Court: Harvard twins stuck with Facebook agreement

Discussion in 'Off The Beaten Track' started by ilovepaydays, Apr 12, 2011.

  1. ilovepaydays

    ilovepaydays Well-Known Member

    3,054
    410
    83
    Court: Harvard twins stuck with Facebook agreement

    Thoughts? Mark Zuckerburg may have done some wrong here - but it is REALLY hard to feel sorry for these two. Born into wealth, went to Harvard, 2008 Olympians, and now they're stuck with a $160 million settlement. I wish my life was this difficult.

    Should they have pursued this further against Zuckerburg and tried to get more money? Or at all? I feel like even if Zuckerburg "stole" their idea, it wasn't like they had it under copyright. And do they know for sure if they had went with the Facebook idea, that they would have done it as well as Zuckerburg anyway?
     
    flutzilla1 and (deleted member) like this.
  2. IceAlisa

    IceAlisa Épaulement!!!

    31,178
    4,415
    113
    Boo hoo. Just like Jesse Eisenberg said in The Social Network, if they were the inventors of Facebook, they would have invented Facebook.
     
    flutzilla1 and (deleted member) like this.
  3. Matryeshka

    Matryeshka Well-Known Member

    12,479
    3,530
    113
    You punish the crime, regardless of the circumstances of the victims. I don't care if they were the sons of the richest Arab sheikh in the world, it doesn't justify Zuckerburg effectively stealing the idea. Is it greedy, yes. Could they have done as good as job with it, probably not. But Zuckerburg would not have done it at all had the Wiklevoss twins not come to him with the idea in the first place.
     
  4. ilovepaydays

    ilovepaydays Well-Known Member

    3,054
    410
    83
    How many entrepreneurs out there start their business with an idea that they heard from or even worked with a relative/friend/co-worker/etc.? I bet a good percentage.

    And it isn't like the Wiklevoss twins didn't have the financial resources to really go for starting the company if they really wanted to do it.

    I am not sure Zuckerburg would have done Facebook without the idea, but I think he would have started some pretty significant company: Zuckerburg's wikipedia article

     
  5. IceAlisa

    IceAlisa Épaulement!!!

    31,178
    4,415
    113
    I agree with you that their circumstances should have nothing to do with the decision. And IMO, they do not.
     
  6. Prancer

    Prancer Jawwalking Staff Member

    39,049
    6,809
    113
    But the issue isn't whether Zuckerberg stole the idea, although the twins would very much like it to be; their claim is that they were defrauded by Zuckerberg undervaluing Facebook and leaving information out of their settlement agreement. They're smart guys who had excellent lawyers and an expert adviser working with them at the time; they are going to have a really hard time convincing any court that they were deceived.
     
  7. Civic

    Civic New Member

    6,262
    657
    0
    I'd never heard of the Winklevoss twins until I watched a 60 Minutes story about their lawsuit against Zuckerburg late last year. It's hard to feel sorry for them given that they're good looking, incredibly fit, multimillionaires. On the plus side, they came across as smart, driven, young men who work well together. I'll be surprised if they don't succeed at future endeavors.
     
  8. Coco

    Coco Well-Known Member

    10,968
    1,588
    113
    I love Judge Kozinski. Haven't really read that name too much since law school, but he really gets it.
     
  9. numbers123

    numbers123 Well-Known Member

    30,765
    5,027
    113
    this.
     
  10. IceAlisa

    IceAlisa Épaulement!!!

    31,178
    4,415
    113
    They kinda have the long horse faces IMO. The actor who played them in the film was :swoon: OTOH.
     
  11. RockTheTassel

    RockTheTassel Well-Known Member

    1,150
    155
    63
    I can't help but feel that if the Wiklevoss twins were poor and Zuckerburg were rich, this story would have been spun a lot differently. They may be making an unreasonable claim, but it's unfair to view what is reasonable and what isn't based off how much money and priviledge they had while growing up.
     
  12. hydro

    hydro Well-Known Member

    4,653
    661
    113
    I agree, however, the financiers of Facebook have been caught under-valuing the company before. I believe Eduardo Saverin's settlement was largely due to pernicious financial reporting by the company.
     
  13. Gazpacho

    Gazpacho Well-Known Member

    5,339
    687
    113
    I'm amazed that the twins' wealth and status is even a factor in this thread. This is a legal dispute that involves legal statutes far beyond my, and most people's, comprehension. Why are people reacting based on the defendants' demographics?
     
  14. JILEN

    JILEN New Member

    2,886
    270
    0
    I'm one of those who believed the Twinklevoss' had good enough payday since they have been awarded 20 million, plus part ownership based on just verbal agreement vs.trademarking and just because you have an idea doesn't mean you can produce the same result as someone else who put your idea in motion. If you did it and failed and somebody else succeeded I dont see how someone get to determine and claim any monetary value to that.

    I see an appeal to the SC coming and it'll be the lawyers going to get filthy rich by the time this is over.
     
  15. Civic

    Civic New Member

    6,262
    657
    0
    I wasn't referring to their parents' money but to the millions of dollars they received through their initial settlement with Mark Zuckerburg. They're smart and they now have beaucoup millions to play with. Why not put their their time and energies into starting a new business venture that they can control.
     
    flutzilla1 and (deleted member) like this.
  16. Civic

    Civic New Member

    6,262
    657
    0
    So they are identical twins...I wondered about that.
     
