that ‘guarded’ Logan Airport, Boston on 9/11 as well the Securacom of Kuwait-American company or really the Bush -Al-Sabah company of Marvin Bush,Wirt WalkerIII and Mishal Yousef Saud al Sabah,that had responsibity for Dulles and the WTC at the same time,to go free.There incompetence at best as well as money to operate was paid for by defrauding investors while the U.S.SEC let tewm fund their operations tis way ! Yes te SEC has much reponsibility for funding 9/11 or at best incompetence that led to 9/11 !
    Both were stock frauds that cost the lives of thousands of people and I,Tony Ryals,not Mark Cuban or
    ‘Loose Change’ to my knowledge, said that ! And the SEC as allowed them to operate and go unauudited and unscrutinized even after 9/11 !
    Check out Securacom and ICTS International SEC filings for yourselves !

    to garyweiss.blogspot.con:
    Gary,
    You’re worst than both of them.You work for Steve Forbes whose pal James Dale Davidson began the ‘naked short’selling lie that SEC Criminal Chris Cox has taken over to distract from offshore manipulation and money laundering with Fannie Mae Freddie Mac etc., shares.And all your associates are stock fraudsters like Sam Antar and the self righteous penny stock parasite den-of-thieves.
    -Tony Ryals

    ……………..

    http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/another-view-mark-cuban-nabbed-so-what/?ref=technology

    Another View: Mark Cuban Nabbed. So What?
    November 19, 2008, 2:24 pm
    by Peter J. Henning

    The Securities and Exchange Commission’s decision to sue Mark Cuban, the billionaire owner of the Dallas Mavericks and a potential bidder for the Chicago Cubs, made headlines around the country. The insider trading case against Mr. Cuban shows that the “cop on the beat” is there to ensure the integrity of the markets. But is this case something we should care about?

    The facts of the case are simple and seem to belie Mr. Cuban’s claim on his soapbox Blog Maverick that “the commission’s claims are infected by the misconduct of the staff of its enforcement division.”…..
    It is hard to feel very much sympathy for Mr. Cuban, who enjoys tooting his own horn to no end. He has been fined more than $1 million by the National Basketball Association, and he once asserted that the N.B.A.’s director of referees was so incompetent that he could not manage a Dairy Queen….

    Dear Peter J. Henning,

    I’ve complained about worthless penny stocks like James Dale Davidson
    of Agora Inc.’s Genemax and Endovasc, etc., fraudulently claiming
    their shares were ‘naked shorted’
    for years and they made use of LOM of Bermuda as well as Tim Mahoney’s
    vFinance and Charles Schwab to do it .
    And the Beltway or Virginia banker David P Summers now at Virginia
    Heritage Bank who ran Davidson’s,the Grin brothers of Israel’s
    etc.,etc., pump and dump fraud Endovasc was really NOT just any scam
    artist fraudulently posing as a Texas ‘biotech’ inventor – but a D.C.
    banker lieing about being one(a biotech inventor) !

    Actually while I have my reservations about Mark Cuban and other
    affluent Americans and foreigners using U.S. penny stocks and getting
    discount deals on their shares while the real ‘retail investors’ get
    taken for a ride,at least Mark Cuban discussed Mamma.com openly on his
    blog in 2004 and also unlike Christopher Cox and his SEC told us his
    readers about the connection between Mamma.com and LOM or Lines
    Overseaes Management – something the SEC of Chris Cox often likes to
    keep covered up to protect the offshore criminals(i.e.- his
    associates).

    And now while Mark Cuban is hauled in and offered to the media as a
    spectacle to distract from so many security,
    (i.e.-ICTS International and Securacom penny stocks that guarded Logan
    and Dulles airports,etc.,on 9/11) and securities frauds – such as a
    potential trillion dollar plus mortgage stock fraud aided and abetted
    by Cox himself (who now claims even Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were
    ‘naked shorted’ while offering no proof whatsoever.) He and his
    U.S.SEC still cover up for every penny stock company that has ever
    made the phoney claim of being
    ‘naked shorted’ since James Dale Davidson’s Genemax and Endovasc
    began the scam – (TO DISTRACT FROM THEIR ILLEGAL AND APPARENTLY
    PROTECTED PUMP AND DUMP MONEY LAUNDERING SCHEMES ) -and has never
    charged a single one! From Genemax to Endovasc to Jag Media Holdings
    to USXP,CMKX Diamonds,etc.,etc..How many ‘companies’ have claimed they
    were ‘naked shorted’ since 2002 ?
    And now Cox and his SEC wants us to believe him and just take his and
    his SEC’s word for it the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and AIG and
    Lehman Brothers,etc., were all simply ‘naked shorted’ as well.

    Maybe the author of this piece should review Mark Cuban’s 2005 blog re NCANS and the naked short selling
    scam the U.S. SEC has allowed to continue for years and in fact aided
    and abetted .Note Mark Cuban at one point in his 2005 blog explains
    that if he needs to purchase difficult to get shares of a given stock he wishes to short he and others must pay interest to a broker such as
    Schwab just to do so.Based upon that fact do you all really think
    others are receiving free ‘naked shorted’ or ‘counterfeit’ shares
    while the billionaire Mark Cuban has no knowledge of how to do so
    himself ?!

    Christopher Cox is pulling your middle leg about Fannie Mae and
    Freddie Mac being ‘naked shorted’ and you ate it up and went on the
    attack at the first celebrity stock investor Cox offered up to you.You
    owe it to us all to use your positions as business writers and
    investigators to get to the bottom of Chris Cox’s trillion dollar
    naked short lie but instead are just playing his game and since he has
    taken over the U.S.SEC that’s what you journalists have continued to
    do.

