Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King

Paul Ceglia vs. Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg: Here's the complaint and it's a good read

By | April 12, 2011, 3:48am PDT

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg won a legal victory over Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, who were appealing to increase a $65 million settlement, and now there’s another lawsuit on the horizon. Paul Ceglia now claims he deserves 50 percent of Facebook because he fronted Zuckerberg $1,000 to launch the site while at Harvard.

When Facebook does file for an initial public offering one of the risk factors will read like this: Everyone that has bought Mark Zuckerberg a cup of coffee at Harvard is now suing for a stake in the company.

Ceglia filed an amended complaint (PDF) in a federal court in Buffalo making his case vs. Zuckerberg. The most notable part of the complaint is that Ceglia produces a bevy of emails from 2003 that look legit. If Ceglia was completely making this complaint up he probably has a movie script in him. In any case, Ceglia paid Zuckerberg $1,000 to work on a site called StreetFax.com and another $1,000 to work on The Face Book.

In the emails, Ceglia had Zuckerberg almost agreeing to give away 80 percent of The Face Book. Ceglia had this stipulation that Zuckerberg would owe him 1 percent interest a day for each day the Face Book failed to launch. On Feb. 2, 2004, Zuckerberg wrote to Ceglia:

Paul, I have a rather serious issue to discuss with you, according to our contract I owe you over 30% more of the business in late penalties which would give you over 80% of the company. First I want to say that I think that is completely unfair because I did so much extra work for you on your site that caused those delays in the first place and second I don’t even think it is legal to charge such a huge penalty. Mostly though I just won’t even bother putting the site live if you are going to insist on such a large percentage. I’d like to suggest that you drop the penalty completely and that we officially return to 50/50 ownership.

On Feb. 3, Ceglia responded:

OK fine Mark 50/50 just as long as we start making some money from this thing. I’m looking forward to hearing how it goes but I am so busy right now with a few other projects that my time is very thin .. Let’s get it live and open up the store. Have you had a chance to inquire about getting a merchandizing license? We really will need that soon so we can start bringing in some money, everyone buys t shirts and mugs, especially the parents .. they deserve bragging rights at home with the tuition they have to pay. Also what about putting in something like a Christian corner? I’ve only been to Harvard a few times but the idea of being able to find other Christians online without having to do the un PC thing of asking someone face to face sounds to me like it would have some real value, if only the spiritual kind. :-) and the other thing is links to hotlines, why couldnt (sic) we have the rape crisis hotline, the suicide hotline, drug rehab and so on right there so when someone really needs something they could link over to the site they wanted? Same thing for local pizza and chinese (sic) or whatever, that way it could really be a resource that a person could use.

The two go back and forth and then on Feb. 6 Zuckerberg said he needs creative control.

Now that the sites (sic) live I feel I must take creative control and I just can not risk injuring my sites (sic) reputation by cheapening it with your idea of selling college junk, nor do I wish to spend my time shipping out coffee mugs to rich alumni. The site is cool as it is and I don’t care about making any money on it right now, I just want to see if people will use it. If I had the rest of the money I was owed by you for all that extra work I did I wouldn’t even need to make money at all on this site. That is money I am entitled to and is rightfully mine.

Ceglia goes off:

Mark, all I can think is your parents have handed you everything your entire life and after all this time and energy and MONEY that you think in your head that an Ok way to act is to just say- oh I’ve changed my mind I don’t think it’s cool to make money and that that should be that. Then you have the nerve to suggest that I should pay you more money if I get you right, so that you dont (sic) have to try to make money on the site we’ve built?? It’s one thing to say you don’t want to sell coffee mugs but I don’t see why since the margins are excellent and with minimal effort we could generate some decent revenue for us while keeping the site free to students. It’s one thing to say “I’d like to discuss with you other ways we could produce revenue for the site, like advertising, we could sell ads locally I am sure and to places that already sell alumni stuff (but we will be losing the margins) angel investors are just con men and until we have some decent revenue we aren’t going to get a dime from them without giving up the whole thing and anyway at this point it’s just a freaking harvard (sic) thing. I need to be able to get on the actual site and see where we can place some ads and we need to get some bike couriers to go around promoting the site so we can get some people using it FIRST!

