One of the paragraphs in this article is mysterious:

> The Journal cited two employees--one who has left Zynga and another that still works with the company--who hired attorneys to reach a settlement that saw them give up some, but not all, of the unvested shares.

Why would a former employee give up shares? Current employees were threatened with firing. But I don't see what hold Zynga has over this person. Why not just keep all the shares?