by Mike Masnick
Fri, May 27th 2011 4:02am
Back in April, when Paul Ceglia refiled his lawsuit claiming to have a contract which gave him a huge chunk (up to 84%) of Facebook, some people pointed out that the refiled lawsuit sounded a lot more credible. There was additional email evidence and (mainly) the fact that a huge, extremely reputable law firm had taken on Ceglia as a client -- something they likely wouldn't do if they thought the whole thing was faked. However, Facebook is sticking to its claim that the whole thing is an elaborate fraud by "an inveterate scam artist whose misconduct extends across decades and borders." The response claims that the evidence was doctored or fabricated. It seems like this case is going to end up being a lot more interesting to watch than the Winklevii case. Someone alert Aaron Sorkin to the sequel possibilities...
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- As India Goes After Google, A Simple Question: Do You Really Want Governments Deciding Search Results?
- Moral Panics And How 'The Kids These Days' Adapt: From Facebook 'Permanence' To Snapchat's 'Impermanence'
- Windows 10 Reserves The Right To Block Pirated Games And 'Unauthorized' Hardware
- India's New Net Neutrality Guidelines Suggest Facebook's Internet.org Is Just Glorified Collusion
- Pride Toronto Seeking To Trademark Names Of 2 LGBT Marches, Claims It's Doing So Defensively