The emails go on. It’s unclear what the legal outcome will be, but for sheer entertainment, the complaint is worth a read.

cegliavszuck

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic.

Disclosure

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan has nothing to disclose. He doesn’t hold investments in the technology companies he covers.

Biography

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic. He was most recently Executive Editor of News and Blogs at ZDNet. Prior to that he was executive news editor at eWeek and news editor at Baseline. He also served as the East Coast news editor and finance editor at CNET News.com. Larry has covered the technology and financial services industry since 1995, publishing articles in WallStreetWeek.com, Inter@ctive Week, The New York Times, and Financial Planning magazine. He's a graduate of the Columbia School of Journalism and the University of Delaware.

For daily updates, follow Larry on Twitter.

78
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Paul Ceglia vs. Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg: Here's the complaint and it's a good read
aygulum 29th Jul
expover microsoft internet working at sites with the
fesbuk - and sohbet odalari - and mynet - mynet sohbet -
turkey the microsoft is a good format is also face -
sohbetci - metin2 pvp -
operiation facebok - twitter
Behaviour of desdek bigger role in these sites sohbet Microsoft A network connection to the game s dada gubve unwanted surprises
metin2 pvp serverlar - pvp indir -
facesohbet -
yonja - and facebok - sex sohbet - sex hikayeleri -
sohbet -
facebook -
fesbuk -
sohbet -
cet -
0 Votes
+ -
Looks Legit
arackal 12th Apr 2011
There's enough smoke there...
Classic - no deal will come from this though if the authenticity of the emails cannot be proven. Without that, it's just words on a paper... happy
0 Votes
+ -
But email can be proved
magallanes Updated - 12th Apr 2011
@phat_andy

If you are not running the email server then it is possible to prove the veracity of the email.

An email send a lot of information concerning of the source and the destination but this information is not visible to the end-user.
In fact, some email client even send your machine name (ex. Desktop_of_JohnDoe) and the local ip.

Even more, Zuck confirmed that he did some sort of pact with Ceglia, so he is somethat screwed.
0 Votes
+ -
but it needs a digital sig
rls_1128 12th Apr 2011
@magallanes It's fairly easy to forge an email. All you have to do is edit the mime heading . . . it can only legally be used if it has been digitally signed, or if there is some other mechanism proving nonrepudiation.
@magallanes : I think they will settle out of court. I think the man deserves at least a 5% stake on the final company, as the mail seem to imply that he acted on good faith, although the contract might be torn to pieces by Facebook lawyers using some kind of uneven unfairness clause.

One last thing might also be the fact that it was only between him and Mark, and not the other angel investors. Since those signed real binding contracts, he is only contractually obliged by his current stock ownership.

Last, but not, least. The emails give you an idea how not even the players knew how big this would finally get.
@magallanes >>

The assumption is that the originals exist in archive at Harvard and/or with Ceglia's provider at the time. Most emails get purged after a few months, so what is on his PC in the local archives can indeed be compromised/edited/forged easily.

I highly doubt Ceglia is going to be able to get the originals from Harvard since he was never a student there.
@rls It's a civil case; all you need is the slightest inclination one way or the other. If the jury is 51% sure the emails are real that's enough for them to render a verdict. It's only criminal where there's a "beyond reasonable doubt" burden of proof. I've spent some time in small claims court and got watch a judge deliver his same pre-court lecture on this subject (complete with using his hands as a balance scale) to try to explain to people how things could easily go one way or the other. He was hoping to convince everyone to settle their cases before trial and actually did get every case to settle except one in the two weeks I was there.

