SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Mark Zuckerberg has had a change of heart concerning lawsuits filed to force native Hawaiians to sell him land within his property:
The Facebook CEO now says he is "reconsidering" a set of lawsuits that he recently filed to compel hundreds of Hawaiians to sell him small plots of land they own that lie within his 700-acre beachfront property on the island of Kauai.
The billionaire's potential about-face came after widespread publicity last week about the suits, which target a dozen plots covering slightly more than 8 acres of land strewn throughout the acreage that Zuckerberg bought for $100 million two years ago. Currently, owners of the lots, which have been in their families for generations, have the rights to travel across Zuckerberg's property. But many of the owners likely are unaware of their ownership interest in the plots.
Last week, Zuckerberg said, "For most of these folks, they will now receive money for something they never even knew they had. No one will be forced off the land." But on Tuesday night, Zuckerberg said, "Based on feedback from the local community, we are reconsidering the quiet title process and discussing how to move forward."
The cause of Zuckerberg's woes is an 1850 law (text) that allows descendants to inherit increasingly fractional amounts of land:
A Center for Excellence in Native Hawaiian Law primer on quiet title and partition law titled "E 'Onipaa i ke Kulaiwi" said using the law to compel land sales has reduced Native Hawaiian landownership: "Partition by sale in particular is highly problematic for the Native Hawaiian community because it severs a family's connection to ancestral land." Zuckerberg, through several companies he controls, filed the lawsuits against a few hundred people — many living and some dead — who inherited or once owned interests in what are known as kuleana lands where ownership is often largely undocumented.
Kuleana lands refers to real estate initially acquired by Hawaii citizens through the Kuleana Act of 1850, which followed the Great Mahele, in which the Hawaiian kingdom began allowing private ownership of land. Often, kuleana lands automatically passed to heirs of the first owner in absence of a will or deed, and then down through subsequent generations of [descendants] who in some cases now own just fractions of an interest in the property without documentation. Hawaii's quiet title law can be used to establish legal title to such land. However, quieting these "noisy" real estate titles is expensive and therefore doesn't happen often unless someone with the financial resources and interest in the property becomes engaged.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by BenJeremy on Friday January 27 2017, @12:45PM
I'm not a fan of his, but this wasn't as big a deal as it was made out to be. First off, the people who own these plots have no idea they actually own them, nobody is living on them, and it basically amounts to a messy situation for anybody buying land in Hawaii.
These "lawsuits" weren't going to cost anybody but Zuckerberg money, and would likely have made a dozen or so people quite a bit of money they otherwise didn't know they could get - for parcels of property that are probably worthless otherwise without access to public infrastructure (Zuckerberg would have to provide access to the property through easement, but the utilities were under no obligation to provide anything at all - and likely would not, considering the isolation of the plots).
I know "lawsuit" is a terrible word, but in this case, it's a step to clean up the title issues related to his purchase. He's not trying to rip anybody off. The plots in question are effectively useless to their owners, who have no idea they own them. Filing the lawsuits is the only legal way they can discover the actual owners to reach them and come to an agreement... and chances are, they'll get far more for those plots now, with Zuckerberg, than they will in the future.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Rosco P. Coltrane on Friday January 27 2017, @12:53PM
Yeees... The native Americans didn't know the land belonged to them either. Powerful unprincipled fucks felt the need to "clarify the situation" too back then.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by BenJeremy on Friday January 27 2017, @02:09PM
As a native American, I do have a right to comment on such matters.
I stand by what I posted. Zuckerberg might be an asshole, but even assholes deserve equal treatment under the LAW. If he was acting outside of the LAW, by all means, crucify the guy. He didn't get his 700 acres by killing and raping natives. He bought it from somebody, and those people bought their land from somebody else. A bunch of natives got money to sell that land, so I'm not going to get too upset for them.
Some complain he's not doing things "the Hawaiian way" and has burned off the native's good will to the point that they no longer will cooperate with them - well, whatever. I guess that only leaves him with his legal options, so stop complaining.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 27 2017, @03:47PM
Equal treatment for the powerful under the law written by the powerful for the powerful is a cop-out defense of power.
No one is putting a gun to his head here.
Social pressure is also a part of living in a society no matter how much ayn randroids would prefer it was not. Zuckerberg is learning that the hard way.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 27 2017, @12:59PM
> I know "lawsuit" is a terrible word, but in this case, it's a step to clean up the title issues related to his purchase. He's not trying to rip anybody off.
Land in Hawaii works differently than most of the rest of the US, this law is one example. But others like leasehold versus freehold are major differences too. He came into it and decided to behave like people on the mainland. That did not sit well because, frankly, locals have had way more than enough of that from other outsiders. His building that wall used up whatever goodwill he might have had. Instead of trying to adapt to the hawaiian way of life, he's been trying to adapt hawaii to his way of life. No matter where you live, that doesn't go over well with the neighbors.
(Score: 1) by J_Darnley on Friday January 27 2017, @03:13PM
I don't care whether anyone would lose money or land in the case. I don't care who is right. I don't care about the word lawsuit. I just love the ammunition it gives people against the progressive icon Mark Zuckerberg, even ammo for other progressives.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 27 2017, @03:50PM
Pure virtue signaling. Completely unsurprising.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 27 2017, @05:51PM
Yup, damn SJWs never stop huh? Oh, I forgot to mention, in this case it stands for Stupid Justice Warrior.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 27 2017, @05:56PM
ahhh, should I have posted a trigger warning for you?