craigslist blog

Although our response to each of Ebay’s unfounded claims will have to wait, it’s worth pointing out that Ebay is suing us for implementing protections for craigslist that it clearly believes are perfectly appropriate for protecting itself, for example:

1. Ebay is suing us for implementing a shareholder rights agreement, which it has called a “poison pill”. Here is a 2004 filing by Ebay regarding an increase in authorized shares, which it reserves the right to use for the purpose of implementing a poison pill:

http://sec.edgar-online.com/2004/05/17/0000950134-04-007721/Section9.asp

2. Ebay is suing us for offering each of our shareholders the opportunity to exchange their shares for an incrementally larger number of shares bound by a “right of first refusal” agreement, whereby shares must be offered to craigslist on the same terms offered to any other potential acquirer. It had previously insisted that craigslist shareholders be bound by a right of refusal agreement, and has from time to time bound shareholders of Ebay and its various subsidiaries by right of first refusal agreements.

3. Ebay is suing craigslist for implementing an indemnification agreement, which calls for craigslist to pay legal fees for craigslist directors and officers should they be sued individually in the course of their duties. Here is a 1998 filing by Ebay regarding a similar indemnification agreement for its own directors and officers;

http://www.secinfo.com/dut49.71xp.7.htm#1stPage

4. Ebay is suing us for implementing staggered board elections. Here is a 1999 filing by Ebay indicating that Ebay itself is no stranger to staggered board elections:

http://sec.edgar-online.com/1999/04/20/16/0001012870-99-001210/Section5.asp