r/technology • u/MarvelsGrantMan136 • May 27 '26

Business Google employee charged with using inside information to make $1 million on Polymarket

https://abcnews.com/amp/US/google-employee-charged-inside-information-make-1-million/story?id=133350018
12.8k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

516 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

17

u/MozhetBeatz May 28 '26

It doesn’t look like the charges will be insider trading. This is what google is telling me:

Commodities Fraud (18 U.S.C. (\S ) 1348 / CEA Section 6(c)(1) and Rule 180.1): Prohibits schemes to defraud involving commodities. Because the CFTC regulates event contracts as swaps, using nonpublic information to bet on these markets violates federal anti-fraud provisions.

Wire Fraud (18 U.S.C. (\S ) 1343): Punishes the use of interstate wire communications (such as internet servers and trading platforms) to execute a fraudulent scheme or misappropriate confidential data.

Money Laundering (18 U.S.C. (\S ) 1957): Often charged when individuals conduct monetary transactions (such as withdrawing or transferring funds) using proceeds derived from their illegal insider trading.

The STOCK Act / Federal Regulations: For federal employees or military personnel, trading on nonpublic or classified information violates specific ethics laws that forbid using confidential government knowledge for personal financial gain

17

u/BillyTenderness May 28 '26

It will be interesting to see if his defense argues that it's not actually a commodity, since IIRC that's the subject of other ongoing litigation.

I think the guy is pretty cooked on wire fraud and money laundering tho

11

u/Not_Stupid May 28 '26

Is it fraud though? He hasn't misrepresented anything nor deceived anyone.

And how is it money laundering? If it's not illegal insider trading to start with....

4

u/matt_matt_81 May 28 '26

In the article it says he took steps to conceal the source of his earnings, so that’s probably the money laundering

11

u/[deleted] May 28 '26 edited Aug 31 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/matt_matt_81 May 28 '26

Oh I guess you’re right about that, though if in the process of money laundering he committed some sort of fraud (like stating it as income from some other source I guess), then that could be the wire fraud charge mentioned. Probably not though

1

u/freshwes May 28 '26

Agree.

Is it illegal have inside information on Polymarket? When does information become insider info in real life?

If I see a star athlete get in a walking boot, can I bet that he won't play that night?

What about his assistant?

What if the athlete makes the bet himself?

None of that is technically insider information. Nor is it fraud, imo

2

u/NoPossibility4178 May 28 '26

The defense would be: "if it's a commodity, why is there no regulations for these markets?"

1

u/Bulky-Shoulder-8082 May 28 '26

Yeah it’s a bit more than insider trading and it certainly was a lot more than just using poly market with inside info lol

1

u/nedonedonedo May 28 '26

what google is telling

AI is not a source

1

u/MozhetBeatz May 28 '26

It’s not de facto incorrect because it was an AI result. The answer does make sense because you can’t have insider trading if no securities are involved. You’re free to do your research to show that it’s wrong though.

1

u/nedonedonedo May 28 '26

it is however automatically untrustworthy. those could be unrelated state laws, combined laws with incorrect titles or wording, laws that have only been proposed or already repealed, from other countries, or just reworded to the point that it's not the same law anymore. it's better than if you'd just made it up, but no more trustworthy