Winklevoss twins end Facebook lawsuit

lesserspottedchloe

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/jun/23/winklevoss-twins-end-facebook-lawsuit

I'd cash those shares in quickly if I were them!

TheZohanS

Can you quote the article for mobile users?

fedor.2.

The greed of these winkletossers always annoyed me

Minstrel27

TheZohan wrote: »

Can you quote the article for mobile users?

article wrote:

Winklevoss twins end Facebook lawsuit

Former Mark Zuckerberg business partners whose case inspired movie The Social Network say they will accept 2008 deal

Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss have decided not to take their Facebook legal battle to the US supreme court. Photograph: Adam Hunger/Reuters
The Winklevoss twins, the former classmates and business partners of Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, have decided to end their legal battle over whether the idea for the social networking site was stolen from them.

The case that launched a thousand cinema trips – after it became the basis for the Hollywood film The Social Network in 2010 – ended with a whimper rather than a bang in a one-paragraph court filing by the twins. They said they would forgo a trip to the US supreme court and accept a 2008 settlement which gave them a mixture of $20m cash and Facebook stock which at the time was worth around $45m. Since then the putative value of the privately-held Facebook has grown more than fourfold, from $15bn to $70bn. The twins' stock is thus in theory worth more than $150m.

The Winklevoss's accusation forms a core element of the 2010 film, which includes many of the legal battles that Zuckerberg fought in the creation of the site.

But another lawsuit against Zuckerberg, by Paul Ceglia, a New York-based former wood-pellet salesman who argues that a 2003 contract with Zuckerberg gives him a claim to a large share of the company, which was started in 2004, continues. Facebook has called Ceglia's claim "fraudulent" and pointed to his former convictions on counts of fraud.

The Winklevoss twins had for some time sought to undo the 2008 settlement, complaining that Facebook left out key information during the negotiations which mean they did not receive as many shares as they should have. But the 9th US circuit court of appeals ruled against them, saying they had been represented by a squadron of Silicon Valley lawyers and their father, a noted business professor.

JONJO THE MISER

$150 Million not too shabby.

Biggins

Case NOT over.

Reports that the Winklevoss twins had decided to drop their legal dispute against Facebook and its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, were apparently premature.

Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss and partner Divya Narendra, who have accused Zuckerberg of stealing their idea to create the social-networking giant, filed a motion today in U.S. District Court of Massachusetts to ask the court to determine whether Facebook and Zuckerberg "intentionally or inadvertently suppressed evidence."

Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-20073921-93/winklevoss-twins-press-facebook-case-in-boston/#ixzz1QAu2vBQl

It seems 65 million is not enough still.

These two guys are a disgrace to the name of Harvard.
The greedy bastards just won't let it rest and take the millions.

mathie

Biggins wrote: »

These two guys are a disgrace to the name of Harvard.
The greedy bastards just won't let it rest and take the millions.

But Biggins can't you see it's not about millions of dollars .... it's about billions.
:pac::pac::pac:

bijapos

Biggins wrote: »

These two guys are a disgrace to the name of Harvard.
The greedy bastards just won't let it rest and take the millions.

To be fair the likes of George W. Bush and countless scumbag political, business and finance managers have done nothing for the reputation of Harvard over the years.

There are still many questions on the intellectual rights to the setting up of Facebook. If the Winklevoss twins think they have a right to more of the company then thats their decision. I've never seen the film but I know from people who operate in social media that there is a lot of skullduggery in the story that has not yet come to light.

G_R

Don't you mean the Winklevi twins?

Logical Fallacy

bijapos wrote: »

There are still many questions on the intellectual rights to the setting up of Facebook. If the Winklevoss twins think they have a right to more of the company then thats their decision. I've never seen the film but I know from people who operate in social media that there is a lot of skullduggery in the story that has not yet come to light.

lol, the film portrayed MZ as an adept public speaker who instantly ruled any room he was in with pinpoint diction and disarming wit.

So clearly the film is fiction based on minor truths, like people's names...i think they got that right.

I wouldn't be looking to the film for any solid details behind anything.

Biggins

http://thedailyedge.thejournal.ie/winklevoss-twins-are-aholes-says-former-harvard-president-183144-Jul2011/

Winklevoss twins are ‘a**holes’, says former Harvard president

FORMER HARVARD PRESIDENT Larry Summers has made his feeling known about the Winklevoss twins, calling the pair “assholes”.

Summers, who is also a former US Secretary of State, made the statement while he was being interviewed at Fortune’s Brainstorm Tech conference.

