SEC still reviewing Apple's disclosures on Steve Jobs' health
The United States Security and Exchange Commission is still reviewing disclosures made by Apple earlier this year to determine whether the company knowingly withheld material information from shareholders about the health of its chief executive.
In particular, the commission is reportedly scrutinizing statements from the company to determine what happened in the nine days from when it reported that Steve Jobs' medical condition was “relatively simple” to when it ultimately disclosed that there were “more complex" problems, a person with knowledge of the probe told Bloomberg.
Regulators reportedly want to know what Apple's board of directors knew between January 5th, when Apple said Jobs was suffering from an easily treatable hormone imbalance, and January 14th, when the co-founder penned an open letter to the media in which he stated that his health-related issues were more complex than he originally thought.
Jobs would go on to take a medical leave for nearly six months, during which time he received a liver transplant in Memphis, Tenn. At the time of the transplant, he was reportedly the sickest person on the waiting list.
A person familiar with the ongoing investigation told Bloomberg that Apple's lead directors, Art Levinson and Bill Campbell, were being briefed by Jobs’ doctors on his condition during the time the company issued its contradictory statements. Should it be determined by regulators that Apple only told partial truths, its statements could be considered misleading.
Still, the ongoing review is said to be just that: a review. And there's currently no indication that the SEC is prepared to charge Apple or its directors with any wrongdoing.
In particular, the commission is reportedly scrutinizing statements from the company to determine what happened in the nine days from when it reported that Steve Jobs' medical condition was “relatively simple” to when it ultimately disclosed that there were “more complex" problems, a person with knowledge of the probe told Bloomberg.
Regulators reportedly want to know what Apple's board of directors knew between January 5th, when Apple said Jobs was suffering from an easily treatable hormone imbalance, and January 14th, when the co-founder penned an open letter to the media in which he stated that his health-related issues were more complex than he originally thought.
Jobs would go on to take a medical leave for nearly six months, during which time he received a liver transplant in Memphis, Tenn. At the time of the transplant, he was reportedly the sickest person on the waiting list.
A person familiar with the ongoing investigation told Bloomberg that Apple's lead directors, Art Levinson and Bill Campbell, were being briefed by Jobs’ doctors on his condition during the time the company issued its contradictory statements. Should it be determined by regulators that Apple only told partial truths, its statements could be considered misleading.
Still, the ongoing review is said to be just that: a review. And there's currently no indication that the SEC is prepared to charge Apple or its directors with any wrongdoing.
Comments
Still, the ongoing review is said to be just that: a review. And there's currently no indication that the SEC is prepared to charge Apple or its directors with any wrongdoing.
Why not? They may as well test how flimsy their argument is when juxtaposed with the right to privacy and HIPAA legislation.
Just because someone is a CEO doesn't give people Carte Blanche to know everything about their personal life in particular their health record.
I think people are being windbags here. If you think you have a case ...lawyer up and bring a fire retardant suit.
Apple CEO Steve Jobs has a hangnail today.
Thank You.
Why is it http://barrysoetoro.com/ and http://www.whitehouse.gov/ show the same page?
Anyone, anyone, anyone?
People rely on the information that Apple reveals to the media. I would be more supportive of Apple in they had instead decided to said nothing instead of blatantly and straightforwardly lie like the company spokespeople did in this case. Not communicating about important matters that will affect their followers is an irresponsible thing for a prominent leader to do and Steve Jobs can and should do better than this. I respect many decisions that Steve makes but I certainly don't respect this one.
I buy, use and benefit from Apple products (and am using one to type this) so although I have an inclination to favor Apple, I most certainly cannot endorse Apple's choice to deliberately deceive the media about their most important member's health conditions.
People rely on the information that Apple reveals to the media. I would be more supportive of Apple in they had instead decided to said nothing instead of blatantly and straightforwardly lie like the company spokespeople did in this case. Not communicating about important matters that will affect their followers is an irresponsible thing for a prominent leader to do and Steve Jobs can and should do better than this. I respect many decisions that Steve makes but I certainly don't respect this one.
However, they knew that the market and the media would over-react, and they would have been correct. At the time he was NOT the CEO, so they DID follow the letter of the law.
People rely on the information that Apple reveals to the media. I would be more supportive of Apple in they had instead decided to said nothing instead of blatantly and straightforwardly lie like the company spokespeople did in this case. Not communicating about important matters that will affect their followers is an irresponsible thing for a prominent leader to do and Steve Jobs can and should do better than this. I respect many decisions that Steve makes but I certainly don't respect this one.
Where did they blatantly lie? Can you prove that Jobs, in fact, did not have a hormone problem? Where does his right to privacy become usurped by a shareholders need to make profit on their investment?
Investing in stocks is nothing but white collar gambling. No one is forcing people to invest in stocks and a company losing value because their CEO says "I have a hormonal imbalance" or whatever makes a mockery of the whole situation.
Maybe they should look into the monopoly on the money supply / money press, releasing of lies and hiding the truth from tax payers on the 'health of America' in regards to politicians ability to be objective, coercion in big government and the two party system and big business.