    He has admitted receiving a monthly briefing from the CIA even though
    they are directly ‘invested’ in the stock market themselves – a clear
    conflict of interest.He has threatened journalists for asking
    questions and begun proceedings against some such as Carol Remond and
    all the NY Times as well as WSJ’s and Forbes,etc.,’business’ reporters
    have had to say in reply is ‘Yas Sir Mr.Cox Sir’. Too bad that it is
    not just you journalists who are harmed by your poor reporting and
    investigative skills or lack of journalistic ethics if that’s the case – we the public are !

    It’s also obvious that the SEC has focused on Cuban for political
    reasons.Mr.Norris of the SEC Dallas-Fort Worth office made that
    perfectly clear.And in truth ‘Loose Change’ is itself not very good
    9/11 investigative journalism and Securacom and ICTS International
    both incorporated in Biden’s state of Delaware and guarded Logan and
    Dulles airports etc. on that date,are never even mentrioned in ‘Loose
    Change’ to my knowledge ! And SEC filings coincidentally make clear
    who was in charge of those airports on that day and it wasn’t W Bush
    dad’s bin Laden partners for some reason – it was Marvin Bush,Misra Al
    Sabah of of Kuwait and Wirt Walker III with Securacom at Dulles and
    Menachem Atzmon,Ezra Harel and ex Israeli military men at Logan
    Airport with their ICTS International pump and dump that owned
    Huntleigh arport security guards,(from money they scammed out of
    mainly American investors).

    Haven’t you read the SEC filings ? That’s what everyone asked me about
    Ensdovasc – so now I’m asking you as much about ICTS and Securacom !
    And again Chris Cox lied about Fannie Mae,et.al. being ‘naked
    shorted’.In fact if shares were naked shorted’ or ‘counterfeitted’ to
    use the penny stock scamsters and I presume Mr.Cox own made up
    definition – then some investors would have complained about not
    receiving their dividends because their shares would have been
    counterfeit.This NEVER happened !

    The term was made up and or promoted by his own pal James Dale
    Davidson of the National Taxpayers Union a short distance from his
    office ! Why don’t you journalists and business reporters ask him for
    his proof ? Afraid he’ll subpoena you ? Ha.

    Comment by Tony Ryals -

  29. Keep posting about it Mark.
    Let the truth out, screw these govt. fools.

    Comment by FLC -

  30. 20 November 2008
    Dear Mark Cuban,

    I used to have respect for you as a successful business man, a provider and what appeared to be a gracious and generous person. I admired that. At what point did you become so greedy that you would risk it all to not fall behind? What was it that triggered your poor choices? You risked everything to avoid losing $750,000? I’m appalled.

    Let me tell you something about survival. I am a 40 year old single mother, raising 2 daughters and I have been doing this for 6 years. I may or may not receive child support from their father on any given month and I earn $16 an hour. I do not have health insurance at my full time job. I bring home $500 a week to support my family. I had $3500 in my IRA but that has dropped over $800 in the past several months. As of today, I have $2700 to retire on.

    Do you think that I might be discouraged? Yes I am. Do you think I might think of doing drastic things to stay afloat? Yes I do. But I don’t do anything different. Each day I get up and get ready for work, pat my children on their bottoms as I send them off to the school bus and I go to work to earn a paycheck each Friday. My point is, I keep trying. I keep going. I keep doing what is right.

    So, you think about this while you are sitting in the big house, with plenty of time on your hands to reflect on your choices and I’ll be either at work, or at my 900 square foot home tending to my children, free as a bird.
    Warm regards,
    V. Sapphire Sundine

    Comment by Sapphire -

  31. Lets see the facts first before we past any judgements. I think Mark is smart enough not to engage in these practices. It’s unfortunate the more money you earn everyone is a sell out. This shows you better watch your back.

    Comment by Anthony -

  32. Mark, you’re a target because you are wealthy, famous, outspoken (you GO boy) and attractive. Do not let these cretins at the SEC get to you. By focusing on you they are obviously diverting attention from the 1000 other things that are truly screwed up. Hang in there and fight back! Truth will prevail. God Bless and keep up all of the fine work that you do.

    Comment by Connie -

  33. Pingback: Cuban’s Defense May Also Contest Whether He Believed Information Remained Confidential

  34. Hey Mark. If Martha Stewart calls with advice……….HANG UP!!!!

    Comment by Jmarkaslot -

  35. I’m an attorney and my firm represents a company who was sued by the SEC. That was over four years ago. And guess what – the case is still going on. It is now pending for the second time in the U.S. Court of Appeals. And the interesting thing is that our client genuinely did nothing wrong. I don’t just say that flippantly. I mean they seriously did nothing wrong. I have seen first hand the SEC’s deplorable conduct and can confirm that everything that Mark has said about the SEC is true. The SEC’s tactics would be criminal were they practiced by the private sector. This is unfortunate and I’m sorry, though not surprised, that you’re having to go through this Mark. Know this – they will try to wear you down. I will pray that you have the patience and resolve to see this through. Go to the mattresses. MFFL.

    Comment by Name withheld for fear of SEC backlash -

  36. Mark, don’t out think yourself like John McCain did in picking
    Sarah Palin. John let his strategist out think themselves and cost hime
    the election. You had material non-public information and
    traded with it. You didn’t ask for the information, but you had it.
    Settle the case and go make your next billion.

    Comment by ticket_trader -

  37. Hope it isn’t so.

    Comment by Peter Robert Casey -

  38. Is this really Mark’s blog? Is he the one writing articles here or did he hire someone to do it for him?

    Comment by Julia -

  39. Hey Mark, Sorry to hear about the haters on your tail. I would bet they are just waiting to get you under oath and then get you on something else that has nothing to do with the situation. ie. There was a man years ago, they asked him questions about a banking thing, Whitewater if I am not mistaken. It turns out he slips up about something any guy would have slipped on(no pun intended) being backed into that corner and it had nothing to do with the case. None the less, now they are talking perjury. They’re fishing. It would not surprise me to find out it has something to do with keeping you from Chitown and all that glitters awaiting you. Keep fighting and don’t let them bait you into something.Good luck. Thanks for the thoughts.

