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

Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 566 posts

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#311

Post by spriggan3 »

bkeroack wrote: post #187
whack wrote: post #54

Libel and slander have no place in a functioning democracy. By building an entire business model around such practices, Gawker is not only spreading disinformation, it is also crowding out more reputable news sources that could have better helped inform the public. The only criticism I can give in this entire tale, is that it shouldn't take a billionaire to sue and win judgement against slanderous publishers. Such re…

False. Statements must be untrue to be either libel (written) or slander (verbal). The sex tape in question was real. I would not be so quick to celebrate. This case has demonstrated that one or two very powerful, wealthy individuals (Peter Thiel et al) are able to destroy a successful business and ruin the livlihoods of dozens merely because they were embarassed . (It's worth noting that what Gawker originally wrote…

> and ruin the livlihoods of dozens merely because they were embarassed.

Gawker ruined the livelihoods of its employees, not Hulk Hogan, not Thiel, with its scummy behavior.Hogan is the victim here, as much as Gawker's employees, they are victim of Gawker's policy which is profit at all cost. Well now Gawker is paying that cost.

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#312

Post by rs999gti »

lotso wrote: post #178
rs999gti wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Especially given Thiel's motive that "they outed me" - come on, Thiel's sexuality was probably the worst kept secret in the Valley. When you pose shirtless on a gay cruise, I think it's fairly safe the rest of the world didn't need Valleywag to tell them of your homosexuality. Does all that evidence matter? Shouldn't it be up to Theil when and where he outs himself instead of blog like Valleywag doing it for him?

> Shouldn't it be up to Theil when and where he outs himself instead of blog like Valleywag doing it for him? Agree, but it isn't illegal.

Not illegal. However Liberace gave Thiel legal precedence when Liberace himself successfully sued the Daily Mirror for hinting he was a homosexual.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberace_v_Daily_Mirror

http://www.theargus.co.uk/magazine/nostalgia/pastpresent/445...

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#313

Post by dingo_bat »

troisx wrote: post #304
k-mcgrady wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was videotaped without his knowledge in a situation he had every reason to expect was private. If you then obtain that tape and publish it you're scum. The livelihoods of the employees were ruined by their idiot bosses who thought it would be a good idea to publish the video, not by the persons defending their privacy.

Actually the judge wouldn't let Gawker present evidence from the FBI that both Hogan and the woman knew they were being taped. This means that not only is it possible that they lied on the stand, but with the huge amount required to appeal ($50 million), it's possible that they may get away with perjury.

>Actually the judge wouldn't let Gawker present evidence from the FBI that both Hogan and the woman knew they were being taped.

Why? That seems like an important piece of evidence.

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#314

Post by CM30 »

cookiecaper wrote: post #226
qq66 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One possible solution is the constitutional right to an attorney in civil cases as well as in criminal, but I don't know how you'd protect that against abuse.

Yes, I believe our system should be amended to ensure that roughly equal resources are available to both parties. The court should require an accounting of all legal fees to be filed. In certain cases, the wealthier party to the litigation should be obliged to pay an amount of money equal to their own expenditures on legal fees into a trust run by the court, which would ensure the less-wealthy party gets equally-soli…

How about a differet system? Both parties pay into a pot based on how much money they have. Then the only legal advice can they take is set by random rather than by anyone's choice, out of roughly equal quality legal teams paid for by the money from the pot?

Just make it so money cannot buy better lawyers or legal advice, and the court system would be made far fairer to everyone.

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#315

Post by jacquesm »

grellas wrote: post #278

A few thoughts: 1. The pressure point here was a court ruling declining to stay enforcement of the $140M judgment pending appeal. This left Gawker having to post a $50M bond in order to avoid enforcement proceedings by which its assets could have been seized and its business literally dismantled. Gawker may or may not ultimately prove to have a successful basis upon which to get this judgment reversed but, without a…

(3) is proof positive the absence or presence of funds has too much influence on the outcome of court cases. If all that stands between a judgment one way or the other is a pile of cash then effectively there is no such thing as justice and this means that more often than not the party with the smallest bank account will lose.

I'm fine with the concept of 'maintenance' but at the same time I feel that there is such a basic unfairness in the various implementations of our systems of justice that some re-balancing is often the only way in which one of the parties stands a chance of winning or losing the case on its merits.

Especially when the other party is a corporation or the government I have no bad feelings about helping to fund the lawsuit (especially a defense).

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#316

Post by mastermojo »

grellas wrote: post #278

A few thoughts: 1. The pressure point here was a court ruling declining to stay enforcement of the $140M judgment pending appeal. This left Gawker having to post a $50M bond in order to avoid enforcement proceedings by which its assets could have been seized and its business literally dismantled. Gawker may or may not ultimately prove to have a successful basis upon which to get this judgment reversed but, without a…

Does anyone have any additional info on #4?

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#317

Post by sib »

mmastrac wrote: post #24
corin_ wrote: post #4

'The media company [...] had assets of $50 to $100 million and liabilities of $100 million to $500 million, filings showed.' http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/10/gawker-media-files-for-ch-11-...

Does this mean the only sensible bid is between $0 to -$450M?

In general no, as they are filing for chapter 11 bankruptcy, meaning that the majority of those liabilities will be washed away.

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#318

Post by wrsh07 »

karmacondon wrote: post #268
wrsh07 wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two things. Both Gawker and Thiel are in the wrong here. 1) It feels obviously wrong to me to have someone publicly outed like that. [like you say, the evidence doesn't matter] 2) It feels sketchy for a wronged person to retaliate by having a nontrivial player in written media shut down.

Thiel was well within his legal rights. "Both sides are wrong" is a common cop out. False equivalency isn't helping

I wouldn't say they're equivalent.

I find a private, rich entity shutting down a media company much scarier than a media company publishing facts.

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#319

Post by tptacek »

slg wrote: post #289
grellas wrote: post #278

A few thoughts: 1. The pressure point here was a court ruling declining to stay enforcement of the $140M judgment pending appeal. This left Gawker having to post a $50M bond in order to avoid enforcement proceedings by which its assets could have been seized and its business literally dismantled. Gawker may or may not ultimately prove to have a successful basis upon which to get this judgment reversed but, without a…

You can't talk about issue 3 without mentioning things like the EFF, ACLU, NAACP, or any number of legitimate third parties that have made it part of their mission to support cases they think are important. How do you deal with those separately or how would you prevent Thiel from simply creating a similar organization and using it for his own personal agenda?

Most of the cases ACLU is involved in are against the government, not private entities.

Re: Gawker Files for Bankruptcy, Will Be Put Up for Auction

#320

Post by untog »

nostromo wrote: post #18

Gawker may have been terrible, but we should all be a bit concerned at the precedent this sets. It's sort of like defending the free speech of terrible groups like the KKK. We do it because we treasure free speech, not because we support the KKK. I generally have positive feelings about Thiel, but his actions here make me very uneasy. I worry that the aristocracy will now use this method to try and close down unfavor…

For those who don't see anything wrong with this because Gawker is Gawker, I present to you a very similar case involving Mother Jones:

http://m.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/10/billionaire-sued...

The story they reported was 100% correct, but they were still sued by the billionaire political donor that was the subject of the story. The case was eventually thrown out of court, yet it still cost Mother Jones $2.5m to defend themselves. That was enough to drive them to the brink of bankruptcy.

Post reply on HN