The e-mails read as real to me, and if there's already a partial admission regarding their existence that's probably enough to be over the 50% threshold. I don't think exotic issues regarding how e-mails *could* be forged have much weight in this civil case. I know it wouldn't matter much to me as a juror.
@magallanes

I could in 5 minutes reduce a jury's view of email to the point where they would toss this out. I'm sure Facebook's lawyers have access to many people like me. An unsigned email is irrelevant in court of law as it proves nothing. Of course he could try Judge Judy she doesn't seem to take facts into cosideration.
@phat_andy
Actually, if you discount the emails, it sounds like the guy owns 80% or more.
It looks like the movie "The Social Network" is due for a sequel
0 Votes
+ -
One right after the other
Cnewmaz 12th Apr 2011
Wow... I wonder how many more are waiting in line for their chance at facebook. It almost makes you wonder if they are just lawyer fodder or if we are starting to see a pattern from Mark Zuckerberg.
@Cnewmaz

Zuckerberg admitted in the court that he "stolen" the code years ago but apparently the foul-play with other persons.
@Cnewmaz
I think a little from column A and a lot from column B.
Funny, Looking to make 25 billion on a $1000 investment. Sounds more like the $1000 was to build Ceglia's website more than pay for Facebook anyway and it also sounds like he didn't pay Zuckerberg for his work. This is going to get thrown out. Too hard to prove the legitamacy of these emails. Why wait for 5 years to produce them? I didn't even think the twins deserved what they got. This guy deserves even less.

The legal system needs to force these leeches to see the light. Facebook is not their brain child and they didn't do one scrap of work to make it what it is today.

What I read in those emails it extortion. This guy may actually be in more trouble than we think. Like witnessing a robbery in the course of committing murder and turning the robbers in at the expense of incriminating yourself. Zuckerberg has too much clout and money now.
@chethammer
This lawsuit has been going on for a few years at this point.
@chethammer

Huh? Did you read the emails? Did you read about the Winklevoss case? What extortion?

As far as we can piece together, here's the story. Zuckerberg was hired (and paid) by the Winklevoss's to do some website front end and back end for a concept which the Winklevoss's originated and had been actively developing for (I think) more than a year. There was extensive code written by previous programmers before Zuckerberg entered the scene.

Then, after getting some amount of pay, Zuckerberg took the idea AND a good chunk of the original code (written by other people) and got Ceglia to buy in as a 50/50 partner in a new business which, curiously, was identical to the Winklevoss project and used the same code.

Ceglia, to protect his investment, required that Zuckerberg either produce a working site on time, or (eventually) forfeit his share of the enterprise. Zuckerberg essentially wanted to be paid additional money for his work on their mutual enterprise, despite the fact that Ceglia's investment was not "pay for services" but an investment in an enterprise. When Ceglia generously allowed Zuckerberg to reclaim his "lost" 30% share in the business, Zuckerberg basically complained he wanted to be paid for his extra work.

People who seek investment capital do not complain to investors, "I'm working really hard, so I should be paid more."
@GreatZen : the problem here is basically of binding contracts.

The Winklevoss claim had certain validity, in the fact that they had a working service ("ConnectU") and they filed claim that Zuckerberg had misappropriated IP from them.

In this case, it's just a potential, non-binding agreement, which needs to have legal scrutiny as an unreasonable clause will be shot down on a Discovery session. Ironically, Facebook could counter sue for slander or even racketeering as the supposed contract feels illegal at all lights.
@GreatZen >> EXCEPT...

The project was not Facebook, but StreetFax. The original code the Winklevoss brothers allegedly provided was handed over to Zuckerberg per that contract they originally signed and then sued over. Happens all the time during development...
Sounds like he has a better case then the twins did.
It would be interesting to see if Mark Zuckerberg acknowledges and agrees that these e-mails are for real?
I predict a sudden lapse in memory coming for Zuckerberg...
Also one thing is for sure, Ceglia is a moron. Based on his strategy for Facebook, he'd have turned google into a crappy pay-for-play search engine like ask.com before it even got off the ground.
@matt_salvano
Actually, per his email, it was Zuckerberg who wanted to charge the monthly fee.
@jeverettk >> Nope, it was Ceglia who wanted to charge for everyone except maybe the students at Harvard. He wanted to sell ads and t-shirts and mugs, along with offering a dating service for Christians and all sorts of other crap that had ZERO to do with what Facebook had been created for. I wonder what he ever did with his "StreetFax" concept that he insisted Zuckerberg work on while holding up the initial launch of Facebook.

