I have to admit that even though I dislike Mark Zuckerberg for his scumbag attitude towards privacy, I’m tempted to side with him in all these legal wars over Facebook. I mean, even if he stepped on people to get the service running, he worked his ass off and achieved the best results anyone could possibly get. That’s something I can respect.

Now, if you’ve seen The Social Network, you should know who Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss are. They’re former classmates of Mark Zuckerberg at Harvard University who sued him for breaking an oral contract in which he agreed to create ConnectU (aka the Harvard Connection). The twins claim Zuckerberg stole the code and the idea behind it while also stalling them so he could get his site, thefacebook.com, out first.

Their case went to court in 2004 and was settled for $65 million in 2008, but you know how people are – you can never have enough money. So the twins tried to undo the 2008 settlement and ask for a larger compensation claiming they were misled about Facebook’s value. But the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Monday that enough is eough and told the twins to look for better hobbies.

The appeals court ruled that the twins were savvy enough to understand what they were agreeing to when they signed the agreement in 2008, a deal that called for a $20 million cash payment and a partial ownership of Facebook.

“At some point, litigation must come to an end,” chief justice Alex Kozinksi wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel. “That point has now been reached.”

The good news was short lived though.

sponsored links

As soon as the Winklevoss litigation ended news came out that Paul Ceglia, the guy who sued Mark Zuckerberg last July claiming Zuckerberg had agreed to give him a 50% ownership in Facebook, refiled his lawsuit with a larger law firm (DLA Piper) and a lot more evidence.

Last year everyone thought Ceglia’s lawsuit was just a scam designed to leech money off of a successful company. But the new evidence, which contains more than a dozen emails between Ceglia and Mark Zuckerberg, appears damn credible. What makes it especially convincing is that in an email sent on Jan. 5, 2004, Ceglia is threatening to call Zuckerberg’s parents (everyone knows things get real when a nerd’s parents are involved). Of course, the fact that a reputable international law firm picked up the case and did research to verify the validity of Ceglia’s claims also plays a major role in establishing credibility.

Regardless of how Ceglia’s lawsuit goes, though, the only real losers in this saga are the people who went to theaters to watch The Social Network.

The movie could have had so many more layers of entertainment if the producers would have delayed it a few more years. It could have been like Inception set in a Harvard dorm.

A drama within a drama within a drama within a lawsuit within a drama within a llama.



Liked this post? Subscribe for updates via RSS or email:
  • Meriale

    I can’t help but to say I think Mark Zuckerburg is one smart cookie. He already had the idea before the Winklevoss’s approached him. Just because he decided to create a universal social website doesn’t mean they had any right’s to it, or any of the royalties from it. They were just sore loser’s and in my opinion made big a&&es of themselves. Mark didn’t have to steal anything. he was the genius behind the computer and all they were was a couple of spoiled rich kids. I’m happy Mark’s company is a humongous success. Everyone got exactly what they deserved in this case. Except the Winklevoss’s , they shouldn’t have profited one dime off Zuckerburg’s hard work and brilliant programming. I hope the Winklevoss brother’s get everything they deserve and then some.. perhaps someday they’ll get their asses sued off. But the good news is that few million you walked away with isn’t even a drop in the bucket to what mark has made.