The twins famously sued Facebook and its founder Mark Zuckerberg, claiming that he stole the concept for the site while they were all students at Harvard. The story formed the basis for the Oscar-winning film The Social Network. And there could be another film in the pipeline, as the lawsuits keep on coming.

An encounter between Summers and the twins makes up one of the pivotal scenes of the film, with the Harvard president dismissing their request for support in fighting Zuckerberg.

CNN reports that when asked if the scene was true to life Summers responded:

"One of the things you learn as a college president is that if an undergraduate is wearing a tie and jacket on Thursday afternoon at three o’clock, there are two possibilities. One is that they’re looking for a job and have an interview; the other is that they are an asshole… this was the latter case."

I have to agree with him.

They asked Zuckerberg to build them a college website ('cos they couldn't do it themselves please note) that links the students to each other.
He did so according to their given specifications.

He then went off and built from scratch, an entirely different one and more wide ranging, with different structure and validation code - and got sued 'cos in the end, they like his application better and claimed it was theirs!

As the head of Harvard then says later... "Assholes!"

TheZohanS

Biggins wrote: »

http://thedailyedge.thejournal.ie/winklevoss-twins-are-aholes-says-former-harvard-president-183144-Jul2011/



They asked Zuckerberg to build them a college website ('cos they couldn't do it themselves please note) that links the students to each other.
He did so according to their given specifications.

He then went off and built from scratch, an entirely different one and more wide ranging, with different structure and validation code - and got sued 'cos in the end, they like his application better and claimed it was theirs!

As the head of Harvard then says later... "Assholes!"

That's not what happened at all Biggins.

Biggins

TheZohan wrote: »

That's not what happened at all Biggins.

* They didn't ask him to build a site according to their requirements?
* He didn't go away and build another one of a different kind - with different coding?
* They didn't claim his one was theirs?

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong and stand corrected.

..To boot, they should have taken the 60 million as well - but apparently now, thats not even enough!

super_furry

Adult twins who wear the same clothes are really, really, REALLY creepy.

Miguel_Sanchez

Ah sure the whole idea was just robbed off Friendster.

AlmightyCushion

Biggins wrote: »

Case NOT over.

Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-20073921-93/winklevoss-twins-press-facebook-case-in-boston/#ixzz1QAu2vBQl

It seems 65 million is not enough still.

These two guys are a disgrace to the name of Harvard.
The greedy bastards just won't let it rest and take the millions.

If he actually did steal their idea (I have no idea if he did or not but it seems as if it isn't exactly clear cut) then why do you consider them greedy? They are only fighting for what is rightfully theirs. If on the other hand he didn't steal their idea, they should just take the money and leave it at that.

Biggins

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

If he actually did steal their idea (I have no idea if he did or not but it seems as if it isn't exactly clear cut) then why do you consider them greedy? They are only fighting for what is rightfully theirs. If on the other hand he didn't steal their idea, they should just take the money and leave it at that.

You have a point and the matter was addressed and assessed and a €60 million plus deal was formed so there is obviously merit to their argument as someone sees.

Now it seems however, they want to go further and want more.
It seems they are still not happy.

TheZohanS

Biggins wrote: »

* They didn't ask him to build a site according to their requirements?
* He didn't go away and build another one of a different kind - with different coding?
* They didn't claim his one was theirs?

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong and stand corrected.

..To boot, they should have taken the 60 million as well - but apparently now, thats not even enough!

He didn't build a site for them and he basically stole their idea for the site.

missingtime

Larry Summers has some right to be calling people assholes...

Biggins

TheZohan wrote: »

He didn't build a site for them and he basically stole their idea for the site.

O' thats news to me!
Not the "stolen idea" bit but that he didn't work on a site for them!

missingtime wrote: »

Larry Summers has some right to be calling people assholes...

Maybe so - I don't honestly know but they say in that case, it takes one to know one!
Maybe thats how he can tell better?

Voodu Child

super_furry wrote: »

Adult twins who wear the same clothes are really, really, REALLY creepy.

I saw a documentary about them - apparently there's only one of them and they use CGI to do the other one.

Sticky_Fingers

If it's found that Zuckerberg did steal their idea he should lose his shirt over it, I'd have no sympathy for him.

Biggins

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

If it's found that Zuckerberg did steal their idea he should lose his shirt over it, I'd have no sympathy for him.

They come to a conclusion about that case - and a settlement.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/12/technology/12facebook.html?_r=1

Now the two boys once agreeing to it for some time - now reject it!

Quick summary:

The dispute dates to 2003, when Mr. Zuckerberg, then a Harvard sophomore, agreed to help the Winklevosses and Mr. Narendra program a social Web site called Harvard Connection, later renamed ConnectU.

