Fb Management Sued by Pension Fund Over Antitrust Woes (1)
Mark Zuckerberg and other senior Facebook Inc. executives were hit by a pension fund lawsuit in Delaware claiming their “buy-over-build ethos” and “long-established culture of respect for Zuckerberg” for the wave of legal troubles blamed who threatened the tech giant.
The 138-page lawsuit, which was filed in the Delaware Chancery Court late Thursday, is based on two antitrust lawsuits alleged against the company in December in parallel cases filed by the Federal Trade Commission and almost every state, Social Having monopolized media.
These suits, and a series of parallel class action lawsuits, claim Facebook exploited user data to identify potential competitive threats it could acquire, copy, or kill.
Andy Stone, a Facebook spokesperson, said the company believes “this case is unfounded and we will vigorously defend ourselves.”
The Delaware complaint filed by the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority is directed against Zuckerberg and other members of the Facebook board of directors and senior management.
They “knowingly implemented the monopoly business model” and “disregarded the essential risks associated with pursuing such anti-competitive efforts,” which violates their duty of loyalty to shareholders, according to the partially edited derivatives lawsuit.
According to the complaint, the company’s “error-prone reputation” has resulted in the “public and advertisers’ trust” in the company being broken.
The lawsuit suspects “the company overpaid its FTC deal by $ 4.9 billion to protect Zuckerberg from significant personal liability” after the agency responded to data breaches resulting from the Cambridge Analytica data collection scandal had imposed their highest fine to date.
This allegation reflects claims made in a Rhode Island Public Employee Pension Fund lawsuit seeking access to the company’s internal files.
The new complaint also cites a sample of allegedly inflated advertising metrics that the same pension fund previously investigated in a different filing process.
Stone, the Facebook spokesman, also referred to the language used in the judge’s ruling on the case, saying there was “no credible basis” for suspicion of misconduct related to the ad statistics.
The lawsuit was originally filed under Siegel on March 15.
Cause of the action: Violation of fiduciary duty.
Relief: Damages, costs, fees, interest, and an arrangement that calls for corporate governance reforms.
Lawyers: SEPTA is represented by Chimicles Schwartz Kriner & Donaldson-Smith LP.
The case is Se. Pa. Transp. Auth. v. Zuckerberg, Del. Ch., No. 2021-0218, complaint not sealed 18.03.21.