Everyone owns Facebook except Mark Zuckerberg

[Sulkdodds]

Hot on the heels of Ivy league clone-sporting stars The Winklevii and their tragic failure to grab any more than $65m from the man who robbed them of Harvard Connection, a convicted wood-chip felon named Paul Ceglia now claims he owns 50% or possibly 84% of what used to be called 'thefacebook.com'. Ceglia tried this on last year and was thrown out of court, but he's returned with a stronger case and the backing of prestigious law firm DLA Piper. If you can't be bothered with all that text, the Taiwanese Ministry of Information has released this helpful video.

Remember Paul Ceglia? He's the fellow in upstate New York who sued Mark Zuckerberg last July, claiming that, way back in 2003, Zuckerberg had agreed to give him a 50% ownership in the project that became Facebook. That claim seemed preposterous at the time, not least because Ceglia had waited 7 years to file it.

When the lawsuit and the purported contract came to light, Facebook dismissed the whole thing as a fabrication. And given the time that had passed, Ceglia's fraud conviction, and the lack of a payment trail for payments made to fund the development of "the face book" (as opposed to StreetFax), this indeed seemed the most logical explanation. But now Paul Ceglia has refiled his lawsuit. With a much larger law firm. And a lot more evidence. And the new evidence is startling.

I really feel for Mark Zuckerberg. Just as he thinks he's seen off the lawsuits, another one appears. Every man and his dog seems eager to crawl out of the wood(chip)work and stake a claim. So I want to make it easy for the poor shiny-faced entrepreneur. Let's air all our dirty washing right here.

If you think you should have a stake in Facebook, or a claim to a share of its profits, use this thread to say so.

You must provide reasons for your claim and specify what you would like to receive from Zuckerberg as damages. Let's keep this orderly.

 

[15357]

I've never used Facebook, nor even gone on its site, but I think it's pretty clear that it should be a common resource in regards to the nature of the services it provides, whatever that may be, and the fact that a huge proportion of the world utilizes it without cost makes it clear that it should be regarded as commonly owned property.

Therefore I stake a claim to 1/6billionth of whatever assets that Facebook has.

 

[Remus]

and the fact that a huge proportion of the world utilizes it without cost makes it clear that it should be regarded as commonly owned property.

That's a good point, sooo... I stake a claim for 80% of Google.

 

[15357]

Well, it was KESPA's (Korean Electronic Sports Players' Association) that said the same thing for Starcraft, so that they wouldn't need a license to use it.

 

[ríomhaire]

Well once, I was on the internet and someone posted something I liked and I was all like "I like this."

 

[Escaep]

Must be hard being a billionaire in your twenties.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Yeah. Real hard. Maybe we should make things a little easier for him.

 

[Mr Stabby]

Sounds like communism to me.

If we all have a share in it, do we all have to spend time doing server maintenance, I've done server maintenance before it is ****ing tedious. Or is it a something for nothing kind of sharing?

 

[Bad^Hat]

I own the intellectual property rights to Facebook on a conceptual level. Look I'll prove it.

Chortle chortle har har.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

Must be hard being a billionaire in your twenties.

despite the sarcasm, and Sulk's post - I really don't envy MZ, his life probably isn't a very happy one.

 

[Mogi67]

imagine the pressure...being a billionaire, wiping your ass with 20 dollar bills, having Trent Reznor write a soundtrack for a movie about your life. Gaddamn

 

[Krynn72]

I was part of the development team for a game released on Facebook. Facebook didn't pay us anything, and the effort resulted in essentially a investment into the company. As an investor, I am entitled to my 1.3 billion dollar share.

 

[Mogi67]

I don't know if I could live with myself if I introduced facebook to the world. All that wasted time, expansion of superficial relationships, the leading of the paranoid and obsessive into new levels of neuroticism. Plus he's got a lot of acne

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

Except facebook has fostered and maintained plenty of healthy relationships and actually is a valid and satisfying way to communicate with various peer groups, particularly those which you are no longer able to physically contact. It really is a viable and incredible 'communication tool' of nearly telephone proportions.

Bell was a company, you know

don't forget how communication and capitalism evolve, and how history has a funny way of repeating itself

...and though this may be a non-sequitur: it doesn't take a culturally savvy mind to understand that wealth doesn't necessarily concoct happiness, just as poverty doesn't necessarily beget sadness

 

[Mogi67]

Except facebook has fostered and maintained plenty of healthy relationships and actually is a valid and satisfying way to communicate with various peer groups, particularly those which you are no longer able to physically contact. It really is a viable and incredible 'communication tool' of nearly telephone proportions.

