I really don't get these lawsuits. To me it looks like a bag holder suing the bag.

- A is lucky or has insider knowledge and sells to B who is unlucky, ignorant or duped.

- C are other shareholders now having traded

If company i.e. the bag has to pay out B then

- A got lucky

- B got put neutral

- C i.e. a neutral third party investor is coughing up the money

Makes no sense but keeps the courts busy.