United States Supreme Court fired NVIDIA’s case previously agreed to be heard as a “surprise admission.” In other words, “Oops, I should never have taken this.” The decision will allow most lawsuits filed by shareholders against chipmakers to proceed.
An investment firm and a pension fund have filed a lawsuit against NVIDIA, accusing the company of misleading investors about its reliance on the cryptocurrency mining industry. The lawsuit alleges that NVIDIA previously concealed its reliance on the market. crash of 2018 That caused the chipmaker’s stock price to fall. (For better or worse, cryptocurrencies have recovered. Bitcoin recently surpassed the $100,000 plateau first time. )
The court’s unanimous rejection reflects an apparent reluctance to hear the case’s complex technical details. “The writ of certiorari is dismissed as being granted inadvertently,” the judgment states in its entirety. the language was identical to a very similar language dismissal A lawsuit SCOTUS heard against Meta last month also accused Meta of defrauding investors.
Reliable news and daily fun delivered to your inbox
See for yourself — Yodel is your go-to source for daily news, entertainment, and fun stories.
washington post report The justices said they alluded to Nvidia’s firing when they heard arguments in mid-November. “It becomes increasingly clear why we brought this case…and…why you must win,” Justice Elena Kagan reportedly said. new york times say Court members across the ideological spectrum seemed frustrated by this argument. “This is a very technical subject,” Justice Samuel Alito said at one point. “It seems to me that you’re asking us to engage in the kind of analysis that we’re not very good at and that we didn’t expect when we took on this case,” Kagan said. spoke.
AI’s troublesome and high-stakes risks Legal and ethical questions loomwe can take comfort in the fact that the highest court of the world’s most powerful country seems completely uninterested in diving into the often mind-boggling technical details of Big Tech. At the very least, the stakes in this case are much lower and only affect the finances of a very wealthy company and a group of (presumably wealthy) Wall Street investors.
