4 ms·
I remember seeing these emails when this story broke. IAAL, and it looked to me like this is a colorable claim (without predicting its eventual outcome). It w
by sunchild 16y ago
I remember seeing these emails when this story broke. IAAL, and it looked to me like this is a colorable claim (without predicting its eventual outcome). It was weird to me that journalists and tech commentators dismissed it so readily at that time.
- msh 16y agoIts really easy to fake some emails, and it seems wierd to wait seven years to come forward with the claim. In addition the person isn't exactly the most trustworthy.
- webwright 16y agoSeems pretty dismiss-able to me... 1) The guy said it took so long for him to come forward because he "forgot" about the contract/emails. 2) Selling 50% of the company for $2k seems like an odd move... I don't know my facebook history perfectly, but didn't Zuck have a business partner with a lot of money already? 3) The guy has a history of fraud convictions.
- sunchild 16y agoDoesn't change the fact that it's a colorable claim. It doesn't look to me like any of the defenses you list would lead to summary judgment based on the facts.
- mattdeboard 16y agoBeing convicted of a felony does not make you forever an untrustworthy lout, nor a compulsive, criminal liar. It means you committed a crime once and were prosecuted for it.
- afterburner 16y agoIf the conviction is for fraud, and it seems like the current case might be fraud, then it's a little more relevant.
- webwright 16y agoThat's what we call a "straw man argument"-- I never claimed otherwise. I offered it up as a data point (among several) that caused people to dismiss the claim. Statistically speaking, I imagine people who've been convicted of fraud are liklier to commit fraud than those who haven't been.
- mattdeboard 16y agoPast performance does not indicate future performance in statistics.
- alxv 16y agoUh, what!?