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

Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 1001 posts

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#361

Post by jasonlotito »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #6

This is probably the correct decision. Alex Jones's vitamin company offered 2x more cash, and in the case of a bankruptcy, cash completely trumps any notion of "giving up debt." Especially when the debt being settled is astronomically large and you are giving up a very small portion of it ($7 million out of $1.5 billion). The other creditors are far better off getting more cash, and those $7 million of claims are wor…

> This is probably the correct decision.

It is 100% not. It makes fewer creditors whole. Simple as that. It's worse for all creditors involved, as per the creditors. Any suggestion that this is "correct" or better is out of ignorance or deceit.

> The other creditors are far better off getting more cash

The nature of the original deal guaranteed the other creditors got more money than they would from the other offer by $100,000 more. Suggesting that they were getting less is ignorant.

> the onion gets to buy this website for no money.

Again, the Onion was spending real cash.

At best your are completely ignorant of the deal.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#362

Post by cthalupa »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #62
alwa wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it a little strange, though, that the system notionally decided that the families are owed an enormous amount of economic power as compensation for the nasty behavior of Alex Jones' media company, but at the same time it's obliging them not to use that economic power to prevent the sale of the media company to a "new owner" still affiliated with an unrepentant Alex Jones, who will undoubtedly continue the nasty…

There was no public auction of InfoWars. That alone is a stain on the whole process. The objective of a bankruptcy court is not to institute some arbitrary meta-ethical standard. It is to deliver maximum cash to the creditors in a fair manner. >Is the issue that there are other creditors who are unhappy with this, who would get paid before the aggrieved families' damages would? The lawyers seem to be fine with it, as…

> There was no public auction of InfoWars. That alone is a stain on the whole process.

Sealed bid auctions are not some absurd rarity in this sort of situation and I have no idea why you believe they are.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#363

Post by avs733 »

gklitz wrote: post #314
avs733 wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The second highest bidder was Alex Jones

Who importantly, supposedly doesn’t have any money, because he doesn’t want to pay the families of the victims what he owns them.

and is arguing that the problem with the sale is that the people he owes money don't have any money because he hasn't paid them.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#364

Post by jfoster »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #193
jfoster wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't seen the filing, but I presume you mean that X filed saying that they own the accounts, right? I don't get why people conflate Elon Musk with the companies that he runs. I imagine he has controlling stakes in all of them, but for the most part he's probably not even a majority shareholder in most of the companies he's running.

musk is the majority shareholder at X and posts obsessively

I don't think the full ownership structure is publicly known, but feel free to link me to it if I'm wrong. Capital other than his did come in as part of the acquisition; there's almost 100 shareholders.

https://www.rcfp.org/x-investors-unsealed/

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#365

Post by munk-a »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #343
munk-a wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's not discuss "proper processes" when Jones illegally hid evidence and refused to participate in our legal system to the point of getting a default judgement against him. Everything he was accused of he did - he refused the right to participate in our justice system and accepted full liability for his actions. On the point of "any award in the billions (much less trillions, as they initially demanded) is exorbita…

[flagged]

It's perfectly fair to stop but I did want to highlight one thing:

> It's not a mere technical distinction. The fact that the number is so high essentially guarantees that AJ cannot pay it. A lower amount might have actually been paid. What can we make of this? The intent was not to get restitution, but rather to destroy the business. That seems unethical.

There is actually an important reason to secure an absurdly high judgement - some of the creditors involved in this situation are Jones parents (and I believe some affiliate companies also hold some of the debt). The judgement will be divided proportionally by debt so the size of the judgement will impact how much money from the bankruptcy sale Jones' parents will receive.

I also think it's fair to view this case through the lens of ongoing damages - Jones has received C&Ds about Sandyhook and ignored them - even during the trial he continued to cause additional damages. There was every indication (to me at least) that if the business survived the damages would continue and the only way to reasonably make the other parties whole was to destroy the business.

I understand this may feel like unnecessary censorship but the path to this point was AJ repeatedly ignoring the justice system saying "Stop doing that" and his response to the process up to this point hasn't been to act in good faith.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#366

Post by dragonwriter »

a12k wrote: post #328
ensignavenger wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bankruptcy law is federal law, Delaware law has nothing to do with it.

They typically file in the United States Court for the District of Delaware, a federal court located in Delaware. Delaware law plays a significant part in these cases even though they’re in Fed court. Corporate charters, filings, fiduciary duties, property rights, choice of laws, etc etc etc are all determined by Delaware law and used in the federal court. Federal Bankruptcy Law provides the procedural framework. So,…

> Federal Bankruptcy Law provides the procedural framework.

Federal bankruptcy law sets the substantive as well as procedural rules for bankruptcy, and its substantive provisions trump any state law, but, OTOH, state law has some role both in determining what the set of claims going in to bankruptcy are and, to the extent permitted in federal bankruptcy law, setting things like allowable personal exemptions, etc.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#367

Post by fennecfoxy »

alwa wrote: post #10
pclmulqdq wrote: post #6

This is probably the correct decision. Alex Jones's vitamin company offered 2x more cash, and in the case of a bankruptcy, cash completely trumps any notion of "giving up debt." Especially when the debt being settled is astronomically large and you are giving up a very small portion of it ($7 million out of $1.5 billion). The other creditors are far better off getting more cash, and those $7 million of claims are wor…

Isn't it a little strange, though, that the system notionally decided that the families are owed an enormous amount of economic power as compensation for the nasty behavior of Alex Jones' media company, but at the same time it's obliging them not to use that economic power to prevent the sale of the media company to a "new owner" still affiliated with an unrepentant Alex Jones, who will undoubtedly continue the nasty…

Nah it's just typical rich people getting away with everything stuff & we'll continue to let it happen because we are hapless.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#368

Post by pavlov »

impossiblefork wrote: post #352
fenomas wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't a billion dollars for a single thing, it was awards to 15 different defendants, ranging from ~30-120 million each. More importantly, you're missing that this was a default judgment - Jones didn't defend himself, so the award is kind of the theoretical maximum. The results aren't comparable to regular court cases where both sides make their case.

Yes, but it's still the value of a whole town. A legal system must be robust even to weird or peculiar people who refuse to work with its rules and still produce reasonable results.

Why should the system accommodate people who refuse to defend themselves?

I understand that in a system like Russia where dissidents face made-up charges and their attorneys are harassed by the state. But Alex Jones isn’t in that kind of position at all. He has no problem getting legal representation.

The default judgment basically means he admitted guilt by his refusal. That was his choice.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#369

Post by buzzerbetrayed »

Cumpiler69 wrote: post #187
yapyap wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the problem with vigilanate justice is not that it doesn’t work, it’s very effective. The problem is that the vigilante might not have the right version of justice

Kinda yeah. The problem is when you allow for vigilante justice, it can easily also turn against you at some point. Someone one day might decide that your mom/dad broke law and evaded justice and it's therefore OK to un-alive them because the court system failed. Which is why countries where vigilante justice is common are significantly more dangerous and worse to live in than where it's not.

This isn’t TikTok. You can say kill and murder. Jesus.

Re: Bankruptcy judge rejects sale of Infowars to The Onion

#370

Post by andruby »

seltzered_ wrote: post #4

Statement from The Onion (via CEO Ben Collins): https://bsky.app/profile/bencollins.bsky.social/post/3lcyypa...

To save you a click. Ben Collins (CEO The Onion):

We are deeply disappointed in today's decision, but The Onion will continue to seek a resolution that helps the Sandy Hook families receive a positive outcome for the horror they endured.

We will also continue to seek a path towards purchasing InfoWars in the coming weeks. It is part of our larger mission to make a better, funnier internet, regardless of the outcome of this case.

We appreciate that the court repeatedly recognized The Onion acted in good faith, but are disappointed that everyone was sent back to the drawing board with no winner, and no clear path forward for any bidder.

And for all of those as upset about this as we are, please know we will continue to seek moments of hope. We are undeterred in our mission to make a funnier world.

Post reply on HN