Ok but...meanwhile on Wall St. individuals can't be held accountable for corporate actions.
Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict
21–30 of 105 posts
Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
The precedent isn't about the quality of your journalism, it's "get a billionaire angry, get sued into oblivion". That's what scares people. Mother Jones nearly faced the same fate for very good journalism.
That's a problem with the legal system that's not tied to journalism at all. It could happen to any company or person at any time. As long as the case looks to have enough merit to avoid dismissal, then rack those legal costs up! The only precedent related to journalism here is that journalists doing illegal things is still illegal.
Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict
#23How 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…
Darling of the left? Is that really how Denton has been described? I don't know anyone -- left or right -- who thinks Denton is anything more than a scumbag.
Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict
#24How 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…
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.
Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict
#25Earlier 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.
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?
Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict
#26How 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…
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"?
Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict
#27How 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.
No, there is absolutely nothing illegal about trashy tabloid "journalism". Only the particular form of privacy invasion was at issue here.
Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict
#28How 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…
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?
Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict
#29Ok but...meanwhile on Wall St. individuals can't be held accountable for corporate actions.
They could have been held accountable. But the government had to make a choice.
(a) Settle and get home loan relief and other measures in place immediately for struggling families.
(b) Engage in possibly a decade long, expensive fight that they might not be able to win.
Re: Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict
#30How 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?
Denton was apparently named as a defendant in the lawsuit as well, and the court yielded a $10M judgment against him personally. Gawker also gave Denton a $200K personal loan right before bankruptcy for the purposes of potential bankruptcy filings related to the lawsuit; this might be a good case for piercing the corporate veil as well.
Is Denton a complete moron to think this was going to be OK. Given the way Gawker ran the court case the evidence is piling up that Denton is not the smartest tool in the shed.