People should rally together to not allow the government and our capitalistic system to continue to collapse (as it is doing so currently). The decaying US government and irresponsible practices of many businesses (which are often endorsed by the US government) are the cause of much of our current economic decline nationally--even recent international decline can, in many cases, be attributed to the fall of the high standards in the US. Apple should help lead the US in a better direction and not go with the flow when it is detrimental for their business in general, their employees, their customers and others who rely on the information that they openly report to the media and other external individuals and groups of people. It's about time for someone to step up and be the example for where most Americans want the country to go anyway.
I will commend the government if they actually do hold Apple responsible for the improper representation of Jobs health. I hope the SEC does its job properly and takes care of this case well. I think that it will be great if the US government will have a revival which includes going back to its healthier traditional standards. God bless the USA.
- GodBless
Why is it http://barrysoetoro.com/ and http://www.whitehouse.gov/ show the same page?
Anyone, anyone, anyone?
Not taking up for 'ol Barry, but it is a redirect.
Contact this guy - maybe he can tell you more:
This Domain Is For Sale
Tharwat Abdul-Malik ([email protected])
+1.7704066885
Fax: +1.7704066885
12850 Highway 9 N
Suite 600-250
Alpharetta, GA 30004
US
(he may be Obamas long lost cousin)
I buy, use and benefit from Apple products (and am using one to type this) so although I have an inclination to favor Apple, I most certainly cannot endorse Apple's choice to deliberately deceive the media about their most important member's health conditions.
People rely on the information that Apple reveals to the media. I would be more supportive of Apple in they had instead decided to said nothing instead of blatantly and straightforwardly lie like the company spokespeople did in this case. Not communicating about important matters that will affect their followers is an irresponsible thing for a prominent leader to do and Steve Jobs can and should do better than this. I respect many decisions that Steve makes but I certainly don't respect this one.
How arrogant are you to think you are entitled to know Steve Jobs' private personal information regarding his health. Do you want an update every time he takes a dump, too?
The SEC likely also needs to cover their back side also, but this is all annoying.
This seems like such a waste of time, when, one assumes, the SEC has so many more important things to do - e.g., like deal with the Madoffs of the world......
That is asking a little to much, don't you think???
Where did they blatantly lie? Can you prove that Jobs, in fact, did not have a hormone problem? Where does his right to privacy become usurped by a shareholders need to make profit on their investment?
Investing in stocks is nothing but white collar gambling. No one is forcing people to invest in stocks and a company losing value because their CEO says "I have a hormonal imbalance" or whatever makes a mockery of the whole situation.
They blatantly lied the day after the MacWorld event when he came out on stage, almost skeleton like. They said he had a cold that he was getting over.
You are confusing what occurred ot him after his leave to what was going on before his leave. And yes, if the job functionality of a public companies CEO is impacted by an illness it is apparently the law to notify the correct people/authorities/public.
.... if the job functionality of a public companies CEO is impacted by an illness it is apparently the law to notify the correct people/authorities/public.
Really? Can you provide any credible cites/opinions/articles/case law?
Jobs could have said " I have a freakin' hemorrhoid that prevents me from doing my duties effectively. I am relieving myself and putting Tim Cook in charge"
The fact is he took a medical leave and it doesn't matter what ailment he had because he wasn't performing his CEO duties.
The fact that the absolute morons in Wall St are fucking with your money and turning things into Soap Opera isn't Jobs's issue. Apple didn't need a bailout remember? They run their company sensibly.
So Apple followed the rules to, what I consider, and acceptable extent. In order to bring suit you'd have to establish negligence. Jobs' wasn't in charge so how could be have been negligent?
You can't quantify how valuable Jobs is to Apple based on knee-jerk reactions from Wall St every time the man farts. That is an intangible and subject to opinion which is hard to base a winning argument on.
Then you get into HIPAA and 14th Amendment privacy issues. The SEC will give the impression that they are "looking" into this and then it'll get mothballed. Unless they have a super attorney that can walk on water it's likely best to just move on.
Really? Can you provide any credible cites/opinions/articles/case law?
How about the SEC? You'd think, given that the SEC is looking into this, that the authority had already been firmly established. That's what you'd think -- but for some apparently, knee jerk reactions trump all.
They blatantly lied the day after the MacWorld event when he came out on stage, almost skeleton like. They said he had a cold that he was getting over.
You are confusing what occurred ot him after his leave to what was going on before his leave. And yes, if the job functionality of a public companies CEO is impacted by an illness it is apparently the law to notify the correct people/authorities/public.
Can you point us to the evidence that shows the Apple board knew the satements being made were false?
And by "knew", I mean had actual knowledge of the falsity of the statements. Not evidence that they reasonably could have known, or could have guessed, or inferred the potential for something more. I mean knew that Jobs was more sick than they stated.
I love it when people just know something to be the case when there is zero evidence in the facts.
Bet, hey, why let facts get in the way of a good stoning?
I love it when people just know something to be the case when there is zero evidence in the facts.
Bet, hey, why let facts get in the way of a good stoning?
It much easier for people who've grown up on watching faux legal procedure on TV. If life was only this easy, where conjecture and unfounded allegations actually meant something.
There's no "smoking gun" here. No documents showing that the Apple Board willfully withheld secrets about Jobs' condition and in fact it'd be hard to prove a case even if documents were found as Jobs was not doing CEO duties.
You have to prove that his ailment caused harm to the company and Jobs being skinny isn't hurting Apple.
Never confuse moral arguments with legal arguments.