"insider trading" is in quotes; that is what I call it. While technically not related to securities, the principle is the same. Someone (Orby, and possibly Best Buy) was privy to inside information that they exploited to gain financial advantage over an unsuspecting entity (person). Had this information been generally known and available, some would not have bought equipment, that was known by the vendor/supplier in advance to be worthless. Maybe not your definition, but a distinction without a difference. While the $100 I spent for useless equipment isn't going to alter my lifestyle, still pees me right off.