    Comment by Frankie from Lawnside -

  40. Mark – I hope this is just another opportunity for you to win. Fight the good fight!

    Comment by Adam -

  41. Who will win the SEC this year? My Money’s on Mark Cuban at 1-3 odds. Next we have Florida at 2-1 and Alabama at 8-1. But I have inside info on that so I’m holding pat and rooting for Texas Tec to beat OU and Sweep.

    GM is a long shot at 500-1.

    Comment by Jeff in Dallas -

  42. Good Luck Mark, but I hate to say it, if they want you they want you.
    Look what happened to Mike Milken years ago. I hope things go better
    for you.

    Comment by Schmoopy -

  43. Although Mark may have been privy to information between him
    and one other person concerning this, there was no confidentiality
    agreement. Mark could have related this information to anyone but
    chose not to and chose to act on it.

    The SEC may heav Reasonable Suspiscion to go after Mark, but unless
    they can provide a document showing foreknowledge of a confidential
    disclosure, then there is no case here. Martha Stewart’s case is very
    similar.

    Although, I would say the governemnt right now is not in any favor
    with the public and the public has judged in Mark’s favor by seeing
    these comments.

    Comment by jkales -

  44. Sorry you have to go through this Mark. I believe you are being
    punished for speaking out against those in power. This should be a
    lesson for all those who disagree with the administration. They will
    come for you and try to ruin your name or worse… Where is the
    investigation into the big fish involved in the bailout. I am sure there
    are more prescient issues to address than alleged insider trading for
    mere peanuts. Shame on the SEC. Go after the real criminals please.

    Comment by Lakers -

  45. Mark;
    Good luck with this trouble, but maybe to take your mind off it you could comment
    on the reported $28 million paid as annual salary to the Ford CEO who was in Washington
    asking for a bailout? You usually make sense to me about financial issues,
    how does that salary make any sense? Is there any way to curb excesses at the top
    of corporations that won’t interfere with the free market economy?

    Comment by Eastern D -

  46. Mark, I just hope your not guilty.

    Comment by Colorado Running -

  47. That is good news. Sounds like the SEC trumped up a phony charge to
    make an example out of Mark. They may need a
    debt settlement
    company
    after the charges are proven false and Mark sues them for
    defamation of character. Go Cuban!

    Comment by Dallas -

  48. Mark,

    All I have to say is that you better co-operate. Martha Stewart didn’t do jail time because she committed a crime, she did time because she gave the SEC a hard time. So, get by this, and buy an NHL franchise. We need someone in Ottawa to fire the GM and the coach and if you’re up to it, trading Spezza.

    Comment by Todd Bush -

  49. The case sounds weak. Those in business seem to all do the same things. A phone conversation is not a good basis, it seems like the accuser is trying to get attention or money.

    Comment by Laura -

  50. Wait, Mark’s a celebrity now?

    Comment by Jason J -

  51. So, if you didn’t get any insider information, why the rush to sell (after hours, and then ALL your position the next day?) Good timing? Maybe you could help me time the current market and tell me where the bottom is!

    Comment by Marc -

  52. Apparently, many of you who have convicted Mark don’t know an insider from apple cider. MARK WAS NOT AN INSIDER OF MOMMA.COM. He was a shareholder and nothing more. Thus, in order to have any liability, the evidence must establish that he agreed to keep information he received confidential. The fact that Mark received confidential information that he acted upon by selling his shares is not sufficient to establish liability absent an agreement by Mark to keep the information confidential. As Will astutely pointed out, why would Mark agree to keep information concerning companies he owns stock in confidential if he knows that doing so would handcuff him in trading stocks? Say what you want about Mark, but he knows securities laws (see shareslueth.com). He would not have sold his shares in momma.com if he had agreed to keep the PIPE information confidential because he knows that would get him in trouble. Use your heads for something other than a place to support your hair.

    Comment by frank -

  53. Mark, I hope you take these Goverment agency to the ringer. There is better way to spend tax payer’s money then to jack around decent Americans instead of harassing people and using the US Goverment as your whipping stick. Most of us do not have the money to fight back and only comply to rid ourselves of the string of problems that these agencies can cause. I am glad to see that you are going to fight this instead of paying their penalty and fines. Way to go!!!

    Comment by Tuan Le -

  54. I am sure that the fact that you have so much net worth has not crossed the minds of your consul. aAfter reading the complaint and all of your responses, I care enough and deeply respect that you have been so successful to offer my opinion. You have a chinese wall obligation that in my opinion has been ignored. I see a lot of good advice to settle this matter and move forward oferred by some inteligent and caring people on this blog, I highly suggest that you take that advice.

    Comment by grey haired broker -

  55. Mark,
    Even Detroit Piston fans root for Mark Cuban.

    Hope all goes well. See your Mavs in the finals.

    Comment by James -

  56. Anyone that thinks this is a slam dunk case should look at this Supreme Court case: http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1979/1979_78_1202/

    Comment by Craig -

  57. Pingback: Mark Cuban Will Not Go Quietly Into The Night | MOUTHPIECE Blog

  58. There’s fraud on a monumental scale happening in the OTC markets daily,
    yet the SEC is going after an investor based on a phone call from 4
    years ago. What a joke!

    Comment by Steve R -

  59. I hope you get ass raped in prison.

    Comment by Joe -

  60. no idea how this is going to go. it’s all up to the lawyers now, but i am interested in seeing how much of this is going to fall into the blog. are you going to be straight up, Mark, and post everything?

