why? AFAIK since they're in bankruptcy, they have zero obligation to shareholders, only to creditors.

That's not really how it works. You cannot do an equity offering if you believe there is a good chance the value goes to zero. And the "obligations" are merely a starting point in negotiations. A strong starting point, for sure, but not set in stone.

Only if they misrepresent the situation in their SEC filing, which (if you read the risks section) sure doesn't seem like they are.

there's at least a 1/2 dozen instances of "because we are in bankruptcy protection <potential bad thing>"

But they are doing an equity offering? Got it.

Their shares irrationally have value on the market, issuing equity allows them to pay off more of their debts. Why shouldn’t they issue, it’s the company’s job to release accurate information, not to force the buyers to make wise decisions.

If someone offers you millions of dollars for your totaled car you’d be a fool not to take it, this is no different. Hertz management must be loving this.

Only if they don't disclose the serious risks involved, which they do, right up front in the very first few sentences of the filing.

no, every broker has a lovely warning about the nature of sec regulations and financial instruments risk of losing value. Negligence is in the investors lack of due diligence. Its why publicly traded companies must publish financials and why cooking the books is illegal and fraudulent

No, they aren't. The retail market for business ownership is not a debt obligation, it is equity. Basic definitions