FB has been around for quite some time, so why wait to sue till now? Guess the wood fuel pellet business is sinking and Ceglia just wants to retire comfortably...
Giving Bill Gate's the idea for Microsoft has very little value. The value is in the 1,000's of decisions and choices, plus LOTS of luck, the Microsofties made over the years. 99% of Internet start-ups failed. Most of the 1% have little value.

1 mis-step made by Zuckerberg could have kept Facebook from any success.

I'm not saying someone shouldn't gain from early ideas that were put in use, but the early idea(s) has very little to do with later great success.
0 Votes
+ -
None of that matters..
daftkey 12th Apr 2011
@Regulator1956 .. if the deal made was 50% of the company for a $1000 investment. All the good ideas and decisions mean nothing as far as ownership of the company goes (hint, how many billion-dollar CEOs own the company they work for?)
@Regulator1956
Yeah, but this issue isn't about the early ideas or decisions. This is about a written contract for purchase of the business and an actual exchange of funds. If it took place, then there's a case.
@jeverettk >>

Except there does not seem to be a written contract here. All Ceglia has produced are printouts of alleged emails guaranteeing him a share. The funds are incidental as they were considered to be for TWO different websites.

Zuckerberg's counter that Ceglia himself was sabotaging the job by insisting he work on the NON-Facebook site could be construed as Ceglia not believing the Facebook site was his main interest. In addition, his suggestions for shopping, hook-ups by religion, etc. read more like a blueprint for Foursquare than for FB.

I also don't buy his allegation that he gave Zuck a lot more money than the original $1000. If you read the whiny content of one of the emails, Ceglia attacked Zuckerberg for having a rich family and had hit a point where he was demanding Zuckerberg create a site (as I said) like Foursquare or maybe even Amazon. He wanted what amounted to another on-line shopping mall and NOT what Facebook was originally launched as.

This is a clear case of Epic FAIL wanting to get paid.
It's obvious that Mark Zuckerberg had a completely different vision from his various partners at the outset. Their face book was for small scale peddling and keeping in touch. This guy for example wanted to sell mugs and memorabilia and Zuckerberg was talking about delayed gratification for a bigger vision.

If one party had a vision for a weekend fair ground in the local community and the other envisioned Disney 24/7 - an more - all over the nation (and now world), does the first's monetary investment trump (not the Donald) the larger vision?
0 Votes
+ -
Yes, it does...
daftkey 12th Apr 2011
@marcusantoniouslee1@... See my post above - the "good idea" may be more valuable, but it says nothing about who has what stake in the company.
I don't think Zuck will dispute the authenticity of the emails. But chethammer's comment about getting 25 billion for a $1000 investment is probably what will sink Ceglia.
@JetJaguar
No, the amounts aren't what would sink him. The only real issue is did he wait too long. For issues that took place in 2004, filing suit in 2011, is pushing the limits of laches isn't it?
@jeverettk

If I had a guess, it would be that he was waiting for more detailed accounting of the worth of Facebook so he didn't get "Winklevossed."

Zuck: Yes, you are totally entitled to 50% of facebook. Here's your check for $100M.
Ceglia: Wait, what? I thought Facebook was worth more than that. I'll need to look at your books to properly valuate your company.
Zuck: No
Ceglia: $500M?
Zuck: Sold.

