The rulemakers can make any internal rules they want, including retroactive exemption. However, they are subject to external rules, including law and regulations, and I imagine that the current rules would give a lot of ammo to anyone who wanted to sue TI even if the rules were retroactively changed: The company might have a hard time convincing a judge that conduct that they thought was harmful in February is suddenly ok in May.
> Changing it requires disclosure of the changes ahead of time
Why must they disclose changes ahead of time? Why couldn't they say 10 minutes from now, 'the former policy is now void'?
I don’t think that’s true. If a board member tries to change the rules after violating them, shareholders can use the courts to force a board takeover vote.
If the shareholders are ok with the retroactive change then it’s not really board power at play it’s owner power.
If your point is that the owners are ultimately in control then, not to be rude but, duh.
> Changing it requires disclosure of the changes ahead of time
Why must they disclose changes ahead of time? Why couldn't they say 10 minutes from now, 'the former policy is now void'?