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

241–250 of 566 posts

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

#241

Post by wrsh07 »

rs999gti wrote: post #146
FireBeyond wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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?

Two things. Both Gawker and Thiel are in the wrong here.

1) It feels obviously wrong to me to have someone publicly outed like that. [like you say, the evidence doesn't matter]

2) It feels sketchy for a wronged person to retaliate by having a nontrivial player in written media shut down.

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

#242

Post by lujim »

BryantD wrote: post #183
lujim wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well Gawker isn't exactly the Wall Street Journal and they didn't get the bankruptcy treatment for having a differing political opinion or some different viewpoint. They were bullying people and now they are getting bullied.

False equivalency. They bullied Thiel, and made him unhappy. I don't see any evidence that his ability to do business has been affected. Thiel has now made it impossible for Gawker to continue as a company. The effect of the bullying is vastly different.

Who said it has anything to due with equivalency? Go try to bully your boss, or a cop, or a 6'9" meat head. You're free to try, but you might not like the result. Part of life if using your brain to determine what you are free to do vs what makes sense to do.

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

#243

Post by notcotsotrot »

viggity wrote: post #222
olliej wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And engadget and kotaku and most of the other tech related websites you probably read. Also its a good lesson to other sites to police content to ensure no one says anything bad about billionaires. Thank god for thiel protecting us from horrible things like censorship!

they didn't say anything bad about Thiel, the reason he went after them is because they outted him as gay.

Incorrect, that's his sub-excuse. The actual reason is because of Valleywag reporting on e.g. his embarrassing failure of a hedge fund.

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

#244

Post by smt88 »

slg wrote: post #238
smt88 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Does that really change the underlying belief? Whether what Gawker did was libel, an invasion of privacy, or any other crime it boils down to Gawker violating the rights of other individuals and building a business model around that practice. This wasn't some brave investigative journalist exposing corruption, this was a hack posting the sex tape of a celebrity. They aren't even in the same ballpark.

> This wasn't some brave investigative journalist exposing corruption, this was a hack posting the sex tape of a celebrity.

I agree, but the reason Gawker lost is important. It was because they violated someone's privacy.

I strongly support violating the privacy of powerful, public figures in the future if it serves public interest. I agree that Gawker was stupid, greedy, and overreaching here, but I still worry that next time, the sex tape (or whatever it is) will be equally private but much more important to the public.

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

#245

Post by ht85 »

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…

Spinning things as much as you're legally allowed to make as much noise and money as possible is the basis of the whole industry Gawker and Hogan are part of.

There is zero morality in showbiz, it's all dares, counter-dares, lawyers and technicalities.

You fight fire with fire. I don't think it's unfair Gawker lost at their own game. Another one will fill the void anyway.

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

#246

Post by jshevek »

AlexandrB wrote: post #198
fooster wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn't obvious to me at least. It was morally, ethically and legally wrong to publish that video. Now they pay the price.

If they hadn't published the Hogan video, the lawyers funded by Thiel would have found someone else who's been wronged by Gawker and the outcome would be similar. The moral really is don't anger the rich and powerful.

I don't see that. There seems to be a conspiracy theory floating around that Thiel was destined to destroy Gawker even if Gawker did nothing illegal, because "money and lawsuits".

I don't buy it. Courts routinely throw out frivolous suits, sometimes they even punish the people who start them.

Gawker lost because Gawker was wrong.

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

#247

Post by CM30 »

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…

How about the opposite precedent? The idea that if your adversaries don't have money, you can seemingly publish whatever you like (legality and morality be damned) knowing they can't afford to sue you/defeat your large legal team?

The only thing stopping Gawker being crushed before was the fact it had a multi million dollar corporation behind it, and was happy to flat out ignore any complaints they didn't like. Now someone with more money comes along, they get smashed to a pulp and everything somehow changes.

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

#248

Post by valarauca1 »

AlexandrB wrote: post #198
fooster wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn't obvious to me at least. It was morally, ethically and legally wrong to publish that video. Now they pay the price.

If they hadn't published the Hogan video, the lawyers funded by Thiel would have found someone else who's been wronged by Gawker and the outcome would be similar. The moral really is don't anger the rich and powerful.

And if they weren't in violation of the law they wouldn't have to pay and had their court fees refunded by their counter suit.

Yes Thiel has shakey ethics. Gawker violated the law AND ethics. Neither side was good in this case.

If you think court cases are too expensive PERIOD... Then start caring about Tort Reform.

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

#249

Post by anarazel »

smt88 wrote: post #221
cjahsh wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

What if a conservative politician lobbies for adultery being illegal, and then a sex tape emerges of him cheating on his wife? That's important journalism. What if the CEO of a company intimidates an employee into having sex with him and secretly films it, and that gets released? That's also important journalism. There are lots of other ways sex tapes could be newsworthy: a famous person makes racist comments in it (…

But that's not gawkers business, so ... ?

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

#250

Post by deong »

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…

Ironically, unlike Gawker's reporting, your comment actually is libelous.
Post reply on HN