*Edit: Oh, I see that he claims he waited because he forgot employing Zuckerberg at all. Ostensibly, his new law firm has been digging through his emails for a few months.*
0 Votes
+ -
It just gives the movie more of a documentary feel!
Yeah if Ceglia didn't pay Zuckerberg any of the money he was owed as a part of the agreement, the agreement should be void.
@snoop0x7b
According to the filing, he paid all the money and then some, and Mark's reply emails seem to support that.
@jeverettk >>

Actually, he was paid for additional work on the OTHER site, which Zuckerberg alleged caused the delays on the FB side. Ceglia didn't want to pay for the work on Facebook and kept delaying the launch with demands for both the other site and the constant concept changes he had for Facebook as opposed to Zuckerberg's. Zuckerberg launched a site bearing his vision and NOT that of Ceglia's. IIRC, Streetfax existed for about two minutes and then went under because the concept was seriously kitschy and unimaginative and ANNOYING. It was like an annoying "as seen on TV" ad.
0 Votes
+ -
Give Him Some Money and Move On
jpr75_z Updated - 12th Apr 2011
Give the guy 50 mil and move on. Mark Zuckerberg sounds like another Steve Jobs/Bill Gates in the making. A self-important demanding brat, who doesn't give a crap about anyone else. Frankly, I would tend to side with anyone but Zuckerberg.
@jpr75_z

You are totally right. Bill and Melinda Gates have totally spent a lifetime not giving a crap about anyone else. 100% correct there. What jerks.
0 Votes
+ -
Message has been deleted.
LTV10 Updated - 14th Apr 2011
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
who cares lawnmower man
Will Farrell 13th Apr 2011
@LT10
Whan are you goning to create yours? That's right, trolls like you don't care about others, just hiding under a bridge calling people names, hording their little "fortunes"
As the vultures circle overhead...
While Zuckerberg clearly had some issue, at the end of the day it was his vision and decisions (frequently is opposition to the small scale peddling outlook of such an "investor") that elevated Facebook to its roaring success. These folks had no clue and don't deserve to be rewarded.
@Wayne Reid
Ah, if the guy recognized the vision and funded it, then yeah, he does deserve to be rewarded.
@jeverettk >>

If you read the alleged exchange, Ceglia had a 100% different idea than did Zuckerberg. As I said above, Ceglia was pitching a "get rich quick" marketplace site and Zuckerberg was 100% against it.
0 Votes
+ -
It is not about who had the vision.
Patrick Aupperle 12th Apr 2011
@Wayne Reid It is not about the idea. If you read it, he claims (I will wait and see what the courts decide before taking a side on whether it is true or not) that Zuckerberg agreed to give him 50% of the company for $1000. It really does not matter what the idea is. Seriously, if I go buy facebook stock, should they be able to take it from me claiming that I was not part of the original idea? Of course not, I purchased the share. The contract has nothing to do with the original idea.
What about Al Gore? How much cut does he get? After all, had he never invented the Internet Zuckerberg probably would be selling mugs ... at the University book store. When you succeed people shoot at you. There are starving lawyers who will sue anyone for any reason so long as they can find a willing plaintiff to sign on. There are successful lawyers who will, and do, troll for big money suits. Hot coffee anyone?
@thekencook

Gore never claimed that he invented the internet. He made a claim that he helped foster it from a legislative sense. At worst you can accuse him of clumsily stating it during a live interview. Stop being a meme printer and use your head.

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

As far as the "when you succeed people shoot at you" comment though it is often true though not certain. But what definitely is true is that if someone succeeds by screwing people over left and right and being a general ********* on the path to success then a LOT of people will shoot at them. Which seems to be the case here.
expover microsoft internet working at sites with the
fesbuk - and sohbet odalari - and mynet - mynet sohbet -
turkey the microsoft is a good format is also face -
sohbetci - metin2 pvp -
operiation facebok - twitter
Behaviour of desdek bigger role in these sites sohbet Microsoft A network connection to the game s dada gubve unwanted surprises
metin2 pvp serverlar - pvp indir -
facesohbet -
yonja - and facebok - sex sohbet - sex hikayeleri -
sohbet -
facebook -
fesbuk -
sohbet -
cet -

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix