[AustinBGibbons]

Zuckerberg purchased the land from all serious parties, and now his lawyers are doing their due diligence to track down anyone who might own even a "1/3,276" share, and are hardly treating anyone unfairly.

Put down your pitchforks, no one is being driven off their land.

[cromulent]

Indeed. Another article quotes his lawyer as saying "Zuckerberg has no intention of contesting any co-owner who can prove their interest in any of the land parcels."[0]

For some of us though, the historical context of the US invasion and overthrow of Hawaii means that this sounds quite distasteful, although reasonable.

[0] http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/34289685/facebook-ceo-sui...

[nym]

The issue is around compelling people to sell land they don't want to, that has a tradition of belonging to that family.

[smallnamespace]

No, the issue is identifying the owners, at Zuckerberg's own personal expense, most of whom seem to be completely unaware that they are partial owners.

The practical effect is some people get a windfall check in the mail that they weren't expecting at all.

[matt4077]

It's a two-step process. First, they learn about their part ownership of some land, which is probably a nice thing, although one shouldn't mistake it with a gift or winning the lottery or some such. After that, their land is exchanged for money, possibly against their will. That seems very much like any eminent domain case, except for the whole for-the-good-of-the-public aspect.