It’s pretty hard to feel sympathy for anyone involved in the Winkelvoss-Facebook ongoing drama, since all parties involved can pretty much go dive into a swimming pool filled with money at any time they find the proceedings to be too stressful.
If you’re not familiar, the Winklevoss twins have been protesting since Facebook hit it big that they’re entitled to a portion of the lucrative social network’s profits because… well, their case kind of ends there. They knew Mark Zuckerberg in college or something. Actually, they say they helped invent Facebook, perhaps. Anyway, they got $65 million dollars for talking about Facebook for a few months in college, but they’ve been suing Facebook ever since, because the $65m wasn’t enough. A judge even handed down an official “stop whining” order not too long ago, but the Winklevoss will not be silenced.
Given their litigious inclinations, the Winklevoss twins should not be too surprised that a dude they vaguely associated with six years ago in turn wants a cut of their Facebook cut. A judge has decided the suit against the suit-happy brothers can move ahead:
Superior Court Judge Peter Lauriat in Boston on April 28 denied the Winklevoss twins’ motion to dismiss the case, ruling that Chang’s prior relationship with the twins gives him standing to seek a share of the settlement proceeds in proportion to his ownership interest in ConnectU as determined by a fact-finder.
“We’re pleased with the court’s ruling,” Alan Rose Jr., an attorney for Chang, said today in a phone interview. “The value of Mr. Chang’s claims are completely intact, and that’s what we care most about.”
Chang is seeking half of any settlement proceeds with Facebook, Rose said.
When Chang gets his day in court, the suit will argue “alleged breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, breach of partnership and breach of fiduciary duty.” Do you think the Winklevosses should get to keep all of their already-too-small settlement?