But instead of following through on the verbal agreement, Mr. Zuckerberg delayed work on Harvard Connection and instead worked on his own project. When pressed for answers, he stalled, according to the Winklevosses. In February 2004, Mr. Zuckerberg released TheFacebook, which eventually became Facebook.

Later that year, the ConnectU founders sued him and Facebook. Facebook countersued a year later. The 2008 settlement was meant to resolve all the claims.

AlmightyCushion

Biggins wrote: »

You have a point and the matter was addressed and assessed and a €60 million plus deal was formed so there is obviously merit to their argument as someone sees.

Now it seems however, they want to go further and want more.
It seems they are still not happy.

Did they actually agree to take the settlement? If they did I doubt they could bring it to the supreme court because taking the settlement means they were satisfied with the outcome. I'm not a lawyer though. If they aren't happy with the decision of the court then they are more than entitled to take it further. I believe they run the risk of losing their original settlement deal if they do though.

Being honest, if I was in their shoes and he actually did take my idea, I probably wouldn't be too happy either. Without their idea there would be no site. Obviously, without zuckerburg, it's possible the site could have sank instead of being valued at the $100 or so billion it is now but they both had a part to play in it being successful. Zuckerburg shouldn't be thrown out on the street but those guys would deserve more of the company than a piddly fraction of a percent. All of this is providing he did steal the idea/site from them which of course may not be true.

Biggins

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

...Being honest, if I was in their shoes and he actually did take my idea, I probably wouldn't be too happy either. Without their idea there would be no site. Obviously, without zuckerburg, it's possible the site could have sank instead of being valued at the $100 or so billion it is now but they both had a part to play in it being successful. Zuckerburg shouldn't be thrown out on the street but those guys would deserve more of the company than a piddly fraction of a percent. All of this is providing he did steal the idea/site from them which of course may not be true.

I wouldn't either but apparently they did agree to take the settlement which includes shares that at todays prices stand at 180 Million+ presently.

Now they are saying after a judge gave a adjudication and agreeing with that adjudication, that they now disagree and are heading to court again!

Seriously - when is enough enough? The only winners here are the lawyers.
They should take the massive money, take the possible already won moral high ground and go live their lives.

TheZohanS

Biggins wrote: »

They come to a conclusion about that case - and a settlement.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/12/technology/12facebook.html?_r=1

Now the two boys once agreeing to it for some time - now reject it!

Quick summary:

They agreed to a settlement of $65 million and Zuckerberg only gave them $11 million in shares instead of the $45 million (plus the $20 million in cash between them), I'm not sure but I think they did another share reissue and devalued the stock. So with this dispute going on the value of the stock has risen and the twins are looking for the current day value of the stock, approx $450 million.

It's Zuckerberg's fault for trying to pull a fast one and not paying up what was agreed when he was supposed to.

Biggins

TheZohan wrote: »

They agreed to a settlement of $65 million and Zuckerberg only gave them $11 million in shares instead of the $45 million plus the $20 million in cash between them...

...That settlement is now worth about $200 million, according to estimates by experts.

Whatever their value at the time, the shares have recently traded as high as $150, after adjusting for splits. That values the stock portion of the settlement at more than $180 million.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/12/technology/12facebook.html?_r=1

Not to be sneezed at.

They are now NOT even arguing over the case of rights to the Facebook site etc, just they want more money than earlier agreed to!

Mr. Denton

Voodu Child wrote: »

I saw a documentary about them - apparently there's only one of them and they use CGI to do the other one.

That's why they need the $60m+. People don't realise but it's very expensive to have a CGI twin operating 24/7.

Aldebaran

If the Winklevoss's were the inventors of Facebook, they'd have invented Facebook. :pac:

phasers

Zuckerberg seems like a douche. The twins do too though... give all the money to Andrew Garfield!

Biggins

phasers wrote: »

Zuckerberg seems like a douche. The twins do too though... give all the money to Andrew Garfield!

Too late, he's already giving most of his money elsewhere...

* http://mashable.com/2010/12/09/mark-zuckerberg/

* and another 100 million: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/blog-post/2010/09/zuckerberg_donates_100_million.html

* Even to a competitor: http://tinyurl.com/3xvu4aa

wild_cat

super_furry wrote: »

Adult twins who wear the same clothes are really, really, REALLY creepy.

Theres a comment... in the comments section which says...

"
Bentown 23 June 2011 10:23AM

These are two of the most identical and American looking people I have ever seen.."