    Comment by simply scott -

  61. Looks like the criminals in the bankster world don’t like what you
    say. Demand a jury amigo. The government of the banksters and for the
    banksters is losing more credibility everyday.

    Good luck and be strong!

    Tomas Estrada-Palma

    Comment by trestradapalma -

  62. Mark,

    An interesting change is in the wind.

    Your blog is usually a love-fest of individuals in violent agreement with you. That isn’t the case at the moment.

    A quick un-scientific survey would indicate that about 33% of the posters are against you, Mark. This is not good.

    I don’t think it a good idea for you to use Blog Maverick as a forum from which to comment on the SEC proceedings as it has the potential to sour your readers. It is, of course, up to you. But after reading your blog for quite awhile now, this is the first time that I have ever questioned yourthought process.

    Good luck.

    Comment by Terry Johnson -

  63. Pingback: theceodaily.com» Morning Update » November 19, 2008

  64. Pingback: Paid Content : Cuban Can't Resist Using Blog Maverick To Defend Against SEC Charges

  65. If you have good lawyers, take their advice. If you don’t have good lawyers, fire them and get good ones. It’s not about what is right and what is wrong. It is about what can you prove and how good is your lawyer. That’s American justice in today’s world.

    Good luck to you Mark.

    Comment by Abby -

  66. Is the timing of this strangely suspicious, or is it just me?

    You lauch http://www.bailoutsleuth.com to uncover where the FED is spending
    our bailout money. They refuse to disclose that information. Barney
    Frank agrees. Bloomberg files a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information
    Act. Now Paulson is testifying before Congress after
    changing the bailout plan in midstream. And your website is getting very
    popular since most Americans want to know where their money is going.

    And now the SEC hits you with this???? WHAT???

    Be careful Mr. Cuban. Obviously you struck a nerve on Wall Street.
    Time to dig deeper. You may be onto something.

    Thanks!

    Comment by Haley -

  67. Mark Cuban is a great an honest man and someone I have known for years. I have seen his hard work and dedication for years. I recall buying Apple Mac IIs from his computer shop in Dallas where we first met.
    I have seen him grow his business from squat to a billion dollar fortune. Yes, he is loud, brash, and bold. SO WHAT? That’s what great and BOLD visionaries are made of. (see Richard Branson).
    Everyone has a different temperament and some of us, like Mark and myself, like to break the mold and expose corruption, incompetence, abuse, and arrogance of power.
    Mark is one of the most ethical and honest owners in sports and fights for his players and those he cares for. How many team owners really care for their fans and give them free airplane trips.
    Knowing the corruption of the Bush Administration personally and its refusal to expose and fight Wall St corruption the past 8 years, this entire ordeal smacks of Texas and political cronyism and abuse of our system.
    How and WHY would we use valuable government resources to fight a civil action over $750,000 (Mark could care less about $750,000) when Wall St and men like Ace Greenberg and even Hank Paulson made BILLIONS on what we all know now were nothing but fraudulent mortgage backed transactions that have brought this nation and world’s economy to its knees.
    Has anyone asked why Paulson gave up billions to go to Bush’s treasury? Anyone question the last blow up in mortgage and banking in the S&L crisis when Daddy Bush was president?
    Let’s explore real abuse here. Reading teh complaint and knowing at least a couple of the players, I can’t help but smell a rat and a set up.
    Yes, Mark is vocal and loud. He is also passionate and compassionate as well as ethical ad honest.
    He was angry over the company’s moves. The company knew he was going to be upset and would react that way. They also knew it would hurt them. I don’t believe they told him to keep the info confidential and why did they call him and then send out the emails to cover their trail.
    I have seen this “pattern” used against me in several set ups and its a common ploy to elicit a reaction from provocation and then document the reaction for future legal use against an enemy.
    This smells as bad as the TARP deal and mortgage crisis and hopefully a new AG an Obama administration will see through this flimsy case.
    Anyone ever think of W’s ties to baseball and its owners? Anyone ever ask W what he knew about Canseco’s and his player’s steroid use? Anyone ever think that some old time owners in baseball don’t want Mark to buy one of the most beloved franchises in all of sports and do not want him in their circles? Anyone think why a transaction in 2004 is now being prosecuted in 2008, almost 2006, less than two months before the end of Bush’s miserable life in the White House?
    What’s Mark’s motive here? Come on, let’s all see, read, and hear the facts. Being a researcher and whistle-blower, I have a good sense here that this is a set-up!
    Just like the frauds and abuses I discovered at Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Bear Stearns, WAMU et al in the 90s and everyone, even those at the SEC, ignored. The question everyone should be asking is why?

    Comment by Nye Lavalle -

  68. God be with you in these times Mr. Cuban. Good luck to the Mavs.

    Comment by Matt -

  69. Mark – I wish you good luck with this. These types of issues can
    cause a s-load of stress, especially with the semi recent Martha
    Stewart mess. I for one do not take joy in the idea that a rich man
    is getting hammered on is automatically guilty. I hope you can work
    your way through this w/o too much loss of love of life.

    Comment by Kirk -

  70.    Mr. Farue will change his description and content of his conversation with Mr. Cuban to suit his needs just as Mr. Furnel changed his in the Martha Stewart case. Mr. Farue can claim any wording he wants since the conversation wasn’t recorded. Any thing Mr. Cuban says about that conversation could than be construed as perjury should Mr. Cuban try to counter Mr. Farue story while he (Mr. Cuban) is under oath or just responding to questions from any federal investigator. So Mr. Cuban shouldn’t open his mouth. That’s how the tuna and Ms. Stewart wond up in the can.

