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

Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 105 posts

Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict

#51

Post by wmf »

takeda wrote: post #28
stale2002 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gawker was guilty of illegally publishing a recorded sex tape. If I did this to someone I would go to jail. If Gawker didn't want to go bankrupt, then maybe it shouldn't have illegally recorded and published a sex tape. This is NOT just "poor taste shock journalism". Just like how setting up a hidden camera in a girl's high school locker room wouldn't just be "in poor taste".

I think the problem is that this amount of money will bankrupt gawker so technically is equal to capital punishment for the company?

Gawker will continue to exist, although the bankruptcy will wipe out the original owners.

Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict

#52

Post by cocotino »

gohrt wrote: post #26
redthrowaway wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's amazing to see how the left latched onto this as a "billionaire buys lawsuit" narrative, as opposed to the much more accurate "shitty darling of the left that habitually engaged in abuse got its comeuppance" narrative. Gawker repeatedly, knowingly, unabashedly, broke the law. They repeatedly, knowingly, unabashedly, tried to ruin innocent people's lives. They absolutely deserve everything that happened to them a…

Is this some sort of gamergate leakage, that makes Gawker "left" because they are united with Kotaku, who gamergate hates, and social-justice fighers hate gamergate, and social-justic fighters are "left", so Gawker is "left"?

Gawker defends progressive ideas and bashes conservative ideas.

Of course in a world where you can get kicked out of your job as a CEO of Mozilla for defending the traditional family, it may look like there's no other option.

Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict

#53

Post by vithlani »

serge2k wrote: post #9
vonklaus wrote: post #7

How in the world did the court come up with a $140M sum for the settlement? This seems so excessive, it is actually comical. Obviously, everyone has beleaguered this point, but I feel obligated to state it one more time: Scumbaggery and poor taste shock journalism are pretty shitty, but fuck Peter Theil if he thinks setting a precedent like this is net good for anything other than his petty vendetta. edit: Yes, Gawke…

> fuck Peter Theil if he thinks setting a precedent like this is net good for anything other than his petty vendetta a precedent that if you engage in trashy tabloid "journalism" and egregiously invade people's privacy that you can end up sued into oblivion? Sounds like a perfectly reasonable precedent.

Well if this is a reasonable precedent, why not apply it against the Murdoch tabloids -- papers that do actual, real harm? Like you know... hacking missing (and dead) girls' voicemail, leading to her parents getting false hope.

Now that would be a good precedent.

This is just billionaire bullying -- power of money and twisted law. And it is not just Theil behind this.

Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict

#54

Post by cocotino »

joering2 wrote: post #43
Dobbs wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is a lot of the excessiveness was due to the behavior of the defendant. They ignored court orders, they repeatedly tried to make a joke out of it and all around refused to take it seriously. This lead the judge to using the large end of the stick.

I doubt that. The amount of money Hogan will receive is impossible to be reasonably justified to amount of pain or embarrassment he has personally experienced because of said tape. I wouldn't be surprised if Thiel had huge footprint on Judge decision, which of course I cannot prove.

That's an interesting and downright sickening accusation.

Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict

#55

Post by nl »

redthrowaway wrote: post #10
vonklaus wrote: post #7

How in the world did the court come up with a $140M sum for the settlement? This seems so excessive, it is actually comical. Obviously, everyone has beleaguered this point, but I feel obligated to state it one more time: Scumbaggery and poor taste shock journalism are pretty shitty, but fuck Peter Theil if he thinks setting a precedent like this is net good for anything other than his petty vendetta. edit: Yes, Gawke…

It's amazing to see how the left latched onto this as a "billionaire buys lawsuit" narrative, as opposed to the much more accurate "shitty darling of the left that habitually engaged in abuse got its comeuppance" narrative. Gawker repeatedly, knowingly, unabashedly, broke the law. They repeatedly, knowingly, unabashedly, tried to ruin innocent people's lives. They absolutely deserve everything that happened to them a…

I don't think anyone, left-or-right thinks of Denton as anything except a gossip peddler.

It is hard to judge, but the divisions in this case don't appear to be right vs left. It seems to me it has more been aligned with people's views on a right to free speech vs a right to privacy. There seem to have been plenty on the right who think that the right to free speech should have trumped the right to privacy in this case.

Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict

#56

Post by encoderer »

davidw wrote: post #2

How does that work out? Isn't it a limited liability company? I know there's "piercing the corporate veil", but why would that apply in this case?

The "Limited" in an LLC means that an investor in the company cannot lose more than the capital they've invested. It doesn't do anything to protect officers.

Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict

#57

Post by FireBeyond »

FireBeyond wrote: post #36
Ping938 wrote: post #3

Funny thing is Gawker gave secret $200K Loan to Nick Denton before bankruptcy.

Secret? Gawker is private. My private employer doesn't disclose employee loans, why should any other?

Further replying since the sibling is dead:

"First, Gawker has indemnified Denton, meaning that it has agreed to pay his legal tab. So theoretically, a judgment against Denton becomes Gawker's liability. But Hogan says that this indemnification agreement specifically precludes anything Denton does that constitutes misconduct or gross negligence. Hogan asserts that what the jury in the sex-tape case concluded qualifies as such and means Denton isn't indemnified. And even if otherwise, Hogan still doesn't believe this merits an injunction."

It's definitely not proven problematic. Of course Hogan's lawyers are complaining about it, but it's not contentious that Gawker had indemnification in place.

Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict

#58

Post by maratd »

dopamean wrote: post #20
chubot wrote: post #13

Wow. I wonder if Thiel calculated the exact amount it would take to put Gawker out of business AND send Denton into personal bankruptcy. I mean, as a venture capitalist, you have pretty good insight into the finances of companies at a macro level. You're used to doing a little bit of "estimation from the outside", i.e. for both potential investments and for competitors. And he was also a lawyer. This is the most ruth…

He seems like a real asshole to me. Nothing I have read about him has given me the impression that there is anything gentle about him at all.

Actually, Gawker and Denton are the assholes. When confronting assholes, it's easy to be mis-perceived as one.

Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict

#59

Post by paulpauper »

dboreham wrote: post #21

Ok but...meanwhile on Wall St. individuals can't be held accountable for corporate actions.

bernie madoff? I think he went to jail

Just Google "arrested for ponzi fraud' ...tons of results. Alan Stanford..another one. High profile and wealthy are not immune to the long arm of justice. Martin Shkreli (pending)..Bernard Ebbers..Andrew Fastow ..many more

Post reply on HN