Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 566 posts

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

#201

Post by jonny_eh »

lotso wrote: post #178
rs999gti wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 shirtless on a gay cruise, I think it's fairly safe the rest of the world didn't need Valleywag to tell them of your homosexuality. Does all that evidence matter? Shouldn't it be up to Theil when and where he outs himself instead of blog like Valleywag doing it for him?

> Shouldn't it be up to Theil when and where he outs himself instead of blog like Valleywag doing it for him? Agree, but it isn't illegal.

Apparently posting a sex tape is though.

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

#202

Post by ryanlol »

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #105
ryanlol wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Privately funding a lawsuit for someone else so you can settle a grudge is ethically dubious, at best. Do you feel that revenge in general is ethically dubious or just the lawsuit part?

The justice system in any democracy should be a level playing field in the eyes of the law, not a pay-to-play free for all.

But where does the ethical issue arise?

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

#203

Post by GraemeLion »

mhurron wrote: post #45
cm2187 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you suggesting the Hogan suit was groundless?

The issue I have with it is that money from an external source that had nothing to do with the suit was funnelled in to use it as a weapon. Thiel had an issue with Gawker, Thiel should have taken it to Gawker.

The other side to that argument is, people who are wronged by Gawker need at least a billionaire to be able to get their day in court.

It should concern you that it took money from an outside source to get an alledged wrong by a massive company to litigated in front of a jury. That should be very concerning.

As for Thiel and Gawker, they're both bullies, and bullies beating the shit out of each other is just fine by me.

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

#204

Post by protomyth »

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…

> Gawker may have been terrible, but we should all be a bit concerned at the precedent this sets.

That you have to have serious cash to hold a news site accountable? We are not talking about a charity, Gawker is a multi-million dollar business.

I am glad Thiel did this and I hope it has a chilling effect on the media in the US. They weren't printing news, they were going for titillation that just happened embarrass someone they didn't like. Corruption in political figures, fine, but not this crud.

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

#205

Post by Natsu »

FireBeyond wrote: post #173
sofaofthedamned wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just out of interest - insurance may not have saved them. I have liability insurance etc but it's capped at £2 million. I doubt any corporate insurance plan for Gawker would be uncapped, so they may well have still gone under.

Also a good point, true. But it does put the lie to their claim, under oath, in court, that there was emotional damage suffered and that compensation was sought.

Actually, it could be construed as evidence of real emotional damage. That is, they'd rather see Gawker go under than get more money, because one would make them feel a lot better than the other.

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

#206

Post by cjahsh »

smt88 wrote: post #72
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…

> Libel and slander have no place in a functioning democracy One man's libel/slander is another man's investigate journalism ("muckraking" in the US). In this particular case, Gawker wasn't guilty of either libel or slander because they didn't publish anything about Hogan that was false. > it shouldn't take a billionaire to sue and win judgement against slanderous publishers It's actually much harder to win a libel/s…

Ah yes, society should recognize the positive impacts of investigative journalism. I can hardly see a between the Pentagon Papers and a sex tape!

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

#207

Post by smt88 »

[deleted] wrote: post #69

[deleted]

Thiel was already out of the closet: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michelangelo-signorile/gawker-...

I also think that outing a wealthy, powerful man like Thiel is beneficial to society. It hopefully increases acceptance of homosexuality.

Of all people who are hurt by being outed in a major publication, Thiel is probably near the end of the list, since he was already out among his associates and extremely wealthy.

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

#208

Post by FireBeyond »

nickff wrote: post #194
FireBeyond wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you post a profile picture like that when you are a person of public interest, I think there's a fairly good argument that you -have- outed yourself, at least implicitly.

So you'd like it if Gawker was trolling your feed (and those of your friends and family) for what they feel to be sufficient disclosure to post some gossip clickbait?

If I was a public figure (as most billionaires are classified, by the courts), and posted a picture of me on a public profile page, then I would be entirely disingenuous to say "you have no right to know this!".

Just like in Gawker's case, decisions have consequences. Don't claim your sex life is private and no-one's business (and I have zero interest) whilst posting pictures of yourself on gay cruises.

"Like" it doesn't come into it. I don't have a right to stop people doing what I don't "like".

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

#209

Post by jdminhbg »

olliej wrote: post #137
chatmasta wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have limits on speech when it comes to private information. Should "free speech" allow gawker to publish a private citizen's sex tape? There is no "in the public interest" argument to apply here.

Ues there is - hogan is a public figure who is involved in politics and has repeatedly announced his conservative/be faithful/young-people-have-loose-morals bullshit. Hence cheating on his wife was news, the public should have been informed, and unlike that fappening this wasnt stolen.

I'm not sure why you think reporting that Hogan was cheating is what Gawker was sued for. Plenty of people have done that, with no repercussions.

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

#210

Post by golemotron »

dsabanin wrote: post #133
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…

A lot of questionable things are becoming illegal to publish lately. For example, it's illegal to film what's happening inside a slaughterhouse[1]. Some people are getting into trouble for filming cops[2]. I'm not saying Gawker shouldn't be punished, but legality doesn't imply morality and free press in theory could be helping to review and change the immoral laws. The chilling effect from Gawker bankruptcy will be t…

I expect [1] to be overturned. Courts have pushed back against [2] every time it comes up.
Post reply on HN