Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This tweet was not an edit to a pre-approved communication. That rule is irrelevant.

The argument is not "this tweet got approved before, so I can edit it however I want". The argument is "the number is already public information, so I can make a new post mentioning it".



> This tweet was not an edit to a pre-approved communication.

That is the problem, in a nutshell: it should have been pre-approved - according to the FCC's interpretation of the settlement agreement.


Maybe. But don't confuse different arguments about why. If the tweet needed pre-approval, it's for a reason entirely different from this quote.


Whether or not it's a valid argument, that does seem to be the SEC's argument here.


It's not the core of their argument, though. It's probably thrown in just in case it could possibly be considered relevant.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: