California – Users of his website may worry about what he does with their personal data, and 25 000 disgruntled customers are even trying to sue him about it, but when it comes to his own bedroom, it seems that Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg is rock solid on the issue of privacy.
The 30-year-old billionaire’s apparent determination to stop anyone peering in has emerged as a result of a legal dispute with a former neighbour in Palo Alto, California.
The case centres around Mircea Voskerician, a property developer who bought the house adjoining the Facebook founder’s $7m (£4.6m) mansion – in which Zuckerberg also has an “entertainment pavilion” and a salt-water swimming pool.
In a lawsuit he has launched against Zuckerberg, Voskerician explains how he realised that his idea of building a 9,600-square-foot mansion overlooking Zuckerberg ’s bedroom might displease the social media entrepreneur.
So, Voskerician claims, they came to a neighbourly verbal agreement in December 2012. He would let Zuckerberg buy his property at a discount – and with his privacy assured, Zuckerberg would introduce the developer to his useful “friends, clients and associates”. Zuckerberg and his team, however, insist that there was no such verbal contract. Emails have emerged showing that the Facebook boss only recalled offering to help Voskerician in a “light way”.
According to the news service Bloomberg, Zuckerberg ’s lawyers have cited a November 2012 email in which Voskerician allegedly said that if his neighbour wanted to continue enjoying his mansion, he had “one shot to ensure his privacy is where it needs to be.”
This, the lawyers claim, amounted to “extortive” tactics against Zuckerberg.
The stance has amused some of the 25 000 European social media users – 944 of them British – who 16 days ago were granted an initial hearing date by an Austrian court to pursue their attempted class action against Facebook over alleged privacy violations.
Stifling laughter, Max Schrems, 27, the activist spearheading the class action, said: “Just like everybody else, Zuckerberg has the right to the privacy of his master bedroom. If he could show the same sympathy for everybody else’s right to privacy we could all live happily ever after.”
Zuckerberg did at least get sympathy and “sad face” emoticons from his colleagues. In emails reported by Bloomberg, one adviser called Voskerician’s attempt at a deal an “obscene proposal”. Adding a sad emoticon, a personal assistant wrote: “This type of behaviour makes me want to punch people.”
Zuckerberg has previously defended his site’s privacy record, telling users in July 2013: “We will continue fighting aggressively to keep your information safe and secure.”
If, however, Voskerician wins his breach of contract claim, he might even be able to reclaim his old property next to Zuckerberg .
If that happens, Zuckerberg can perhaps console himself that soon after his initial entanglement with Voskerician he took the precaution of buying three other properties near his mansion – for a combined cost of about $30m (£19.7m).
The Independent