Hacker News Reader

That is, if his claim has any truth to it and if he doesn't settle out of court, which might be likely to happen considering what is at stake. (cf. previous Facebook lawsuits)

I'm definitely curious about how that kind of things are handled, where a previous contract appears out of nowhere, completely changing how later contracts and investments would have happened.

View on HN

If the previous contract is deemed valid, then the later contracts are usually "breached" and they can sue for damages. This means that the first investors all the way until through the latest investors have contracts signed by Zuckerberg or company executives stating the beneficial ownership. And this ownership is no longer accurate.

Nobody crosses the Russia Mafia....I mean investors.

Could you add a clause in any (subsequent) contracts dealing with this possibility?

If this contract is valid, Zuckerberg would have known about it ever since 2003. If his business associates knew about it, would they have dealt with the situation proactively?

If he chose not to disclose the information, maybe he'll be seen as a danger to the future prosperity of the company?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com