    Comment by richard -

  71. I’m sure the truth will come out in the courts. Mark, you’ve
    always come across as a straightforward guy. I believe you’re telling
    the truth when you say you’ve done nothing worng. Peace, Newamba

    Comment by Newamba Flamingo -

  72. People, this is a CIVIL, not criminal lawsuit. A guilty verdict will result in a fine, NOT A JAIL SENTENCE. Stop with the hundreds of ignorant notes!!

    Comment by Hougirleegirl -

  73. Hey Mark,

    Just settle with the SEC and move on.

    Its obvious to everyone except your fanboys that you screwed up.

    My .02 ….

    Barney

    Comment by Barney -

  74. Okay, maybe I am such a ranting loon my comments can’t be posted –
    I am just so frustated…we will continue on until our own titanic
    sinks. Carry on – you people up there in government killing the
    American life-style we all so enjoyed.

    Comment by Mary Burcham -

  75. Mark, did this action get brought to prominence because of the
    Huffington Post column you wrote last week titled “Obama’s First Big
    Mistake”?
    Articles have indicated that this investigation has been ongoing for
    the last two years possibly because of your involvement of the “Loose
    Change” documentary – which I haven’t seen, and thought was probably
    a bunch of crap. But did this investigation get fast-forwarded
    because you wrote a column that wasn’t a total love-fest of soon to
    be President?

    I don’t know how you even got your column published at teh Huffington
    Post site. You can’t find a critical article about this man
    anywhere. Bush, Cheney, Palin – these articles (true or false) are published
    on all major and minor sites. You have to look very hard to find the
    articles about the 17 lawsuits in 12 states asking for the proof of
    Obama’s birth certificate.

    I haven’t read these other posts in this forum – haven’t had time to
    look at them. I don’t know the state of this forum and if they have
    have had any thought this direction. I just think the O-Team maybe
    want you to “shut your mouth” and support (have a love-fest with
    “kiss America Goodbye as you knew it”) the incoming administration.

    We are coming into a new type of government we have never seen – no
    more of this “I hate Bush” sentiments – now we are seeing only ” I
    love Obama and anything Obama”, and I believe if you oppose this
    opinion, you will see your thoughts shut down fast.

    This country isn’t going to look the same soon – the government’s bad management in
    business practices (government has their hands in too many pockets
    and they can’t run anything efficiently), and our personal lives are
    are going to be so messed up with their management (health care, etc.).
    There will be many elected officials that benefit from lobby money
    for these new programs that are suppose to be for the American
    citizens (but will support thousands of new immigrants that will get
    instance legalization and benefit from these programs – due to our
    new guard) but the costs of these programs will be too much, and most
    of us will see nothing.

    Signing off: A Really Paranoid American Who Sees the American People
    Dumbly Buying Into Whatever Is Sold To Them (a.k.a A Total Obama Love
    Fest) This Is Our Children’s Inheritance – Even If They Don’t
    Understand What They Voted For

    P.S. Also, your comment section format seems to be unfriendly…
    Maybe it’s my bad firewall??? Certainly it is not because I am a
    ranting lunatic – I am fairly sane most of the time. But I am really
    frustrated with all these kool-aid drinking people that accept
    everything they are read and hear. It’s not true.

    Comment by Mary Burcham -

  76. Pingback: Mark Cuban update « Sly Capital

  77. Your defense is that you took confidential inside information and traded on it but you did not agree to keep it confidential?? What kind of defense is that? You stole money from people on the stock exchange who did not have the same confidential info that you had. That makes you a criminal, no different from the guy who robs the Dairy Queen.

    Comment by commonman -

  78. Hang in there Mark. People in government come after their own. They did it with Roland Carnaby also. Hang in there and dont let them get the best of you.

    Comment by Alpha -

  79. The right thing to do would be to plead guilty, admit to your fans that you were wrong, and face the law like a man. Instead, you will do what all rich people do – claim innocence, say that you’re being unfairly targeted, hire the most expensive lawyers that money can buy, and try to weasel your way out of this.

    I hope if you’re found guilty, that max out your penalty.

    Comment by Andrew -

  80. So, you’re a republican who declares having voted for Obama: http://blogmaverick.com/2008/11/05/proud-to-be-an-american/
    And a week later you get the SEC on your back? :) Hmmmm…..

    Comment by Joe -

  81. If there is a large sell order on a Mom and Pop (err, just momma I guess) internet stock, of course it is going to tank. This smells like a bitter Momma.com executive to me. How much did he lose as a result of the decline? Did the info Mark received hit the street the day after? It doesn’t sound like it if they were “considering” something and Mark’s sell order probably gave them a pretty clear view of his opinion.

    P.S.
    Mark, if it does go to trial, please dance in the courtroom “Don’t Forget The Lyrics” style when you win :P

    Comment by Mufaka -

  82. Pingback: Mark Cuban Can’t Help Himself, He’s Going To Fight The SEC In Public | American News World - News And Technology

  83. Pingback: Why the Case Against Cuban Smells Fishy - GigaOM

  84. Mark,

    I wish the SEC was spending more time dealing with the crooks on wall street with all the
    bail out money. This a complete waste of taxpayer money in the current
    economic state. If their entire case is based on information based
    on what someone said [he said she said crap] they don’t have a case.

    -Mike

    Comment by Mike Jones -

  85. Angelo Mozillo flushes $90 Million worth of cooked-books Countrywide turd stock when one new mortage in four wasn’t even mailing in the first payment and this is how George Bush’s SEC deals with the situation?

    Do you suppose that they are softening you up for the posthumous pardon of “Kenny Boy” Lay on the day before Obama’s inaguration?

    Look for this blatant harassment to go away just about as quickly as Christopher Coz does this winter.

    Comment by scumtracker -

  86. Wild goose chase! I knew it! The whole case seemed weak from the start. The real question is, who did you piss off to get the SEC on your back?
    Keep the faith Mark, the truth will prevail.

