Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Facebook Social Networks The Almighty Buck The Courts Technology

Ceglia Sues For 50% Facebook, Old Emails as Evidence 350

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the worth-looking-at-the-tapes dept.
Kamiza Ikioi writes "A lawsuit by Paul Ceglia contains never-before-seen emails from Mark Zuckerberg. The emails, if they prove to be real, could be the most damning evidence to date against Zuckerberg's business dealings in the time leading up to 'The Face Book' and just after. They paint a picture of a Zuckerberg more sinister than portrayed in the movie The Social Network, actively out to sucker his investors about the site, including Ceglia. FTA: 'Zuckerberg writes Ceglia an email telling him he's thinking of shutting down the Facebook site, because he's too busy to work on it and there's little interest in it among students. (This is while Facebook is growing like crazy). Ceglia gets really pissed off, and starts accusing Zuckerberg of pulling "criminal stunts."' Among the emails is one where Mark Zuckerberg agrees to split Facebook with Ceglia 50/50. If the emails are proven legitimate, Ceglia may own 50% of Facebook."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ceglia Sues For 50% Facebook, Old Emails as Evidence

Comments Filter:
  • by Ferante125 (971811) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @06:33PM (#35800566) Journal
    a consolation for us non-billionaires
  • by webmistressrachel (903577) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @06:38PM (#35800654) Journal

    They paint a picture of Mark Zuckerberg which is more sinister than that portrayed in the movie "The Social Network", seeming to suggest that he was actively out to sucker the investors on that site, including this "Ceglia" character (I assume he's the jock?).

    There, FTFY.

  • Re:Stupid Zuckerberg (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ackthpt (218170) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @06:56PM (#35800922) Homepage Journal

    Well, depending on when this happened University mail systems may have been involved. One or both parties or someone that was forwarded or copied on the messages may have be using a commercial e-mail provider. There are a lot of scenarios where there could be independent 3rd party copies of these messages.

    Even if no copies come to light immediately Zuckerberg's lawyers are going to be very, very careful about claiming they are false if there is ANY chance they are real. Nothing would go worse for them than claiming the messages as forgeries and then having someone come forward with third party proof.

    Lawyers tread carefully? I don't think they will. They will assail Mr Ceglia's character, the veracity of his claim, that his email copies are the only ones which exist, etc. I don't see them holding anything back. Burden of proof is on Mr. Ceglia. If he can get his email provider to back him up then he's got a stronger case.

  • Three possibilites (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gnasher719 (869701) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @07:03PM (#35801018)
    1. Ceglia has e-mails that can be proven to be genuine. 2. Ceglia has e-mails that can neither be proven to be genuine nor to be forged. 3. Ceglia has e-mails that can be proved to be forged.

    According to an article on www.businessinsider.com, "Paul and Iasia Ceglia are charged with 12 counts each of fourth-degree grand larceny and one count each of first-degree scheme to defraud" in what looks like a not very clever scam to get $200,000. That would destroy his credibility and therefore any chance to collect in case (2). And if the emails are forged, then I'd expect them to be provably forged, since Ceglia doesn't seem to be exactly a criminal mastermind.
  • Re:Stupid Zuckerberg (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ackthpt (218170) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @07:05PM (#35801036) Homepage Journal

    This is what sickens me. These people have more money than anyone could ever possibly spend, yet STILL manage to be greedy, cheap bastards.

    I mean holy shit, if I had $50 billion dollars, I could make sure that not a single one of my close friends would ever have to work again, and I would hardly notice.

    We think alike. But we're rational. We're also not billionaires (or potential billionaires.)

    Money changes people. Anyone who doubts it should read up the sad tales of lottery jackpot winners - the first to win a $40m jackpot in Pennsylvania (IIRC) was broke in a couple years, more so, he was called by his bank as they inquired as to when he would make good on the last few checks he had written as he was seriously overdrawn (but being a man of means and an account which once hosted several figures to the left of the decimal point, they were keeping him covered.) He was, of course, ruined and all his family and friends he showered with gifts were reluctant to return the cars and houses.

    Bill Gates may have been a decent enough fellow at one time, but even he wanted to RUIN Java as he saw it as a threat to his empire. Really. The man was already worth more than a billion and he wanted more, more, moar.

    I think the same intoxicant caught up with Mark Zuckerberg. At one time he probably would have been thrilled to have enough to by a modest house and a sports car. Now it's snowballing and he wants to keep in snowballing for himself. Looks rather like it's beginning to melt.

  • by pastafazou (648001) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @07:13PM (#35801122)
    if he's smart, he's already bought a few shares, so when he gets his 50%, he has complete control.
  • Re:Stupid Zuckerberg (Score:2, Interesting)

    by erroneus (253617) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @07:22PM (#35801222) Homepage

    Indeed, it takes a special kind of sick mind to think they need and even deserve that kind of stuff. If it were me, I would be into some SERIOUS charity work. Trouble is, I would be really picky about who/what deserves things.

    (For one thing, I would not contribute to anything I consider to be voluntary misery -- this includes various forms of addiction and other conditions such as obesity. Those things just bug me. I know that when I think i am doing too much of anything, I usually take a moment to evaluate what I am doing and where it is going. And when I have to buy larger clothes, it is time to DIET not time to shop. And if for some reason nothing I do seems to help weight gain, I would go see a doctor, not wallow in it.... but I digress...)

    There have been numerous writings about all these rich jackasses who selfishly collect billions and don't even pay taxes. Then, after all their collecting, some of them have simulated consciences and realize they need to give it all away and/or create foundations and activities that doesn't really help the general populous. Want to help the general populous? Run for office and pay down the national debt then get of off this damned Federal Reserve system which is nothing more than a damned revolving credit account that enables the bad behavior we see from government today.

    I'll stop here... I could rant for hours

  • by jjohnson (62583) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @08:00PM (#35801718) Homepage

    If Ceglia can produce copies of the emails from independent third parties like Harvard's email logs from 7 years ago, that's pretty good proof. As a felon already convicted of fraud, Ceglia has zero credibility, but if Harvard produced identical copies and said "these came from our archives in 2003", then the burden of proof is on Zuck that Harvard is either lying or somehow insecure in its logs.

  • by leonbev (111395) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @08:45PM (#35802172) Journal

    Arron Sorkin has a legitimate excuse to start writing the script for "Social Network 2: Payback Time" :)

  • Re:Stupid Zuckerberg (Score:5, Interesting)

    by metlin (258108) on Wednesday April 13, 2011 @01:03AM (#35804038) Journal

    Your two statements are not mutually exclusive. One could be honest, yet greedy. A famous example would be Warren Buffett, who is perhaps the anti-thesis of the "evil, rich men" stereotype. However, he has quite honestly admitted that he is greedy, not because he covets wealth but because to him, money is a scorecard. And even so, he has shown himself to be a man of integrity - for instance, he has openly stated his disagreement with the concept of inheritance, and keeping in line with his beliefs, he has slated for most of his wealth (~90%) to be given away to various charitable organizations.

    And unlike Zuckerberg, he is completely self-made, and is worth just as much (and has much more tangible holdings to his name, too).

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Working...