Scams and fraud involving the cryptocurrency industry have prevailed since its inception. The sheer magnitude of some operations left some investigators in the lurch, with many cases left unsolved.
At the latest turn of events, a High Court judge asked Facebook and Wissam Al Mana to resolve their differences in a friendly manner. This was done in connection with a dispute that saw fake advertisements being hosted by Facebook about the billionaire businessman.
The advertisement included a fabricated news article linking Al Mana to a cryptocurrency auto-trading program called the Bitcoin trader. The Qatari national explicitly stated that he had no connection with the company and that Mark Zuckerberg was responsible for this issue. On Facebook’s part, the social media bigwig took down the ad after complaints were filed by Al Mana’s attorneys.
According to the registered complaints, Al Mana was worried that his name might be used again in such malicious projects. The billionaire revealed that he wants to sue Facebook Ireland Ltd for the damages caused to him. Ireland serves as the headquarters for Facebook Europe and no comments have been made available from them. Al Mana and his lawyers want to take the company to court for malicious falsehood and defamation.
The billionaire and his lawyers were on a mission to find out who were the miscreants who uploaded the fake advert on the website. Al Mana’s attorneys were planning to obtain the “Norwich Pharmacal order” from the court so that they could trace back the original perpetrators. This particular court order is used for the disclosure of documents or information that is available in the United Kingdom.
The Qatari national and his team want Facebook to disclose details about the culprits who were responsible for linking Al Mana to Bitcoin Trader. The details included names, addresses, emails, and phone numbers as well as the IP address of those responsible. Al Mana’s lawyers said that discussions were still ongoing and that a solution can be drawn by May.
Court officials have said that there is an urgency to the situation because of the rules related to a defamation case. In such a scenario, those behind the crime must be brought to court 12 months within the publication period. The judge presiding the case was Ms Justice Reynolds, who asked both parties to come up with an amicable solution.
