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

Hulk Hogan awarded payout over Gawker sex tapes

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 176 posts

Re: Hulk Hogan awarded payout over Gawker sex tapes

#141

Post by alkonaut »

eljimmy wrote: post #111
gregpilling wrote: post #88

So let's see. Hulk Hogan is worth $25M according to the interwebs. His reputation is in tatters for the video of him doing something he did. So he gets awarded almost 5 times as much for lost earnings, as he is worth total? Of course we all know this will go to appeal, where the real fate will be decided. Gawker does not have 115M to pay, and Hulk is not likely to find himself 5x richer. The real question is where do…

It wasn't just about earnings. $55 million was for economic injuries and $60 million for emotional distress.

How do you find a number for emotional distress? I get the feeling numbers in US lawsuits are made up and adjusted for the receiver -- I.e you can sue McDonalds for a larger sum after burning on a cup of coffee than you can the coffee shop on the corner, despite your own costs/damages being the same? Isn't that using a lawsuit as a kind of punishment, something which should be reserved for a criminal case?

Re: Hulk Hogan awarded payout over Gawker sex tapes

#143

Post by bogomipz »

microcolonel wrote: post #121
whateveridunno wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I think that while Gawker wasn't right to release the tape, fining them $115 million isn't right either. $115 million could easily sink Gawker entirely. I'm not exactly the biggest fan of the place but it's a dangerous precedent to set for press freedom if a single editor's single bad decision can take down an entire site. Of course, the amount is likely to be revised down in appeals.

While I respect that conclusion in general, I think that Gawker in particular has done a lot of sadistic and mean "reporting" which serves no public good. Them being sunk seems almost a public good in my opinion.

Indeed. The final straw for me was when they outed a Conde Nast exec, there was no scandal, no real story at all but they(Nick Denton) went ahead and destroyed this guy's life. You can read about it here:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2015/07/17/gawkers-appar...

I think $115 million is OK.

Re: Hulk Hogan awarded payout over Gawker sex tapes

#144

Post by bogomipz »

gregpilling wrote: post #88

So let's see. Hulk Hogan is worth $25M according to the interwebs. His reputation is in tatters for the video of him doing something he did. So he gets awarded almost 5 times as much for lost earnings, as he is worth total? Of course we all know this will go to appeal, where the real fate will be decided. Gawker does not have 115M to pay, and Hulk is not likely to find himself 5x richer. The real question is where do…

Right because there's nothing more accurate than typing "what is ___ ____'s net worth" into a google search. You have no idea what his earning potential with WWF or anyone else that severed their association with him based on this.

Re: Hulk Hogan awarded payout over Gawker sex tapes

#145

Post by bogomipz »

tunesmith wrote: post #123
tptacek wrote: post #20

I think @Popehat summed this up nicely: https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/710972390566563845 First they came for Gawker, and I did not speak out. Because fuck Gawker.

What is your actual argument in terms of how this is a threat to freedom of speech? Apologies if I am misreading your meaning.

There is none. The ruling isn't a threat to free speech at all. The trial was never about whether or not the content constituted obscenity or any other measure that would involve the Miller rule. This case was about damage to someone's life and career.

Re: Hulk Hogan awarded payout over Gawker sex tapes

#146

Post by bogomipz »

minimaxir wrote: post #4

Before anyone goes on a "Gawker is a terrible site, they deserve it" tangent, keep in mind that this does set precedent for other individuals to sue other media companies for massive amounts of money, which could be another problem for an already-struggling ecosystem. (Although in fairness, this incident is particularly egregious, especially as they disobeyed a judge's order to take down the video)

What's the precedent? If you try to ruin someones ability to earn a living you can be sued for it?

What struggling ecosystem? The tabloid industry? Gawker is little more than a tabloid. And as far as I know the vapid tabloid industry is doing just fine.

Re: Hulk Hogan awarded payout over Gawker sex tapes

#147

Post by bogomipz »

MajesticHobo wrote: post #55
tptacek wrote: post #20

I think @Popehat summed this up nicely: https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/710972390566563845 First they came for Gawker, and I did not speak out. Because fuck Gawker.

That's not a nice summary at all. It's a (mildly amusing) inane quip that also happens to miss the point.

I'm pretty sure that's a nice summary.

Re: Hulk Hogan awarded payout over Gawker sex tapes

#148

Post by hluska »

hartpuff wrote: post #106
hluska wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I downvoted both of the comments in which you mentioned your downvotes. Talking about downvotes adds absolutely nothing to the conversation.

What does trying to bury a post for absolutely petty reasons add to a conversation?

Upvotes and downvotes aren't about burying/promoting content. They're about maintaining a certain baseline of quality.

Talking about downvotes is flat out boring and it adds nothing to the conversation. Therefore, I'm disengaging from this conversation and strongly encourage you to do the same.

Re: Hulk Hogan awarded payout over Gawker sex tapes

#149

Post by [deleted] »

icebraining wrote: post #132
spoiledtechie wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its about the First Amendment encroaching upon the right to privacy. Where is the line drawn. That was what this trial is sincerely about. Privacy outweighs the first amendment at this stage. But lets remember, that Gawker is a pretty far stretch to say they are living within the 1st amendment rights.

Where is that right to privacy codified in the US Constitution or law?

[deleted]

Re: Hulk Hogan awarded payout over Gawker sex tapes

#150

Post by Kristine1975 »

polishninja wrote: post #53
InclinedPlane wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At best this is an argument for tort reform*. Gawker's actions here are not defensible. Edit: meaning improved protections against baseless lawsuits that could be damaging regardless of their merit. The simple way to protect your news company from being sued for releasing leaked sex tapes is to simply not release leaked sex tapes, which I think will be the major takeaway from this case.

On the topic of tort reform, I'd suggest the documentary Hot Coffee. It obviously has a bias but it really made an impact on how I view these large settlements. These huge sums are required to set an example and not just be a fine. If he only won $500,000, then then next time a similar situation arises it just becomes a math question. Can they can earn more than $500,000 by releasing and paying the "fine". https://en…

Essentially this. To quote the movie Fight Club:

A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.

Punitive Damages are intended to prevent X from becoming too small.

Post reply on HN