If Steve Ballmer comes up to you and says "hey buddy, I'm retiring soon, better buy some MS since the price is going up", and you buy, that's insider trading.
If I (unrelated to Steve Ballmer) tell you "hey, that guys getting old, he'll probably retire soon", that's not insider trading.
Near as I can tell, the Reuters early release is firmly within the category of the latter. I can't see any reason why early release of private research would be illegal.
As the article points out, the contract clearly shows the 3 known levels data distribution times (2 seconds early, on time, 5 minutes delayed).
If they were releasing it at other times it would most likely be a contract breach or some other civil matter.
But that is a big if. All this article points to to prove that is a disgruntled employee and a Nanex study (all months old) that do not have any proof of early release.
This is not the customer's contract, it's the University of Michigan's contract.
If the regular customers know that there are other more privileged tiers that impact the value of what they're buying, I guess it's ok. Otherwise, i think it might qualify as fraud
These tiers are widely known about in the algorithmic trading community. There is marketing materials on Reuters site outlining the advantages http://thomsonreuters.com/machine-readable-news/ and if you are event trading you certainly pay for this.
If the 4th secret tier exists, that would be a bigger problem but there is no proof of that in the article. It is all speculation.
I don't actually use their service, I assume pricing is available via a sales rep via their contact us page. If you want notice about the tiers, take a look under the "Suite Components" portion of the link I provided.
If I (unrelated to Steve Ballmer) tell you "hey, that guys getting old, he'll probably retire soon", that's not insider trading.
Near as I can tell, the Reuters early release is firmly within the category of the latter. I can't see any reason why early release of private research would be illegal.