Facebook, Once Again, Says That Ceglia's Claim To Own 84% Of Facebook Is A Fraud
from the strong-words dept
Back in April, when Paul Ceglia refiled his lawsuit claiming to have a contract which gave him a huge chunk (up to 84%) of Facebook, some people pointed out that the refiled lawsuit sounded a lot more credible. There was additional email evidence and (mainly) the fact that a huge, extremely reputable law firm had taken on Ceglia as a client -- something they likely wouldn't do if they thought the whole thing was faked. However, Facebook is sticking to its claim that the whole thing is an elaborate fraud by "an inveterate scam artist whose misconduct extends across decades and borders." The response claims that the evidence was doctored or fabricated. It seems like this case is going to end up being a lot more interesting to watch than the Winklevii case. Someone alert Aaron Sorkin to the sequel possibilities...Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: equity, mark zuckerberg, ownership, paul ceglia, scam
Companies: facebook
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
So, financing 'rounds' don't come into play here.... stupidity on the part of the people at Facebook does in that they left the contract open to this interpretation!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Whether the whole thing is fake or not, it is very likely that it's out of statue of limitation. In both Connecticut and New York, the Status of limitation on contract is 6 years, and in California where facebook is based, the limitation is 2 years. The initial contract was allegedly made in 2003, the last date involved in the dispute as calculated by the 84% figure is Feb 4, 2004, and this guy filed in July 2010. So it's at least 5 months too late anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nitpick
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It may very much depend on the details of any "contract," thought it sounds like there wasn't a clear one. It's possible that it could be interpreted that his shares were diluted as well, but if that's the case, it will be a *freaking mess* to unwind all the follow on financings. And, if I understand the other dealings properly concerning Eduardo Saverin, at some point FB started a new company and moved the old shares into the new company. Unwinding this would be a total mess.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I like this guy's wiki page...
With that much magic mushroom sauce in my blood, I'd probably think I founded Facebook too....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I like this guy's wiki page...
Heck, with that many 'shrooms in my blood, I might think my ice cream stand WAS Facebook.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
FB
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If one has a vested interest in some company of any reasonable size (50% or more is pretty reasonable) from some old piece of paper, one should check and see if the investment was paying off periodically-even calling the person with whom you made the contract once in a while.
"Hey, Fred, how's that business you and I signed on for?"
It came as a complete surprise to this guy that FB is so popular and valued now? Where was he in the past 8 years?
Does Mark Zuckerberg even know this guy that well?
Does Zuckerberg even have a copy of the alleged contract? He might have been in college, but he's smart enough to keep track of his records, I'm sure.
I'd say that the premise that it's out of statute of limitations is probably valid, and will undoubtedly get booted out of court for that one reason alone.
"You snooze, you lose."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]