    Comment by Markus -

  87. Pingback: Mark Cuban Can’t Help Himself, He’s Going To Fight The SEC In Public

  88. Pingback: Mark Cuban fights back [Insider Trading] : VCsAndAngels - Venture Capital / VCs, Angel Investors, Startup News, Etc

  89. Mark,

    This smells like a deal where the government takes
    a shot at those who reach the level your at. It seems
    unfortunate for you and a total nusiance but you are
    obviously a target for the feds given your wealth.
    Best of luck and maybe the govt. can focus on something more
    important here like reducing 11 trillion dollars of debt.

    Comment by Greg -

  90. Mark,
    Of all the people that this could happen to, I’m glad it was you. Not because of malicious reasons but rather because if anybody will fight the good fight and win it’s you.
    Good luck!

    ‘Don’t tread on Mark’

    Comment by Sam -

  91. Bush’s religous right wackos take out their frustrations on losing
    the election by persecuting a liberal Jew, welcome to a 21st century
    pogrom. Hang in there Cuban only 2 months till sanity returns to DC.

    Comment by DallasDan -

  92. hmmm…so the biggest issue at Wallstreet is Mark Cuban…as alledged Cuban stood to loose approximately $750,000 dollars had he not sold the stock.
    seriously the SEC perhaps needs to monitor more significant crimes…getting Mark is more of a gimmik just like with Martha, while people who stole billions were on the roam. This time its Mark, just so that people will maybe be distracted about….lets see…oh the bailout for 700 billion, where was the SEC when CEOs were taking multi-million dollar bonuses while their corporations were going down the shitter.
    Mark is just a scape goat…SEC trying to show they do their work because they even have an eye o the small guy.
    Oh by the way i am not a Cuban fan….but this is outrageous
    Let us put the CEOs of failed corporations is jail first for criminal negligence…what am i talking about… the housing crises the credit crises, loaning and spending money they never had…

    Comment by AQ -

  93. So if he’s not a criminal, he’s a scumbag. Even if he’s not found guilty of criminal activity, he still sold 600,000 shares of stock to some “schmuk” who didn’t know the stock was going to drop.

    I’ve lost all respect for Mark Cuban. Way to help the little guy bro.

    Comment by Phil -

  94. I think it was Michael Lewis who wrote several years ago that Michael Milken had in reality been prosecuted for “loitering with intent in the vicinity of the Savings and Loan crisis.”

    Comment by Neville -

  95. After adding my support for you yesterday, I’m a little disappointed by this. It gives the impression that your defense revolves around a legal technicality rather than the higher bar that you conducted yourself ethically. I hope that’s a wrong impression and I’m just missing some nuances because you can’t provide more detail.

    Comment by Bob -

  96. Comments by Frank and by Will (November 18) above are good points and worth reading. Understanding that it is not illegal to trade on insider information if you are not an “insider” yourself (e.g. have a duty to keep the information confidential) helps explain the defense written by Mark’s lawyers in this blog post.

    Comment by Scott -

  97. enjoy prison, you criminal.

    Comment by cascooter -

  98. I’m very surprised at you, Mark. Yes, you deserve your day in court and
    certainly, I’ll wait for all the facts. If the facts are, as indicated
    in the press, I think you’re pretty much screwed. As you know, Mark, the former
    CEO’s claim of telling you something was confidential, is irrelevant.

    As an insider, and technically you certainly were one, it is your
    responsibility to know what information is material, or not, and certainly
    mamma.com’s decision to do a PIPE was material. I’m just surprised that
    someone of your intellect and notoriety was careless enough to turn around
    and sell your shares immediately after being given material information.

    Good luck, Mark. I doubt you’ll ever see jail like Martha, but there
    will be consequences you may not enjoy.

    Comment by Mark T -

  99. I think the other issue at play is that government agencies get much more bang for the buck (deterrence) by prosecuting high-profile defendants than some average Joe. They might be willing to see this case through regardless of the strength of their case for the publicity. Think Wesley Snipes v. US Treasury.

    Comment by Traveler -

  100. Best of luck in your case. I have a feeling they have a pretty good case if they were willing to prosecute it at all. Someone less famous would probably get probation as long as they paid back the money and a fine.

    Comment by Traveler -

  101. Pingback: Mark Cuban versus SEC: Insider trading or insider politics » VentureBeat

  102. Mark,

    Be strong for yourself and your family. You did not get where you are
    today by giving into unjust circumstances. I know from my own experience from being screwed
    by the TSSB, and it was for their own self gain.

    Unfortunately, I did not have the resources to fight, and what I did “pay out” left me
    with about $300. I know how you feel, and I’m sorry that you and your family have to go through
    this ordeal. Looks like they could go after the scoundrels at fannie mae and all those mortgage brokers who cost the economy trillions.

    There are people out there like me who where $%^$ed in the rear and who could not defend themselves,
    (and the gov’t knows this). For your own self healing, go to you lawyers office and conference the SEC on the telephone,and tell them to !@#$ themselves. Don’t go on with the rest of your life giving into something that you feel was not wrong. It’s the worst of all feelings, I should know.

    Thanks for your courage, and I truly wish you all the best.

    Anonymous

    Comment by anonymous -

  103. Homeless man was trying to sell t-shirts
    and bumpersticks on 11/17/2008 that read
    “Free Mark Cuban” and
    “Free Mark Cuban / Jail The Fed” on
    CafePress.com.

    Some nameless person filed a copyright and
    trademark violation claim on 11/18/2008
    against him.

    The homeless man is now preparing to sell
    “Jail Mark Cuban” t-shirts and bumper stickers.

