backtop


Print 9 comment(s) - last by RivuxGamma.. on Jun 25 at 4:12 PM


From Left to Right: Tyler Winklevoss, Divya Narendra, and Cameron Winklevoss  (Source: cotabatoexchange.com)
The twins said that they reconsidered the matter and decided that they would not seek Supreme Court review in a filing in court today

At the core of Facebook's history is a long, drawn-out battle between its creator and two wannabe social network leaders. But after years of litigation, the Winklevoss twins have finally decided to let it go and stick with their $65 million settlement.

Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss attended Harvard University with Mark Zuckerberg, who later became the CEO of Facebook. In 2002, the Winklevoss twins created HarvardConnection, which was a social networking site that was later changed to the name "ConnectU." In 2003, the Winklevosses lost their programmer for the site and asked Zuckerberg to fill in. Zuckerberg allegedly entered an oral contract with the Winklevosses and their partner, Divya Narendra. 

After entering this oral contract, Zuckerberg started creating his own social networking site called "thefacebook.com" over the next two months. During this time, he exchanged e-mails with the Winklevosses saying he was very busy, but would make changes to their site. On February 4, 2004, Zuckerberg launched thefacebook.com and the Winklevosses found out two days later. Outraged by Zuckerberg's actions, ConnectU filed a lawsuit against Facebook in late 2004 for breaking oral contract and for stealing the idea of ConnectU. 

The Winklevoss twins won a $65 million settlement in 2008, but decided to take it a step further in 2010 by filing yet another lawsuit claiming that a friend had allegedly lied about the value of Facebook, and that Zuckerberg had committed securities fraud. In April 2011, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Chief Judge Alex Kozinski ruled that the Winklevosses must accept their previous $65 million settlement and nothing more. But the Winklevoss twins refused to give up, and said they'd seek a rehearing before a larger group of 9th Circuit judges, and the Supreme Court.

But now, the Winklevosses are changing their tune. The twins said that they reconsidered the matter and decided that they would not seek Supreme Court review in a filing in court today. The filing did not specify why they changed their minds. 

As expected, Facebook is pleased with the Winklevosses decision to finally let this go.

"We've considered this case closed for a long time, and we're pleased to see the other party now agrees," said Facebook in a statement.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Winklevoss Timeline
By The Raven on 6/23/2011 2:30:31 PM , Rating: 2
From "Related Articles" headlines:
quote:
Facebook Founder Accused of Stealing Idea for Site

quote:
Winklevoss Twins File Yet Another Lawsuit Against Facebook

quote:
Winklevoss Twins Continue Facebook Fight

quote:
Winklevoss Twins Decide Not to Seek Supreme Court Review in Facebook Settlement Case

I'm sorry, but you may as well be reporting on Kim Kardashian's twitter posts.




RE: Winklevoss Timeline
By ClownPuncher on 6/23/2011 2:35:51 PM , Rating: 3
Are you saying she is literate enough to make such posts?


RE: Winklevoss Timeline
By RivuxGamma on 6/25/2011 4:12:31 PM , Rating: 2
Nah, you just set up an iphone next to her ass and let the jiggles do the posting.


...
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 6/23/2011 9:34:06 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
"We've considered this case closed for a long time, and we're pleased to see the other party now agrees,"


Oh snap ;)




RE: ...
By Mitch101 on 6/23/2011 9:40:03 AM , Rating: 2
His brass makes him interesting.

I read that they took the original 65 million settlement in stock which is now worth 160 million. As I throw up in my mouth on facebook valuation.


RE: ...
By MrBlastman on 6/23/2011 10:45:39 AM , Rating: 3
Facebook is only worth as much as people continue to use it. Like all major properties on the internet--eventually, someone will come up with a better idea (or the fad will run its course).

As far as Facebook being overvalued... Goldman Sachs threw all all that money into it and gave it a false hypothetical valuation of 50 Billion. 50 Billion. Let that sink in. 50 Billion bucks for a site that people waste time on daily. Then, you have to realize how big of crooks Goldman really are. Just ask Libya about them and the 1.2 billion that Goldman lost of their money. "Oops, we're sorry, really."

One of these days, they will go down. Interesting note: Anytime you see a company incessantly push an idea or a valuation of a company--watch out! Remember, there are always two sides to a transaction, a buyer and a seller. If they're drumming up an idea, most likely they are on the selling side--as was shown by a few other illustrious offerings and transactions by them during the most recent crash. Hmm... peddling something to their clients and then being short on it themselves....

Anyways, back to Facebook--They missed the opportunity to IPO last fall. They should have done it when the movie was released and the press was hot about them. I think they messed up by waiting and now that we are getting reports of usership declining, you'll only see that value dropping unless they turn the user decline around. IPO at the top when you know there's a bubble. Just look at Glencore (look it up)--top of the commodity bubble, they IPO'd (and not in the states, but instead London and Hong Kong but part of that is because of Mark Rich).

I think the guys just gave up their case because they were sick of living small and figured--hey, 80 million apeice, not bad for living off of dividends for the rest of their life.


IPO
By Uncle on 6/23/2011 12:35:45 PM , Rating: 2
The Winklevoss were given special IPO options when Facebook starts trading. That will more then make up for any losses. Whats good about this setup is the general public will be paying for the Winklevoss profits when shares start trading, and they don't have to declare any taxes until they sell their shares. A win win for Facebook and the Winklevoss.




RE: IPO
By MrBlastman on 6/23/2011 1:09:09 PM , Rating: 2
Deferring taxes isn't always a good thing--especially when you consider our taxes are quite low right now and the prospect that the long-term capital gains rate is scheduled to go up in a year and a half unless they extend the cut further. Also, couple that with what has happened in the recent Linked In and Pandora IPO's...

No bet, no matter how good you think it is in a company, is a sure thing.


?
By Motoman on 6/23/11, Rating: 0
"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that." -- Microsoft COO Kevin Turner














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki