|
|
|
|
|
|
by PG-13
5920 days ago
|
|
|
First those brothers start working on their Facebook in 2002, get nothing done for 2 years. Go up to Zuckerberg, and say, "hey, you wanna code this thing for us that's like a Myspace but for like colleges and stuff?" He agrees, but then is like "wait, why am I working for these clowns? I'm gonna make my own Facbeook". The brothers then claim the code was really meant for them and later win millions just for knowing Zuckerberg. Now, you claim that because Mark talked about Facebook with you and (gasp) went to your website to look at it, that you somehow deserve credit for Facebook even though, as you admit, your own website didn't have any traction. So if you ever discuss ideas with someone, and they go on to turn that idea into a success, you will then claim credit for their execution. |
|
|
If I came up with the vehicle designs for a new low-mpg hatchback and show it to a few people at Ford and then magically Ford has a car being released that fits my designs to a T then yes I'm fully entitled to compensation for it regardless of my ability to implement it. Someone else is always better posed to implement an idea, if we reinforced that attitude then we wouldn't have anti-monopoly laws and anti-trust cases going.
Copyright doesn't protect ideas, so obviously these two brothers had design documents and other corroborating evidence otherwise a judge would have never heard their case. Obviously the judge thought that beyond a doubt that Zuckerberg's relationship with these two brothers suggests beyond doubt that he took their ideas and plans for implementation to form his own website.
Essentially the judge looked at it like "If Zuckerberg hadn't defrauded these two gentlemen, they would have been the founders of Facebook." This is why they were awarded not only money but a minority stake in the company (I believe they have to go back to court to agree upon how much their stake is worth, which will be their ability to implement vs Zuckerberg's).
When you look at cases like this you have to realise that a million crackpots claim to have come up with the great idea before someone else did. These two brothers likely not only have documents proving it, but their relation to Zuckerberg and the fact they allegedly hired him eliminate the majority of the crackpot criteria. Judge's rarely waste their time on cases like this, so the brothers must have had a really good initial case to begin with to even get the Judge to look.