

Winklevoss twins end legal row with Facebook - cskau
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13886534

======
acangiano
Their reputation has been tarnished. Yes, they got some money out of it, but
it's not like they were exactly poor to begin with. I'm not sure they exit the
ordeal victorious.

~~~
roldon332
They live in a world where Mark was just an employee that stole their idea and
started another company. If only he stayed on as their employee they would own
facebook. They don't understand that you can't have it both ways. You can't
have a badass employee that understands your business and gets a lot done, and
at the same time expect that employee to happily do most of the work while you
supervise and make the profits. If Mark was the kind of person who just wanted
to code and get a paycheck he wouldn't have even been doing a side project. He
would have got decent grades at harvard and then easily got a 100k+ coding job
at a big company working 30 hours a week

~~~
danssig
No, what happened was they hired a tech person to implement their idea and
that person betrayed them. It's not that he just copied their idea for his own
project. Personally I'm not a believer in non-compete clauses. What he
_actually_ did was to slow down their own works so his would release first.
Now _that_ is dirty and immoral. I can't believe all the startup hopefuls on
this site would root for someone who behaves like that. Zuckerberg is the
anti-role model for what we should all aspire to.

~~~
roldon332
Mark is NOT a role model. Millions of people get duped into sharing
information they think will remain private every day. He has screwed over a
lot of people in the process.

'Idea people' that hire 'tech people' don't get it. Lots of people have ideas
for companies. The twins were not the first people to think of creating a
friendster for colleges. They don't get to own 50% of another company because
their company was delayed by a few months.

~~~
danssig
>They don't get to own 50% of another company because their company was
delayed by a few months.

I think they should get Mark's shares. It's not that their company was delayed
a few months, it's that the founder of another company came in and sabotaged
their company long enough to gain critical mass. In fact, I'm surprised what
Mark's did isn't illegal.

------
adrianwaj
If I were the judge I would have reversed prior judgements
(<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2555569>). I'd never do business with
either of those guys.

~~~
danssig
Either of those guys? Do you mean the twins or do you mean "either of those
parties"?

------
ovi256
Looks like they extracted their pound of flesh.

