If you read the complete story, **Summers is not calling them assholes for wearing suits. ** He called them assholes for being a couple of assholes, and, again, this is not an opinion that is at all unqiue to Larry Summers. The suit line is just a part of the narrative.
that doesn’t mean Larry Summers isn’t ALSO an asshole, but there is in fact considerable evidence Summers is an asshole totally apart from his interaction with the Winklevoss twins.
Yeah, Larry Summers calling someone an asshole is like The Situation calling someone a douchebag.
I must say that when I saw the movie, I did not come away feeling that the Winkelvi were justified in their lawsuit. Despite the fact that they were presented as basically a nice guys, it was clear that their ‘idea’ amounted to very little, and that, unlike Zuckerberg, they did no real work on the project, and took no risks.
On the other hand, I thought movie-Zuckerberg acted as a total asshole towards Eduardo, the only person who had supported him from the beginning. Of course this may not be true to life either, but, just going by the movie, I am totally OK with what Zuckerberg did to the Winkelvi (indeed, I do not think they they deserved the huge damages they got - I’m not convinced they deserved any damages at all), but I am not at all OK with what he tried to do to Eduardo.
Although the law makes fewer distinctions, real people don’t view intellectual property the same way as actual property.
But it still doesn’t mean it’s not true.
I think people are largely missing the point of the Winkelvi’s complaint, and the reason Facebook setteled with them. It wasn’t that they had the “idea” for Facebook first. Stealing an idea isn’t illegal or actionable.
Their complaint, which I think is valid, is that Zuckerberg defrauded them out of developing their idea until his own product was on the market. They hired him to do a job, he lied to them saying he was doing it, and then used the time it took them to figure out he was lying to develop the same concept for his own company, because he realized that the most important thing was to be the first out with the product. They also claim he stole some of the code they’d already developed for their site and gave him to work with and used it in Facebook.
Dunno if they’re jerks or not, but the Winkelvi definitely deserved their settlement.
But as to the crux of the OP, people may not be OK with Zuckerberg at some level, but that doesn’t matter to them very much. Contrastingly, people like using FB and that matters to them quite a lot. So not being OK with Zuckerberg doesn’t show.
I’m not ok with it, assuming the accusations are true, but I don’t know if they are. It’s not the legalities of it, or that I care about the Twinkletoe twins. If the allegations are true, it’s dishonest, and encourages immoral behavior in business. Guys like Suckerburger are considered heroes among the robber barons, who assume the allegations are true. They would lose respect for him if they weren’t.
In the book, Eduardo (who was a major contributor to the narrative) made it clear that he really did blow off Mark during that Summer. And that if they had just been business partners, he wouldn’t have been surprised when he was “fired.” He also refused to come to California even after he quit his internship after repeated requests from Mark (this part is in the movie).
The Winkelvi got their settlement because they had a working relationship with Zuckerberg, but they never had a “contract.” Which is why, in all their subsequent attempts to get more money from Zuckerberg, they’ve been denied. A judge even told them they had to stop suing Zuckerberg back in the Spring.
The point wasn’t really Zuckerberg blowing off the work he’d said he would do because he was busy or lazy or whatever. That would just make him a crummy employee, hardly a unique sin amongst college students, and wouldn’t really be a big deal contract or no. The point is that he consciously sabotaged the Winkelvi’s efforts to develop their own site by lying to them about the work he was doing. Had he just broken his agreement to work on the site and told the twins to go f**k themselves, they presumably would’ve found another person to develop the site and that would’ve been the end of it. Zuckerberg could’ve tried to beat them by being faster at coding, and whoever was faster would’ve been first on the scene.
But instead Zuckerberg kept telling them that he was working on their site in order to prevent them from perusing the project on their own. By the time they realized what was up, Facebook was already a done thing, and there wasn’t really room for two Harvard exclusive social networking sites.
That was a decision on what complaints the Facebook settlement covered, it didn’t really have anything to do with the merits of theWinkelvi complaints one way or another.
We have no problem with what Zuckerberg did while launching FaceBook because it does not affect us, the users. If his shenanigans took money out of our pockets (instead of just possibly cheating some other rich persons) then we would see a groundswell of outrage. Otherwise, none of us care because it does not harm us.
Businesses in America The Beautiful are always built on breaking the backs of other people. If we had to boycott facebook for what they did, imagine what we’d have to do to companies like Microsoft, Apple, Nintendo, Walmart, etc… whatever wrong Zuckerberg has committed pales in comparison to most billion-dollar companies.
This is the part that’s in dispute actually. Zuckerberg claims that he told the Winklevi that their idea wasn’t fleshed out enough and blew them off because they kept coming back to him looking for more work even though they never had a contract with him and never paid him. Meanwhile, the Winklevi claim that Zuckerberg’s non-employment somehow prevented them hiring another programmer (a big part of the book and movie is that they’re having trouble finding someone willing to work on their project) and that he stole code from their site.
Maybe I just loves me some Facebook, but Zuckerberg’s story sounds a lot more plausible.
Zuckerberg’s claim doesn’t make any sense. Here’s a timeline of emails sent between the two from wikipedia:
I can’t really see how you can square those emails with the claim that Zuckerberg blew the brothers off, he tells them several times he’s making progress on the project. He was obviously trying to make them believe that he was writing their code for them.
I like Facebook to, and at the end of the day don’t really care that its founder screwed over some people a decade ago. But the story is interesting, and I do think his claim is pretty transparently a lie, and that he did in fact screw the twins over.
The Winklevi did not pay him and never formally added him as a partner to their site. With such a lack of commitment, I’d put priority on my own projects as well.
No doubt, but again, the issue isn’t that he didn’t do the work they asked him to, its that he lied to them about what was getting done so that he could develop his own project without being worried they would beat him to it.
Had he really blown them off, it wouldn’t be an issue, but he kept telling them he was “almost complete” so that they didn’t go hire someone else.
According to your Wikipedia link, the Winklevi handed their site to Zuckerberg in an “almost complete” state. The fact that their unpaid, flaky programmer was able to string them along for a few months and they never went looking for another programmer says more about them than him.
The email traffic doesn’t make Zuckerberg look good, especially since he didn’t deliver anything to them at the end. If he had said, “Here’s the code I told you I had produced for HarvardConnection, don’t talk to me ever again, and by the way I also made a competing site in the meanwhile,” then he’d still be kind of a dick but at least not a liar. As it was, he basically lied to them for 2 months, saying he was producing things that he wasn’t.
Now, I have my own opinion of what a 2 month delay is worth, and it’s vastly different from what the twins have sought and continue to seek, but I’m not writing the checks, so whatever.
:: cough ::
I’m a real person, and I view intellectual property theft as, well, theft. I’m just not sure that what MZ did rises to that level, as I don’t trust any Hollywood movie to relate the truth of any matter other than the color of the sky.
I think the two months were pretty signifigant. I doubt there was a niche for two Harvard exclusive social networks, and the nature of social networks is that the first one there has a significant advantage, even if newcomers offer a better product. After all, once all your friends are using one product, your tied to it unless you all decide to switch at once.
Plus, whether they were important or not, its pretty obvious that MZ thought the two months were important, since he bothered to snowball the Twins instead of just telling them to go find someone else.
Thats why I find the story interesting, because MZ main innovation wasn’t really anything to do with social networking, it was blocking his competitors to make sure that he was the first one to implement the idea.
I don’t think there’s any issue of IP theft. So far as I know, the twins never claimed to have copywrited or patented anything.