An attorney for Facebook Inc. said she was “unsure” if Mark Zuckerberg signed an agreement which allegedly entitles a New York man to 84 percent of the world’s largest social network.
Paul Ceglia sued Facebook and Zuckerberg in state court June 30, declaring that the April 2003 contract entitles him to ownership of the majority of the company. Ceglia’s attorney produced a copy of the record for U.S. District Judge Richard Arcara today at a hearing in federal court in Buffalo, New York.
Palo Alto, California-based Facebook, which has not stated the alleged contract with Ceglia is really a fake, has “serious questions” about its authenticity, Simpson said.
The case is the most recent challenge to the origins of Facebook, which is worth $24.6 billion, according to SharesPost.com, a marketplace for closely held companies. Facebook’s paternity has been questioned in a suit by several Zuckerberg’s former Harvard University schoolmates, who claimed he utilized code developed on their own ConnectU venture to start Facebook. They settled in 2008.
Today’s hearing was for Arcara to consider a request by Facebook to dissolve a short-term injunction, issued by a state court judge June 30, stopping the company from transferring assets. The parties resolved the problem by agreeing to let the injunction end July 23. Arcara prolonged an order staying the injunction until then, meaning it will have no impact.
The parties, showing up before Arcara for the first time in the case, also supplied brand new details of their clients’ stories in reaction to inquiries from the judge.
“Mr. Zuckerberg did have a contract with Mr. Ceglia,” Simpson said. Zuckerberg, 26, worked for Ceglia as a computer coder, she said.
Facebook claims Ceglia stayed silent in excess of 6 years and his claim is most likely too old to pursue. Furthermore, Ceglia claims his alleged agreement, which describes “The Face Book,” had been signed about 9 months before Facebook was created, the company said in court papers.
Today in court, Ceglia’s attorney, Terrence Connors, produced a copy of the two-page “work for hire” contract that his client said entitles him to own of the social-networking service.
