Slashdot Mirror
Mark Zuckerberg 'Reconsidering' Lawsuits To Force Property Sales in Hawaii (cnbc.com)
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg says he is "reconsidering" a set of lawsuits that he recently filed to compel hundreds of Hawaiians to sell him small plots of land they own that lie within the boundaries of 700-acre beachfront property on the island of Kauai. From a report on CNBC: The billionaire's potential about-face came after widespread publicity last week about the suits, which target a dozen plots comprising slightly more than eight acres of land strewn throughout the acreage that Zuckerberg bought for $100 million two years ago. Currently, owners of the lots, which have been in their families for generations, have the rights to travel across Zuckerberg's property. But many of the owners likely are unaware of their ownership interest in the plots. Last week, Zuckerberg said, "For most of these folks, they will now receive money for something they never even knew they had. No one will be forced off the land."
For most of these folks, they will now receive money for something they never even knew they had. No one will be forced off the land.
No one will be forced off the land, except for the ones who will...
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
I, high king of the Social Network, hereby decree that I have more money than thou! With this money comes great responsibility and power and the desire to own 700 acres of beachfront property in one of the most beautiful parts of the world! Unfortunately, many of you lowly peons also own bits and pieces of the property and because I am a just, and OCD, king, I must have ALL of the lands with no filthy natives scurrying across my property to access their own, so I shall be generous. Fight my lawsuits and I will bankrupt you. Accept my offers or you shall find yourself the poorer. I am king, I hereby decree it.
I care deeply about this because it's about someone wealthy from some social "platform"'s VC and stock-inflation value that decided to force natives out of their lands just because he has the money to do it. It proves he really hate everyone that isn't him, and uses everyone for his own personal gain.
If their properties is surrounded by Zuckerberg's property, why not offer them a swap? Offer them part of the outer part of his property for theirs, same size, same quality (or of course money if they prefer). That feels like sensible way to solve this without being evil.
Signature deleted by lameness filter.
What do you get in return for defending him?
What the hell are you talking about? I just called it a
rich-person-behaving-badly story
What I hope to achieve is less crap on the front page of Slashdot and more "news for nerds."
The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
1) is the actual problem. There is no owner of record because the deed is held in a name that has long since passed away, and no heirs can be discovered without going through probate. Which is a long, expensive and often tears families a part. Yes, I've looked into this a bit, and it seems a "lawsuit" is required to discover the rightful owners. And with it, Zuckerberg will likely also have to pay all the back taxes on the land.
Makes Mark seem less like a douche when you stop kneejerking reactions. (He's still a douche, but for other reasons)
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Maybe, the angle is, Zuckerberg is among the Trump-haters? In particular, he is opposed to Trump's efforts to regain control of immigration:
His stated desire for ever more immigrants (like myself) to come here to live next to you and me seems at odds with his manifested desire to live away from the "unwashed" masses... And hypocrisy — or even appearance of hypocrisy — is always newsworthy.
Because Facebook?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Bullshit conjecture. That rarely happens in Hawaii. A lot of the owners tried to contact Zuckerberg and his lawyers to settle the issue long before the lawsuits happened. Both him and his lawyers ignored them entirely until after the lawsuits were filed and the press got a hold of it.
It is ironic that the owner of Facebook is suing for privacy.
I care deeply about this because it's about someone wealthy from some social "platform"'s VC and stock-inflation value that decided to force natives out of their lands just because he has the money to do it. It proves he really hate everyone that isn't him, and uses everyone for his own personal gain.
From what I understand, only one person has been found so far and he's a professor that was willing to sell. We're talking 8 acres out of 700 and most of those 300 people who share it don't even know they own the land. He's not forcing anyone off any land. The lawsuit is to give people who might have ownership rights time to step forward and otherwise assume that they are all dead and proceed. This is standard procedure in hawaii. He's not doing anything that anyone else who buys land in hawaii doesn't have to do and what exactly are 300 people going to do with 8 acres. I'm sure Zuckerberg would be more than willing to give them the choice of any 8 acres on the edge of his tract if they really want it. This is all just propaganda to make him look like an evil rich guy.
Obviously you don't care that much about it because otherwise you would have read a bit about the story and realized the story is complete click bait. Zuckerberg isn't suing to force people to sell. Zuckerberg doesn't even know who the people are. They don't know who they are! There are 8 acres of land inside his land. He owes these people the right to cross his land and if he builds on his land something like a fence he has to consult with them. These owners owe property taxes on the land. He is asking the local government to find the people who own the land and tell them they own the land. If the owners decide they don't want the land (very likely) then the land will be sold and if it is sold for more than the back taxes the owners might get some money.
It this is the situation, then why shouldn't the steps be
1. Public records to find the owners
2. Send certified letters letting them know they own it and you'd like to buy it
3. Buy it, since "they'd be getting money for something they didn't know they had"
4. Avoid assholeriness
5. Enjoy!!!
This is EXACTLY what he is doing. This "lawsuit" is notifying the 300 next of kin who might own property to make a claim. The lawsuit basically says that if noone steps forward in 21 days that the court will give the property free and clear to Zuckerberg. He's not being an asshole, he's following standard procedure in Hawaii. This is how it is always done there.
Where is the angle that distinguishes this from any other rich-person-behaving-badly story, and warrants inclusion on Slashdot?
Probably the fact Zuckerberg is probably the single most vile person currently alive. He created a fortune by stealing a product from some people he claimed to be developing for them while getting paid to do so, then he leveraged said platform to spy on his own countrymen, then he adjusted said platform to fit the fascist policies of every nation he felt he could get a hand into, while continuing to sell out. His entire scheme is comprised of suckering people into giving him information on themselves, their friends and their families to hand over to governments around the world for nefarious purposes while manipulating the community both online and off for his own sociopathically-derived sociological experiments. The fact he's now actively oppressing several hundred people wouldn't even be worth a footnote in his long list of crimes against Humanity, save for the fact that he also leverages a perception of social justice to claim the moral highground in all his misdeeds, demonstrating exactly what he and those like him at the top consider social justice to be - a tool to control morons. He has extreme influence over the direction of technology and in turn his misdeeds are of extreme interest to nerds - who make their livelihoods and hobbies out of the things he and those like him are corrupting.
If you believe in property rights, then those 8 acres are 8 acres and it doesn't matter who the neighbors are, the neighbors don't own those 8 acres and can't pretend they do and close off access. End of issue.
Also, if you don't know who has interest in a property, that's fine. You might not actually have a right to know who has an interest in any property you want to acquire. If it is information you might simply not have access to, then there is no argument that they don't exist or in fact don't have an interest. In that case it just is their own business and their own land and piss off, right?
If you want to buy a private area to close off, my advice is to find one that is for sale, instead of a bunch of smaller plots next to each other with other plots in between that are not for sale. Seems obvious to me.
The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
>probably the single most vile person currently alive
Seriously? Robert Mugabe, Joseph Kony, El Chapo (just to pull three off the top of my head): Not as bad as Zuckerberg?
Grotesque hyberbole much?