I uploaded the complaint (only) on Scribd, which includes the contract as an exhibit. It's hard to read (as a poor quality photocopy) but seems superficially credible - that is, there are signatures supposed to be Zuckerberg's on the contract and a receipt for cashed check, which could be checked for authenticity.
As to whether the contract is enforceable or even valid, I have no opinion. I'm having considerable difficulty just reading it and don't know enough about contract law to evaluate it. Even if it is, I imagine Facebook would respond that the suit is equitably estopped by laches (unreasonable delay in enforcement of a claim).
Perhaps grellas might shed some light on the laches issue, but aside from that I think this is legit. First, I notice the response from Facebook was that this is "frivolous" not bogus, which implies to me that Mark did sign that document. Second, from scrutinizing the hardly legible document it appears the claims are accurate, including the 1% ownership transfer to "Purchaser" for every day of delay in project completion after January 1, 2004. Last, the contract timeline does make sense to me. It sounds like a very young college kid in 2003 with his mind on many things, including a hobby project to connect students met a more experienced business man who wanted some street software developed. The business man recognized the value in the hobby project already begun by Mark which he loosely referenced as "The Face Book". The business man then covered himself to be well-positioned legally if this hobby took off. He paid Mark 1K for it (and another 1K for the street software), explaining Mark would still own 50% of "The Face Book" in case it did become more valuable... All hypothetical, but not hard to imagine.
Comments
I uploaded the complaint (only) on Scribd, which includes the contract as an exhibit. It's hard to read (as a poor quality photocopy) but seems superficially credible - that is, there are signatures supposed to be Zuckerberg's on the contract and a receipt for cashed check, which could be checked for authenticity.
As to whether the contract is enforceable or even valid, I have no opinion. I'm having considerable difficulty just reading it and don't know enough about contract law to evaluate it. Even if it is, I imagine Facebook would respond that the suit is equitably estopped by laches (unreasonable delay in enforcement of a claim).
Edit: they do - 2nd link, 2nd last paragraph.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/34239119/Ceglia-v-Zuckerberg-compl... http://www.scribd.com/doc/34240120/Ceglia-v-Facebook-Motion-...
Perhaps grellas might shed some light on the laches issue, but aside from that I think this is legit. First, I notice the response from Facebook was that this is "frivolous" not bogus, which implies to me that Mark did sign that document. Second, from scrutinizing the hardly legible document it appears the claims are accurate, including the 1% ownership transfer to "Purchaser" for every day of delay in project completion after January 1, 2004. Last, the contract timeline does make sense to me. It sounds like a very young college kid in 2003 with his mind on many things, including a hobby project to connect students met a more experienced business man who wanted some street software developed. The business man recognized the value in the hobby project already begun by Mark which he loosely referenced as "The Face Book". The business man then covered himself to be well-positioned legally if this hobby took off. He paid Mark 1K for it (and another 1K for the street software), explaining Mark would still own 50% of "The Face Book" in case it did become more valuable... All hypothetical, but not hard to imagine.