joemoran

Ambiguous indeed...

Here are some other hypothetical situations I can think of:

1) A family member communicates to her husband and a broker. No one acts on the info. Is the family member in violation (since the intention is implicit when relaying this info to a broker)?

2) Staple communicates to multiple brokers. And only one broker acts on the info. Are other brokers who did not act on the info in violation?

3) A family member communicates to a husband, who also happens to be a broker. The husband does not act on the info. Is the family member in violation?

I just wanted to throw these out there to see if they help pin down the theories.

In concluding within our discussion, it seems to me a family member will be in violation if the communication is to a broker, irrespective of whether the broker action on that information. And a broker will be in violation only if the info is acted upon on. Let me know if your thoughts are different.