Bell was a company, you know

It also fosters self-promotion and narcissism. Facebook generally consists of people posting self-important statuses so that others can shower them with attention. Everyone's lives are perfect. Everyone tells stories of how rainbows end in their house and bunnies shit skittles all over their yard. Then, if you so happen to know any of them in real life, you know about the real deal. There's pregnant 13 year old daughter on meth, the spouse who gave them chlamydia, the husband who beats the shit out of them. All they talk about is what they bought, how their TV is bigger than yours, their car newer or more badass, gossiping about their neighbors or "friends", how they claim they have it so together, but act like a total scumbag. It's all self promotion and it's all ****in phony.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

Welcome to communication and self representation under capitalism

the irony of your post is staggering

What do you think of the identity you've forged, fabricated and consciously fine-tuned on countless occasions, even here on halflife2.net? This is just how humans behave. You won't win this "debate".

The first claims by alarmists when a new communication medium arrives are that they present a new mechanism, a threat, one that is usually birthed from illiteracy and inability to operate within that very medium (fear), the apparent decline of "realness" - an imaginary dichotomy between "real" and "fake" "behavior" when in reality even while we are alone, we are practicing for socialization - we are forging an us we believe to be presentable. Conversation presents this same threat.

Remember the stigma about cell phones, about texting?

This very forum is a theater, let's see how you respond to my projected anonymous narcissism with your own. Two characters twined in a world just as "superficial" as you claim Facebook to be, also "owned" by companies.

It's signally easy to fear something like a new massively popular communication medium, to avoid it and stigmatize it. To learn that same 'something' is difficult - downright impossible but infinitely more rewarding.

 

[Sulkdodds]

I think that new forms of communication really can change the way we communicate, so I wouldn't dismiss or suppress Facebook's impact. But I broadly agree that social media is just socialising by other means - which means it carries and perhaps intensifies problems that are already inherent in all identity and all communication.

For every narcissist it enables it has connected two old friends. In our busy lives it is now so much easier to just arrange and negotiate the arrangement of a social occasion. Plus, it's really nice to have a slowed-down, semi-persistent medium of communication which all my RL friends are engaged in - I've always thought I'd love for all my RL friends to have a forum like this one, but that would be difficult to organise, and Facebook presents something similar.

 

[Mogi67]

Welcome to communication and self representation under capitalism

the irony of your post is staggering

What do you think of the identity you've forged, fabricated and consciously fine-tuned on countless occasions, even here on halflife2.net? This is just how humans behave. You won't win this "debate".

The first claims by alarmists when a new communication medium arrives are that they present a new mechanism, a threat, one that is usually birthed from illiteracy and inability to operate within that very medium (fear), the apparent decline of "realness" - an imaginary dichotomy between "real" and "fake" "behavior" when in reality even while we are alone, we are practicing for socialization - we are forging an us we believe to be presentable. Conversation presents this same threat.
.

Which is why I'll likely never post here again, or on any other forum. Is there any such thing authenticity then?

 

[Yuri]

It also fosters self-promotion and narcissism. Facebook generally consists of people posting self-important statuses so that others can shower them with attention. Everyone's lives are perfect. Everyone tells stories of how rainbows end in their house and bunnies shit skittles all over their yard. Then, if you so happen to know any of them in real life, you know about the real deal. There's pregnant 13 year old daughter on meth, the spouse who gave them chlamydia, the husband who beats the shit out of them. All they talk about is what they bought, how their TV is bigger than yours, their car newer or more badass, gossiping about their neighbors or "friends", how they claim they have it so together, but act like a total scumbag. It's all self promotion and it's all ****in phony.

mogi, you're a ****ing [strike]idiot[/strike] guy that has different opinions from me so i am pointing it out to you

seriously, to dismiss people's interactions on facebook due to some twisted simplified personal distaste for the site is absolutely [strike]moronic[/strike] insensitive, think of the children!

 

[Sulkdodds]

Yuri, I feel a satisfying sense of righteous justice in warning you not to make posts that by being both empty and rude do little but combine the worst aspects of spam and abuse.

EDIT: Marginally better, perp. :frown: I've got my eye on you.

 

[Yuri]

yeah i realized and added some backup there, apologies.

now where's my 1 billionth of facebook, dammit

 

[CptStern]

so very very very surly


Mogi67, what you describe is not exclusive to facebook or online behaviour. why else would people answer "fine" when asked "how are you doing" 99% of the time? people want to project to the rest of the world that they're happy or successful or whatever. no one likes a sourpuss or a negative nelly. people who are consistantly honest to a fault will find themselves ignored or shunned outright. no one's interested in your/the next guy's problems unless you have emotional stake in them so if you answer "well not so good lately because ..." when asked "how are you" most of the time people dont want to know

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

So, um

"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

 

[samusaran253]

Must be hard being a billionaire in your twenties.

I lol'd