    Comment by jeepndesert -

  104. This case sounds pretty fishy to me, and I hope you don’t get Martha’d over this.

    Comment by researchrants -

  105. This is nothing more than the US government going after another high
    profile individual to deflect attention away from more important
    matters (ie. the crumbling US economy). Funny how these investigations
    seems to crop up at opportune times.
    One would think that they have more pressing issues to investigate in
    the financial industry, especially when we’re dealing with billions
    of dollars, not hundreds of thousands. The tactics are blatantly
    obvious.
    Let’s hope public recognition of this witchhunt (and Mark Cuban’s
    legal counsel) can shame the SEC into dropping this frivolous case.

    Comment by TC -

  106. Mark, you are deflecting the issue. Yes you kept it confidential but you acted on the informatiin gained as an INSIDER!

    Remember you telling your readers you like to own 5% of a company in order to be in the know with th

    smaller companies?

    Why did you leave us other MAMA shareholders hanging? Remember you wrote on the

    Yahoo! MAMA message board how you were going to integrate Mamma search
    in all your properties?

    Instead you sold in a huff and bought Rocketboom.

    You are no hero Mark!

    Comment by MikeM -

  107. Mark,

    I am sure this has already been discussed, however, just thought I would throw in my two cents. In the world of trading investors know who is buying what and who is selling what. Obviously, someone like yourself has the ability to buy and sell much larger quantities than the rest of us. That being said, when you decide to sell a large quanity of stock in a small internet business, of course the stock is going to drop. Let’s suppose there is a small startup company that you believe in and you decide to purchase $1 million in shares. There will be people that follow you and I would venture to say that stock would increase. Now suppose you are pleased with your ROI after a certain period of time and decide to sell, the stock drops and now you get accused again?? You are a well respected business man and why should you be at fault because people follow your investments. Perhaps you should be rewarded everytime you invest in a company and the stock soars, if they want to penalize you for selling and the stock drops. Victim of circumstance I say. Best of luck to you.

    Comment by Matt -

  108. Pingback: footnoted.org » Blog Archive » Breaking: SEC charges Mark Cuban

  109. Pingback: SEC v. Cuban: Can Someone Thrust a Duty of Confidentiality Upon You?

  110. Still no defense here that I can tell. Why even put this information out to the public? No explanation on why Mark thought he could trade on information that was not public knowledge.

    Comment by Scott -

  111. Since this is currently a civil case there obviously a less proof out there.
    but, you sure are testing the waters with the posts on your blog. Is it truly worth your name being driven through the mud?

    Dont play this out on your blog man. settle the case, and let it go.
    If this keeps playing out you will be liable in the ‘court of public opinion’
    if nothing else and that my friend will affect every aspect of your future.

    Comment by Noteguy -

  112. Mark,

    I have been a fan of yours ever since you bought the Dallas Mavericks.

    I even voted for you when you were on Dancing With The Stars…

    Comment by Phil Hoover -

  113. Poor Markie! Can you buy your way out?

    Comment by Mikey -

  114. This case comes down to one very important thing: can the SEC prove that Mark Cuban “agreed” to keep the information confidential. The “agreement” is an essential element because it creates a “duty of trust or confidence” with this issuer, Mamma.com. If the SEC can prove the agreement, then Mr. Cuban is in trouble. If they cannot prove that agreement, then Mr. Cuban did NOT violate the law even if the CEO provided him with material, non-public information. It is not against the law to possess material non-public information and trade UNLESS you have a duty to keep it confidential (the duty can be created in various ways, but here it would require an affirmative agreement by Mr. Cuban). THAT IS WHY Mr. Cuban’s lawyer posted the excerpt from the interview — an effort to show that there was no agreement, and therefore no violation of law. That’s why most sophisticated investors in Mr. Cuban’s situation would never, ever, agree to a confidentiality agreement because it would result in their inability to trade until the material information is made public — and generally investors do not want to be put in that position.

    Comment by Will -

  115. Mark,
    Hanging in there its the season of the witch.

    Comment by Jay -

  116. Hi Mark, I hope your doing OK. I truly believe that you will be
    proved to be 100% not guilty of using insider information.

    I’m really troubled that in a time where the big CEO’s cost their
    shareholders billions of dollars the SEC is going to pour tons of
    money into a case for a 750k.

    I still hope you will be able to buy the cubs.

    Comment by Rajiv Darji -

  117. Pingback: Mark Cuban: On Second Thought, I Do Have Some Things to Say About These SEC Charges | Peter Kafka | MediaMemo | AllThingsD

  118. Those of you who have convicted Mark already have failed to realize the importance of this blog post. In order to succeed, the SEC has to prove more than just the fact that Mark was acted on non-public information. It much more complicated, but essentially, the SEC has to prove that Mark agreed to keep the information confidential. The SEC alleges that Mark agreed to do so, but the transcript exerpt quoted above indicates otherwise. I would like to see the entire transcript to be sure, but it looks like the SEC’s proof may not stand up to scrutiny.

    Mark and/or Mr. Best, please post the entire transcript of the Faure interview. When was it taken? When did the SEC drop its investigation of Momma.com? If Mr. Faure is now singing a different tune than in his interview, it is no giant leap to assume that he agreed to play ball with the SEC in exchange for dropping the investigation of the company.

    Comment by frank -

  119. Pingback: Mark Cuban Embarks on a Public Battle Against SEC Charges | Startup Meme - Technology Startup and Latest Tech News

  120. Mark,

    Do you think this will have any influence on your chances to buy the
    Cubs? The Cubbies need you!

    Comment by Jimmy S -

  121. Living in America … a nightmare, not a “dream”.

    Comment by Winky -

  122. The same SEC which has been out to lunch on everything related to rampant problems on Wall Styreet now somehow has got it right on the Cuban matter?

    Obviously, Mr. Cuban is entitled to a presumption of innocence, especially since there is no related criminal prosecution existing or even anticipated.

