Which scenario would NOT be classified as a violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934?

The scenario of overhearing advice and profiting from it does not constitute a violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 because it lacks the element of improper access to material nonpublic information or deceitful conduct that typically characterizes violations under the Act.

The Securities Exchange Act primarily addresses issues such as insider trading, misleading financial statements, and the provision of false or deceptive information that can manipulate stock prices or mislead investors. In this context, overhearing advice is typically not recognized as a prohibited action because it does not involve any deceit or breach of duty—it simply involves inadvertently obtaining information that is not meant to be private.

The other scenarios, including overstating income, using insider information, and omitting material facts, all involve some form of misconduct that would mislead investors or violate regulations pertaining to fair disclosure and market integrity, which are core principles established under the Securities Exchange Act.