Ceglia Sues For 50% Facebook, Old Emails as Evidence

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."

Comments

Stupid Zuckerberg

[ackthpt]

To put any of his swindles into writing.

Still, we know how to fake an email header, right? What's going to prove these are genuine?

Re:Stupid Zuckerberg

[Telvin_3d]

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.

Re:Stupid Zuckerberg

[iamhassi]

The $1,000 check that Zuckerberg cashed, hard to fake that.

Zuckerberg has got to be one of the biggest con-artists of the 21st century, why doesn't he just admit it and give these people 10 billion and move on? What's 10 billion when you already have 50 billion? Still more money than he could spend in his lifetime.

Re:Stupid Zuckerberg

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't get $50 billion by not being a greedy bastard. No one earns $50 billion honestly.

Re:Stupid Zuckerberg

[iMadeGhostzilla]

Ha ha! You are wrong on so many levels. First, with $50bn you would become a very different person. Second, your "close" friends would never be content with how much you gave them, not to mention how they would fight to be "close" or how they would change in relation with you. And finally, if you really did make sure they had enough money not to ever work again, that would be about the fastest way to fuck up their lives. So you didn't get a single thing right.

Re:Stupid Zuckerberg

[jjohnson]

Thank you for stopping, because I threw up in my mouth a little when you referred to addiction as a "voluntary misery".

Re:Stupid Zuckerberg

[UnknowingFool]

The only thing I don't understand is why the guy waited so long to sue. He says it's because he only recently found the contract while looking for other papers. I see. I forget that I own a large majority of a major corporation all the time.

Re:Stupid Zuckerberg

[erroneus]

Exactly how is addiction NOT voluntary misery? The decision to start is voluntary. The decision to persist is voluntary. And the risks are ALL too well known in advance. I'd really love to hear a reasonable counterpoint to my statements of simple truth. To say that people are not responsible for their addictions is to say that people are not responsible for their actions. That is a difficult position to make stand.

I enjoyed the Southpark position on alcoholism. "The victims" claimed it was a disease! The kid just said "no it's not! Just stop doing it!" Seriously. Just stop doing it -- whatever it is -- it's bad for you, so stop it! The pain of quitting is the pain you deserve for doing that in the first place.

Seriously, I would like to hear a perspective-changing counterpoint to the truth that it is their choice and is voluntary. So let's hear it. How is it involuntary?

What is facebook?

[s-whs]

I've not registered with facebook so I can't see much of it. Perhaps good.

In any event, I wish slashdot would go back to the old days of more tech stuff, with more about programming etc. The latest version of afterstep, new C compilers, and of course other stuff such as physics. But too much business crap just and stuff about drivel level science (e.g. global warming deniers, which anyone can show as being nutters with nearly zero time spent) takes much of the fun away.

Perhaps I'm misremembering, perhaps I'm getting different interests and don't want to select rubbish any more.

Being philosophical: I think that's actually what old people have: They are tired of hearing the same old crap again and again from people. They see through the BS and have had enough...

And all this business stuff is such BS, that will always remain, just like politicians are always bad, in just about all countries. These are given.

Re:What is facebook?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not sure you realize the nature of slashdot. As soon as the second news story was posted, people were complaining that slashdot was not as good as it used to be.

Re:Legally binding contract?

[Anonymous Coward]

maybe you missed the part about the signed contract and the cashed check ?

Re:What about my shares?

[bill_mcgonigle]

Where's the SEC when you need them?

Taking marching orders from Goldman?

Re:Pretty Damning

[Lehk228]

Not immature and short sighted at all when ceglia has a history of similar fraud