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

81–90 of 105 posts

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

#81

Post by paulpauper »

bobwaycott wrote: post #24
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…

Not disagreeing with your points on Gawker's despicable behavior, but this doesn't answer the question of how the damages were calculated. It also doesn't address the precedent issue, beyond voicing support for exacting revenge as justified.

they probably calculated the valuation of Gawker and then added some extra. 'pain and suffering' 'damage to Hogan's brand and earning power' In some instances the judge will reduce it. This time they didn't.

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

#82

Post by joering2 »

Bartweiss wrote: post #71
joering2 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They repeatedly, knowingly, unabashedly, tried to ruin innocent people's lives. Can you actually prove that anyone's life was ruined? They mostly "reported" on sex tapes and other weird stuff, like the origins of Trump's hair. And my opinion, as I can imagine 99,9% of others, about Hogan's wrestling persona or skills has nothing to do with his out of wedlock shenanigans. And if you see a 140MM win from a lawsuit fo…

The primary event for "ruining lives" is the gay rival CEO Denton outed (who was married to a woman), not Hogan.

That's "a life", not "lives". Anyone else?

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

#83

Post by jshevek »

nl wrote: post #55
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…

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 ca…

I would agree that left vs right isn't the best way to categorize the disagreements here, but I think its understandable that some people might think that 'the left' was championing Gawker. There were quite a few low brow leftist media outlets who jumped to Gawkers defense and tried to demonize Thiel.

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

#84

Post by jshevek »

cocotino wrote: post #54
joering2 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

With such a short comment, I'm not sure if I'm parsing that correctly. Is it sickening because (a) you disapprove of the the parent commentator so casually throwing around baseless accusations, or (b) sickening to think of our judicial system possibly being so corrupt?

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

#85

Post by bobwaycott »

jdmichal wrote: post #25
bobwaycott wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not disagreeing with your points on Gawker's despicable behavior, but this doesn't answer the question of how the damages were calculated. It also doesn't address the precedent issue, beyond voicing support for exacting revenge as justified.

What precedent, exactly? That doing illegal things is still illegal, even if you're a journalist? Or that you can get sued into oblivion, which could and did happen before this case?

I believe the precedent the GP was referring to, to which the parent was replying—and to whom I replied—is a billionaire using the legal system and a case to which he's not a party to seek revenge by bankrolling that case. I see no one disputing the legitimacy of suing Gawker or defending Gawker's disgusting and illegal behavior.

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

#86

Post by bobwaycott »

paulpauper wrote: post #81
bobwaycott wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not disagreeing with your points on Gawker's despicable behavior, but this doesn't answer the question of how the damages were calculated. It also doesn't address the precedent issue, beyond voicing support for exacting revenge as justified.

they probably calculated the valuation of Gawker and then added some extra. 'pain and suffering' 'damage to Hogan's brand and earning power' In some instances the judge will reduce it. This time they didn't.

Hopefully the GP who asked sees this. Seems a sensible enough explanation of the "how" asked for.

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

#87

Post by internaut »

jshevek wrote: post #80
bmm6o wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure where this "darling of the left" thing is coming from. Disliking both Gawker and Thiel is one thing that can unite us all.

There is a subset of the left that absolutely loved Gawker.

A subset and some very well-to-do SV personalities who should have no tangible connection to Gawker but seemingly are much invested in its future, hmmmm?

With good fortune it should end in a battle of fisticuffs.

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

#88

Post by jbooth »

redthrowaway wrote: post #70
jbooth wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what, his libertarian values? While backing Palantir and engaging in stuff like this?

> and engaging in stuff like this? Only the left has a problem with his support of Hogan, because it was an attack on your tribe. Stop assuming the rest of us share your outrage. We don't. Thiel essentially insured Hogan's lawsuit, so that Hogan could proceed without fear of losing millions in legal costs. That's it. Billionaire swoops in and enables aggrieved party to sue evil corporation for abominable behaviour. I…

Buddy. Give the 'the left' stuff a rest. We're talking about a libertarian going way out of his way to attack a (horrible, tabloid) press organization here. Same guy bankrolled/backed one of the biggest private enablers of security state overreach in the country. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy.

Also, as far as you deciding what 'the left' thinks and then feeling superior to them for it.. I mean, whatever floats your boat, but it's not exactly the path to enlightenment.

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

#89

Post by maratd »

dopamean wrote: post #76
maratd wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

You say "actually" as if you're trying to correct me in some way...

Were you talking about Thiel or Denton? It seems like you were talking about Thiel, so yes, I was correcting you.

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

#90

Post by nl »

jshevek wrote: post #83
nl wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ca…

I would agree that left vs right isn't the best way to categorize the disagreements here, but I think its understandable that some people might think that 'the left' was championing Gawker. There were quite a few low brow leftist media outlets who jumped to Gawkers defense and tried to demonize Thiel.

Yeah, you might be right. Maybe there should be third axis in the left/right divide? Left|right|stupid.
Post reply on HN