Feeds

Winklevoss twins are back in Facebook's face

It's not over until the burly 20-fingered gondolier sings

The essential guide to IT transformation

Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss haven't backed away entirely from their epic row with Facebook, despite ending a Supreme Court appeal against an earlier ruling.

The Los Angeles Times reports that the strapping, slightly creepy Olympic rowing twins, alongside biz partner Divya Narendra, are trying to convince a judge to probe whether the world's largest social network "intentionally or inadvertently suppressed evidence".

Earlier this week, the Winklevoss brothers and Narendra decided not to appeal against a ruling upholding their $65m settlement with Facebook, after a long-running dispute with the company's founder Mark Zuckerberg.

But it turns out the fight, dramatically chronicled in the Hollywood flick The Social Network, isn't quite over yet.

In April this year the Winklevoss twins and Narendra lost an appeal against a February 2008 settlement with Facebook, which granted them $20m in cash and $45m in the firm's shares.

It turns out in that same month that the men were planning to ask the Boston federal court to look into their allegations that Facebook and the company's legal team concealed instant messages from them during litigation.

However, the request to examine those claims was put in stasis while the Supreme Court appeal case remained pending. Now that the Winklevoss boys have abandoned that plan, the case in Boston can now proceed.

Facebook lawyers dug out instant messages from Zuckerberg's computer that were later leaked to Silicon Alley Insider in 2010.

"I'm going to fuck them," wrote Zuckerberg in one exchange during his time at Harvard, notes the LA Times.

In another, he said the twins had "made a mistake haha. They asked me to make it for them. So I'm like delaying it so it won't be ready until after the Facebook thing comes out."

The Winklevoss men argue that they wouldn't have agreed to the settlement had they been aware of the IM exchange. As a result, their oars are well and truly poking Zuck again.

Facebook responded coolly to the latest legal spat.

"These are old and baseless allegations that have been considered and rejected previously by the courts," said the company's attorney Neel Chatterjee. ®

The essential guide to IT transformation

More from The Register

next story
GCHQ protesters stick it to British spooks ... by drinking urine
Activists told NOT to snap pics of staff at the concrete doughnut
Britain's housing crisis: What are we going to do about it?
Rent control: Better than bombs at destroying housing
What do you mean, I have to POST a PHYSICAL CHEQUE to get my gun licence?
Stop bitching about firearms fees - we need computerisation
Top beak: UK privacy law may be reconsidered because of social media
Rise of Twitter etc creates 'enormous challenges'
Redmond resists order to hand over overseas email
Court wanted peek as related to US investigation
Ex US cybersecurity czar guilty in child sex abuse website case
Health and Human Services IT security chief headed online to share vile images
NZ Justice Minister scalped as hacker leaks emails
Grab your popcorn: Subterfuge and slur disrupts election run up
prev story

Whitepapers

Endpoint data privacy in the cloud is easier than you think
Innovations in encryption and storage resolve issues of data privacy and key requirements for companies to look for in a solution.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Advanced data protection for your virtualized environments
Find a natural fit for optimizing protection for the often resource-constrained data protection process found in virtual environments.
Boost IT visibility and business value
How building a great service catalog relieves pressure points and demonstrates the value of IT service management.
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.