  17. VIETgrlTerifa

    VIETgrlTerifa Well-Known Member

    10,285
    2,203
    113
    I agree with this ruling. They agreed to accept the settlement and it sounds as if they did not make a convincing argument that they were duped into thinking that Facebook was worth a lot less than it was.

    I can't see the Supreme Court agreeing to review the case if the twins decide to appeal this decision.
     
  18. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    17,560
    2,130
    113
    Because they are people - lawyers may be most interested in the case details, but the rest of us are interested in the people. Few care about the technical details and the coding that built Facebook - we care about the people, and thus the success of The Social Network.

    Whatever the demographics, we're going to care about them. If the twins were poor and disadvantaged, we'd care and we'd have reactions and opinions. That they are rich and privileged makes no difference - we're still interested, and we still have reactions and opinions.

    There actually was a second actor who appears throughout the movie - it's only when the shot needed to show a face or have his voice heard that Armie Hammer's was superimposed.

    Armie is credited as playing both Cameron and Tyler, while Josh Pence is credited as playing Tyler only.
     
  19. allezfred

    allezfred Old and Immature Admin Staff Member

    44,050
    10,575
    113
    This. :grope:

    I hadn't heard of the Winklevoss twins until I saw "The Social Network". :shuffle:
     
  20. FigureSpins

    FigureSpins New Member

    2,062
    200
    0
    The issue isn't about someone stealing their idea - the issue is whether the payment they did receive was enough.

    As for their wealth at the time, they had six lawyers help them get the initial $20m, so they were well-represented. If they were poor, starving college students that brought six lawyers out to play, I'd still feel the same way. However, if the agreement was made without any legal advice, then I'd feel different about their case, but not about their lifestyle.

    The lawyers should have done their due diligence to determine if the share price at the time was accurate. Wouldn't that have uncovered an accurate share price and let them negotiate a better deal at the appropriate time? Hindsight is 20/20. You can't sell your beater car for one price, sign the agreement, then go back and get the buyer to give you more money because it suddenly appreciated in value after the buyer tuned it up, replaced the upholstery and did bodywork. That's not the way it works.

    I can't see any cause for saying they were deceived. I think the ruling was fair.

    As someone else said, they'll probably blow the $20m on lawyers for the appeal.
     
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2011
  21. Beefcake

    Beefcake Guest

    Eys. :grope: All during TSN I was dreaming of being the baloney in a Winklevoss sandwich, then had those dreams shattered :fragile: in an instant when the credits came on ... and I saw that it was just one actor.


    Anyway, like most of you here I believe that the brothers' settlement was fair. Time to let this matter die.
     
  22. emason

    emason Well-Known Member

    3,358
    538
    113
    It's not about hindsight; it's about whether the other side in the case made false and misleading representations in their disclosures.
     
  23. VIETgrlTerifa

    VIETgrlTerifa Well-Known Member

    10,285
    2,203
    113
    And apparently the three-judge panel did not feel that the other side did.
     
  24. hydro

    hydro Well-Known Member

    4,653
    661
    113
    And the language the judges used in their ruling was especially harsh towards the Winklevosses.

    http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2011/04/litigationdailywinklevoss.html
     
  25. CynicElle

    CynicElle Well-Known Member

    2,174
    373
    83
  26. antmanb

    antmanb Well-Known Member

    3,774
    1,703
    113
    Not really, one side put forward a proposed share price and it's up to the other party to accept or reject that price in the mediation. There will undoubtedly have been a lot of negotiation on that point with each side presenting different factors to support the share price. At some point all the parties, their lawyers and accountants/financial advisers reached a price they were all happy with in the mediation.
     
  27. FunnyBut

    FunnyBut Well-Known Member

    4,401
    762
    113
    No, I don't feel sorry for the Winklevii. They're well educated, they had excellent representation , they agreed to the terms of the original settlement. Its not like there was this huge secret that Facebook might become one of the most valuable companies on the planet. If I were them, I'd be thankful Zuckerberg made me a multi-millionaire out of my fledging idea. Whose to say if they held the reigns that Facebook would have ever been more than local college directory, as opposed a behemoth that toppled My Space and all comers?

    I am :lol: at the notion that two All-American Olympians with Abercrombie looks are being portrayed unfairly because of their looks and privilege :drama:
     
  28. Jenny

    Jenny From the Bloc

    17,560
    2,130
    113
    In addition to the settlement, which aside from monetary award also acknowledges that they had a role in the development of one of the most important innovations in recent history, they have also gained fame and recognition (and capital) that should open doors to just about any business venture they'd be interested in going forward.

    Not bad at all.
     
  29. Erin

    Erin Well-Known Member

    5,238
    954
    113
    Thank you! I was very confused by why Tyler had two different people credited as playing him and wasn't sure whether there were two actors or one. It seems like a weird decision to do it that way.

    Me neither, but I hadn't paid much attention to the behind the scenes story of Facebook's development. I couldn't have even told you Mark Zuckerberg's name before The Social Network.
     
  30. Beefcake

    Beefcake Guest

    :shuffle: But, really, nice that he gets the "acting" credit, but the one actor was really just a body double (/ stand-in).