    Certainly, the SEC needs to be viewed with great suspicion. If and when they get their act together on the much larger issues, then, and only then, should they be spending any time on such unproven allegations.

    Comment by John P Slevin -

  123. What happened to the (il) in Guy Fa(il)ure. Perhaps he was trying to do you a Favre Mister!

    Comment by Jim Parham -

  124. Hey Mark stay strong!!! You are a hero to me in how I live my life and I want you to know that you are not being judged by me. I believe in your innocence and I know your going to come through this on top!!!

    Take care!!

    Comment by Scott Becker -

  125. Too bad they can’t charge you with being a jerk who blames his problems on everyone else

    Just remember – don’t drop the soap!

    Comment by mike -

  126. Mark, take a lie detector test you miserable fucking liar. And please get rid of the dumb niggers that I have to play with.

    Comment by Dirk N. -

  127. Funny how people make assumptions from reading a couple of paragraphs of blog. Wait until the facts come out. Its too bad Mark’s name is being put on the front pages while the real crooks, the executives at the banks and on wall street are sitting back waiting for their christmas bonus while America tries to get out of a mess they created. If Mark is convicted he deserves to pay the fine, but let’s wait until all the facts are out before we judge him.

    Comment by Hoosier -

  128. Mr. Cuban,
    I am a recent college graduate and I am interested in working for you.
    Please email if you are interested in speaking with me.

    Thank you.

    Comment by eric -

  129. You’re one DUMB CHUMP. Shut your mouth and let the process go through.

    IF YOU CAN’T POST THE ENTIRE TRANSCRIPT, QUIT POSTING ONLY WHAT BENEFITS
    YOU!

    You’re a sap and you know damn well you were caught. What a cry baby!

    Comment by Larry -

  130. can’t wait to see this play out…i know we hear this a lot, but i get the sense that they picked the wrong guy to F with :) give it to em mark!

    Comment by Mike -

  131. Bud Selig has people in high places.

    Comment by Brandon -

  132. Are the Mamma Inc. people giving up anyone else? Or are they being let off just for giving up Cuban?

    Comment by Daniel -

  133. If you are innocent, just be quiet and take your case to the people in a court of law. You act as if you are a little kid, trying to explain to the Principal that it wasn’t you who poured glue all over the little read headed girls hair.

    Comment by Xeifrank -

  134. They need to leave Mark Cuban alone dang the man has enough to be through shoot his team losing but they win it all anyway this season but my point is his mind needs focus on the nba season and not what the sec is doing so screw off sec because Mark is innocent untile proven guilty but he is innocent thank you .

    Comment by Kwame Smith -

  135. You think that sucks, try being a Bears and Cubs fan.

    Comment by Mike -

  136. What sickens me, Mark, is that it’s politically expedient for the SEC to go after you. How about some real change at the SEC? How about going after real bad guys and not taking pot shots at celebrities for political gain?

    Comment by Steve Brewer -

  137. Mark, I hope you are not paying this attorney alot of money because if this is an example of his defense you, you are toast. Face the facts Mark, you acted on information given to you by a person at mamamma.com and you sold all 600,000 of your shares based on that information. Information that was not available to the public. Case closed.

    Comment by Jim N -

  138. Fight hard, Mark.

    And watch closely what you say to the Feds.

    Remember what they did to Martha Stewart. Convicted, on perjured testimony, for allegedly lying in an investigation of something that was not a crime.

    Comment by rodander -

  139. I can not believe all the people here who are defending a criminal. Yes the SEC should be going after others but that does justify letting Mr Cuban off for his criminal activities. Face it they would never go after a billionaire with unlimited resources to defend himself unless they has a slam dunk case. The fact the SEC is pursuing this makes it all to obvious they have the goods. So go ahead defend a criminal who I am sure is guilty. Why are defending a crook? Because you like him? He broke the law and should be in jail. I cannot locate what I posted yesterday (maybe I am missing them there are a lot) in which I stated I believe he was guilty. Interesting they are gone. More insider activities?

    Comment by Don Johnson -

  140. All this BS going on in Wall Street and the SEC decides to go after Mark Cuban?

    Please.

    Ram it down their throats.

    Comment by Mike -

  141. So the allegation in paragraph 14 of the SEC’s Complaint that “Cuban agreed that he would keep whatever information the CEO intended to share with him confidential” is untrue? If so, the SEC would be in violation of FRCP 11(b)(3). This is especially true since a duty of confidentiality is an essential element of either a 17(a) or 10(b) claim under the Exchange Act. Is there any way the entire transcript of the interview of Mr. Faure can be posted so that the public can judge the veracity of the SEC’s allegations?

    Comment by frank -

  142. Mark,

    Looks they have a pretty weak case to me. How much of our tax dollars are being wasted for this anyway?

    Comment by MSC -

  143. One more thing.

    GIVE THEM HELL!

    Comment by Bill -

  144. Mark,

    Do you feel you are being targeted because of you high profile and
    outspoken criticism of the government massive bailout attempts.

    Also, be glad you have your own airplane, because you are probably of
    the security watch list now.

    P.S.

    If you need a pilot in Dallas let me know.

    Comment by Bill -

  145. It’s still insider trading if the information is not public. Once
    you learn the info, you can’t act. If Mr. Cuban wished not to learn
    “confidential” info he should have hung up the phone.

    Comment by Alex -

  146. Best of luck MArk

    PS, First?

    Comment by PCD -

  147. As with anything, there are always two sides to every story. Unfortunately for people who are well-known, they don’t get the same type of civil liberties our justice system provides when it comes to the ‘Court Of Public Opinion’. I’ll reserve my judgement till the courts decide who is or is not guilty.

    Comment by Nathan Nichols -

  148. I think it’s time for a “the SEC: they couldn’t manage the finances of a Dairy Queen” comment.

    Comment by Jake -

Comments are closed.