An Indianapolis bankruptcy attorney named Mark Zuckerberg has filed a lawsuit against Meta, claiming the social media company has repeatedly disabled his business and personal Facebook accounts for allegedly impersonating the tech giant’s CEO who shares his name.
Mark Steven Zuckerberg filed the lawsuit in Marion Superior Court in Indianapolis this week, seeking damages after his Facebook pages were suspended multiple times over eight years. The 52-year-old attorney says the suspensions have cost him business opportunities and caused personal harassment.
Facebook has suspended the Indianapolis attorney’s business page five times in eight years and his personal account four times, according to court documents. Despite paying more than $11,000 in advertising fees to promote his law firm, his accounts continue to face removal for alleged impersonation violations.
“It’s not funny. Not when they take my money. I’ve had the name Mark Zuckerberg way longer than he has. I just want them to stop,” the attorney told WTHR in an interview about the legal action.
Indiana’s Zuckerberg has been practicing law for more than 38 years, establishing his career decades before Meta’s founder became a household name. The lawyer began his practice when the Facebook CEO was just three years old, highlighting the chronological precedence of his professional identity.
The lawsuit alleges breach of contract, arguing that Meta improperly removed advertising content that Zuckerberg paid for through the platform. The legal complaint states that Meta operated in breach of contract because he paid the company $11,000 for advertising which was subsequently improperly removed.
Beyond the business disruption, the attorney describes how sharing the billionaire’s name has created chaos in his personal life. He receives approximately 100 friend requests daily, constant technology support calls, and has been subjected to mistaken lawsuits and public harassment.
The situation reached an extreme when fans mobbed him in Las Vegas after a limousine driver held up a sign with his name, mistaking him for the tech mogul. The attorney now uses fake names when booking restaurant reservations to avoid pranks and unwanted attention.
The lawyer’s commercial Facebook page, which he uses to advertise his legal practice and communicate with potential clients, has been disabled five times, according to court filings. Each restoration process takes months, during which he struggles to maintain client communications and business operations.
The repeated account suspensions have resulted in lost business opportunities, as potential clients cannot locate his services through Facebook search. The attorney argues that the platform’s algorithm unfairly targets his legitimate business presence based solely on his name similarity to the Meta CEO.
Meta spokesperson responded to the lawsuit, acknowledging the unusual situation. “We know there’s more than one Mark Zuckerberg in the world, and we are getting to the bottom of this,” the company stated in response to media inquiries about the case.
The legal action highlights broader questions about how social media platforms handle identity verification and account authentication when users share names with prominent public figures. The case could establish precedent for similar naming conflicts on major platforms.
Indiana’s Zuckerberg emphasizes that he would prefer to resolve the matter without litigation. “I’d rather not pick a fight with them, but I don’t know how else to get their attention,” he explained to local media about his decision to pursue legal action.
The attorney seeks monetary damages and legal fees through the lawsuit, though he humorously suggested an alternative settlement. “If [Mark Zuckerberg] let me spend a week on his boat to say he’s sorry, I’d probably take him up on that,” he joked during interviews about the case.
The lawsuit represents an unusual clash between two individuals sharing identical names but vastly different public profiles. The outcome could influence how social media companies handle similar identity conflicts in the future while balancing fraud prevention with legitimate user rights.
The case is pending in Marion Superior Court, with no immediate court dates scheduled for initial hearings on the matter.
