Man Claims 84% of Facebook, Gets Order Blocking Assets 326
Cyrus writes "According to a Bloomberg scoop, a New York man claiming to own a majority of Facebook has gotten a signed court order to block Facebook from transferring assets."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
Real Programmers don't eat quiche. They eat Twinkies and Szechwan food.
Re:Not Facebook! (Score:1, Interesting)
I was kidding. But one can only hope something shuts down that huge pile of crap.
The Pellet thief (Score:5, Interesting)
The story gets even jucier:
In 2009, New York Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo obtained a restraining order against Allegany Pellets, a western New York wood pellet company owned by Ceglia and his wife Iasia. Cuomo accused the company of defrauding consumers by taking $200,000 in orders but not delivering any products or issuing any refunds. That case is reportedly ongoing.
An odd detail is that 84% number is said to be as of 2004. Why 2004?
Here is the photostat of the contract (Score:4, Interesting)
see this article in cnet news. At the bottom a flash window has all the pages of the suit and the contract in the appendix. According to the contract the 50% ownership is unambiguous. it's the primary compensation and it is listed right up front. Also they show other documents indicating that the name changes were registered as ficticious (placeholder) names in NY. It's going to be interesting.... [cnet.com]
This could be a good thing for Facebook (Score:3, Interesting)
This could be a good thing for Facebook.
I hate to put it this superficially, but about 60% of the trouble is in can be traced back to CEO Mark Zuckerberg's immaturity with handling people. If someone does indeed own 84% of Facebook they could simply order him to stop making public statements.
In fact, he could take it a step further and put out spin how FB is under new derangement, with new policies and better tech coming down the road.
Re:That Must Be One Entertaining Contract (Score:3, Interesting)
The statute of limitations is a red herring -- it only begins to run when a contract breach is discovered (or reasonable should have been), not when the contract is signed. You can have a contract signed 50 years ago, but if you breach it today, the statute of limitations start to run today.
The purported breach was arguably only discovered by the plaintiff due to recent press accounts of potential selling of Facebook or portions thereof. Until some act is taken that indicates an intent to breach, a party to a contract has the right to rely on the expectation that the other party will fulfill his obligations under the contract.
Yeah I guess he just didn't notice that he owned 50% of facebook when that's the second paragraph in the contract.
Re:Not Facebook! (Score:2, Interesting)
I don't know how one can use e-mail and slashdot, but think facebook is a scourge to the internet.
I sometimes see email addresses, but I don't see a commercial 'email logo' stuck all over crap everywhere in life. There's a 'See us in Facebook' sticker on the glass door of 'Fashion Bug' which is essentially a strip-mall women's clothing store. The marketing of Facebook has gotten out of hand and is repulsing.
If I started seeing the Slashdot Log stuck all over Radio Shack, I'd probably feel the same way about Slashdot. If all the casual iPod games I download and play for a little while pushed 'Post about your success on Slashdot' I'd feel the same.
Fuck you, Zuck.
Re:Not Facebook! (Score:3, Interesting)
t allowed me to relocate and connect with old high school and college classmates. I also learned about the reunion through facebook
Come on, this is Slashdot - you only found out about the reunion because you were stalking your old high school and college "classmates" (tellingly, you didn't call them friends).
(Only joking - although my wife was stalked by an ex-boyfriend via a social networking website. He even found her address through another site that sells access to things like the electoral register, and then turned up one night on her doorstep).
Re:Not Facebook! (Score:5, Interesting)
I disagree. But then I have to add, I deleted my Facebook profile. My problem is my family and friends are ALL in other countries, and most are in timezones where I cannot call them easily. When we want to send personal messages, e-mail sure is what we use. But Facebook is perfect for posting updates and photos of our 1 year old daughter for family (and some friends) back home to see.
Also I do appreciate (even the impersonal) updates... makes me feel like I'm still home.
I've blanked-blocked almost all applications a long long time ago anyway, so I've never seen these "Farmville" updates people speak of.
My wife will keep her profile and do these updates, but I personally don't like Facebook's policies.
Re:That Must Be One Entertaining Contract (Score:5, Interesting)
Among other things, the countersuit claims there's no need for urgent action (really? Pending sale of the IP doesn't make it urgent?)
This sounds like a quick and poorly research counter while they circle the wagons and find out just what happened, sounds like Zucker may have "burned" the original company to elimate this little ownership problem, while taking all the assets. This little stunt may have actually sstarted the statue of limitations countdown, if he as CEO of "thefacebook" company wrote himself a severance package where he got the IP and the 84% owner said nothing because he was unaware, thinking he owned a silent but significant owner of "Facebook".
Of course, odd that you would believe yourself even a 50% owner of a huge internet phenom and not ask for at least a board seat where you can find out what they are doing with your company...
Re:Not Facebook! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Not Facebook! (Score:3, Interesting)
The way I see it, if I really care about a person, I will make sure to stay in touch and no need to re-connect.
That's an excellent point and I would have agreed with when I was a teenager and my long-lost friends were the ones I didn't have classes with that semester. Then I got older and realized that sometimes people move without remembering to notify everyone they've ever corresponded with. I parted ways with some old friends - Navy buddies, college pals, neighbors, etc. - before email was popular among non-geeks and had no way of getting in touch with them short of hiring a private investigator.
Re:Not Facebook! (Score:3, Interesting)
Can't you create a (password + optional SSL protected) website for posting those updates? Hosting is cheap these days and it does not look like you would use a lot of hard drive space and/or bandwidth.
(I am not the author of the GPP.) I can, but I don't expect all my friends to do so, especially all my non-geek friends. For myself and virtually everyone that I stay in touch with: (free + convenient + slightly evil) trumps (cheap + hassle + ideologically sound). Probably doesn't bode well for the future of personal privacy, but there you go...