Slashdot Mirror
Man Claiming Half of Facebook Suffers Setbacks
itwbennett writes "Slashdot readers will remember Paul Ceglia, the man who says Mark Zuckerberg agreed to split Facebook with him and has the email to prove it. Well, his case took a turn for the worse this week. Two law firms representing him resigned, the judge refused to postpone a hearing to allow his new lawyers to get caught up, and the judge ordered him to turn over computers and electronic and paper evidence."
I agree, but what else is Slashdot going to report on? Most stories get complaints that they don't belong on the main page. If we listened to those people complaining loudest and hardest, banned all Facebook, Twitter, iterative product releases, generic rants and blogs, flamebait and troll articles, and reviews, what would be left? One story per day, which half the people on Slashdot didn't even understand, because it was too technical?
I agree that there's too much boring, extraneous crap being posted to Slashdot, but this is the way it's always been. There was no glorious, crapless time when everything was relevant, interesting, and geeky. Half the fun of Slashdot has always been trolling the stupid articles, while you wait for a good one to be posted.
And, let's face it, for every article that you consider relevant and interesting, there's someone out there, thinking, "Why the fuck was this posted?" Windows users don't give a shit about Linux 3.0, Libertarians don't give a shit about some Marxist interpretation of The Matrix, graphics designers don't care about the latest I.T. management fad, and teenagers don't understand why anyone would want to talk about the banking industry.
Having your legal team resign is a bad sign. Despite most peoples view of lawyers, they are bound to act ethically and if they have reason to believe you're engaging in a fraud they won't represent you.
Nick
>Last I checked, emails weren't legally binding, as a contract is
Check again.
Congress passed the ESIGN act to prevent people from repudiating contracts that were made electronically. That was the foundation of the e-commerce boom (otherwise, how would you expect companies to sell on the Internet when people could just say "Oh, that wasn't a real contract, it was just electronic.")
Btw, a contract doesn't need to even be written to be a contract. The written form helps in establishing what was contracted, though.
A contract requires an offer, an acceptance, and consideration (exchange of value).
If you hash out terms for a business deal over email, and at the end you accept it, you just made a contract.
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
Having your legal team resign is a bad sign.
Yeah, considering the suspicions surrounding the legitimacy of Ceglia's contracts and emails, this is very likely a sign that the lawyers figured out that his evidence is indeed forged. I'm sure that's (at least part of) what you meant. But I'm equally sure that there are readers who are unfamiliar with the case and the suspicions that Ceglia's evidence trail consists of forgeries.
Yea, that's pretty much what I'm saying. I'm wondering how much of a compulsive liar this guy must be if he honestly thinks he can forge an email trail. I guess it's worth a shot for a few hundred million dollars though.
Nick