Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction • Hacker News Board

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#151

Post by princeb » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:37 PM UTC

apendleton wrote: post #90

princeb wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what precedent? that if you say something, you stand by the consequences, financial and all? that people take responsibility for what they say is not a new development. new journals are free to start up and take the place of gawker. nothing here stops them from doing so.

I think the precedent OP is concerned about is not about Hogan specifically. Thiel probably doesn't give a shit about Hogan's sex tape. He probably dislikes Gawker for other reasons (maybe general tone or content, or maybe something specific in a particular article by one of Gawker's subproperties; who knows?), but he took advantage of the opportunity the Hogan case provided to eliminate a media outlet. The problem i…

thiel couldn't nail them when they wrote about him. it was in bad taste, but totally defensible. they crossed the line when they posted a private sex tape without consent. if you can defend that, you can defend revenge porn (that is, you can't).

gawker played themselves.

> who's going to want to write anything nasty about Peter Thiel

you can write nasty things about Thiel but remember rule #1: don't play yourself.

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#152

Post by zo1 » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:38 PM UTC

qq66 wrote: post #139

whack wrote: post #54

Libel and slander have no place in a functioning democracy. By building an entire business model around such practices, Gawker is not only spreading disinformation, it is also crowding out more reputable news sources that could have better helped inform the public. The only criticism I can give in this entire tale, is that it shouldn't take a billionaire to sue and win judgement against slanderous publishers. Such re…

One possible solution is the constitutional right to an attorney in civil cases as well as in criminal, but I don't know how you'd protect that against abuse.

Why do you need an attorney at all? Perhaps that is the question we should be asking. Rather than figuring out how to give one to everyone for free, and then protecting it against abuse.

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#153

Post by smt88 » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:38 PM UTC

will_brown wrote: post #125

nostromo wrote: post #18

Gawker may have been terrible, but we should all be a bit concerned at the precedent this sets. It's sort of like defending the free speech of terrible groups like the KKK. We do it because we treasure free speech, not because we support the KKK. I generally have positive feelings about Thiel, but his actions here make me very uneasy. I worry that the aristocracy will now use this method to try and close down unfavor…

>It's sort of like defending the free speech of terrible groups like the KKK. There is a difference between protecting a group from being silenced by the Government and holding a private company liable when they release a sex tape under the pretense of freedom of speech/freedom of the press. >I believe this will have a chilling effect on the media in the US. As well it should...its not exactly a slippery slope: sex t…

> sex tapes don't become newsworthy just because the subject is a celebrity

What if the sex might have been non-consensual (see: Dominique Strauss-Kahn)? What if the sex is between a public official and his employee (see: Bill Clinton)? What if the sex is illegal (see: Eliot Spitzer)?

The fact is that sex can be of interest to the public, which means video of that sex can also be of interest to the public.

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#154

Post by GunboatDiplomat » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:38 PM UTC

benten10 wrote: post #63

Don't anger the Billionaire. He can fund the Lawsuits longer than you can stay solvent.

Except that's not what happened here.

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#155

Post by will_brown » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:38 PM UTC

whack wrote: post #54

Libel and slander have no place in a functioning democracy. By building an entire business model around such practices, Gawker is not only spreading disinformation, it is also crowding out more reputable news sources that could have better helped inform the public. The only criticism I can give in this entire tale, is that it shouldn't take a billionaire to sue and win judgement against slanderous publishers. Such re…

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#156

Post by qq66 » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:38 PM UTC

jshevek wrote: post #67

axlee wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the damage was not worth putting tens (hundreds?) of people out of a job, most of them who had nothing to do with the Hogan fiasco but are still being punished for it, putting their livelihood in jeopardy for the emotional comfort of a billionaire. The people responsible for the piece should have been personally held responsible.

Regarding people losing their jobs - that is a result of the terrible judgement and values of the leadership of Gawker. They are not being 'punished' for anything. Do you think that the people at Ford were 'punished' when the leadership of Ford made bad decisions that cost people their jobs? "emotional comfort of a billionaire" That is very dismissive. Are people worth less to you when they have more money?

> Do you think that the people at Ford were 'punished' when the leadership of Ford made bad decisions that cost people their jobs?

Yes

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#157

Post by hobs » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:39 PM UTC

axlee wrote: post #38

cm2187 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you suggesting the Hogan suit was groundless?

I think the damage was not worth putting tens (hundreds?) of people out of a job, most of them who had nothing to do with the Hogan fiasco but are still being punished for it, putting their livelihood in jeopardy for the emotional comfort of a billionaire. The people responsible for the piece should have been personally held responsible.

That's the breaks when your corporation makes criminal mistakes and it is proven in a court of law, unless you are a bank or financial firm or politician.

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#158

Post by olliej » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:39 PM UTC

FireBeyond wrote: post #116

GrumpyYoungMan wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Precedent this sets"? I think "Don't publish a illegally made video of people in a private moment or ignore court orders to take down the video." to be a rather positive precedent, don't you? That's the sort of chilling effect on media we should all be applauding. Thief merely funded a court battle that had merit (in this case, quite a lot of merit) that Bollea probably could have won on his own. I fail to see what…

Yes, and Gawker had purchased insurance to deal with the ramifications of their actions. Bollea's lawyers, as funded by Thiel, then decided to specifically drop the claim that would allow the damages payout to have been made from insurance. That's fairly vindictive. Especially given Thiel's motive that "they outed me" - come on, Thiel's sexuality was probably the worst kept secret in the Valley. When you pose shirtle…

They did have insurance, and when that became clear the claims were changed so that their insurancr wouldnt cover it.

This is: you hit me with a car, i find out what your insurance covers, and then make sure that your insurance wont cover it.

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#159

Post by broAhmed » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:39 PM UTC

nostromo wrote: post #18

Gawker may have been terrible, but we should all be a bit concerned at the precedent this sets. It's sort of like defending the free speech of terrible groups like the KKK. We do it because we treasure free speech, not because we support the KKK. I generally have positive feelings about Thiel, but his actions here make me very uneasy. I worry that the aristocracy will now use this method to try and close down unfavor…

I'd be more concerned about the precedent it set if Gawker had won.

The publishing of secrets derived from an invasion of privacy is defensible by "free speech" if something of great moral/ethical imperative is gained. Publishing papers that reveal years of lying and misleading the American public about the true extent of the US government's involvement in Vietnam and surrounding countries, aka the Pentagon Papers? Defensible. Publishing a videotape without consent of someone having sex? Gawker can scream "free speech" till they're blue in the face; I think your average person is going to recognize a blatant violation of privacy occurred with little gained.

Look, I get it: free speech = awesome. But I don't think your average person sees free speech as an automatic get-out-of-jail-free card.

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#160

Post by lotso » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 5:39 PM UTC

whack wrote: post #54

Libel and slander have no place in a functioning democracy. By building an entire business model around such practices, Gawker is not only spreading disinformation, it is also crowding out more reputable news sources that could have better helped inform the public. The only criticism I can give in this entire tale, is that it shouldn't take a billionaire to sue and win judgement against slanderous publishers. Such re…

The Hogan lawsuit has nothing to do with libel or slander.