8 ms·

Cool. Did you know that Peter Thiel, in his own words, decided to "create a shell company to hire former investigative reporters and lawyers to _find_ causes o

Cool. Did you know that Peter Thiel, in his own words, decided to "create a shell company to hire former investigative reporters and lawyers to _find_ causes of action against Gawker", and to then give it a starting timeline and budget of "three to five years and $10 million"?

throwaway_tech 7y ago
>"create a shell company to hire former investigative reporters and lawyers to _find_ causes of action against Gawker" Cool. As I said, you can point the finger at the "Billionaire" but at the end of the day Gwaker's is liable for their unlawful behavior resulting in damages, that can't be blamed on Thiel. A Jury found Gwaker liable and awarded Hogan $140M, that bankrupted Gawker, not Thiel. If Gawker didn't willfully publish stolen sex tapes of Hulk Hogan in violation of his rights, then Thiel would have wasted $10M and 3-5 years looking for something that doesn't exist, and they would still be in business.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- powowow 7y ago
  Yah good point. Most small businesses would suffer no harm at all from an adversary with an initial $10MM allocated toward an attack. After all, most businesses have no employees who have ever done anything even remotely questionable. And besides, it's super cheap and easy to win in court if truth and justice are on your side. (and the same in print; there's no way to for an investigative journalist to create disproportionately bad press) You're definitely correct, right, and very smart. I agree with all of your points.
  - throwaway_tech 7y ago
    I'm sorry you don't understand how civil lawsuits work. It would probably help you immensely to learn at least the basics before forming opinions though. >And besides, it's super cheap and easy to win in court if truth and justice are on your side. Well if Hogan's lawsuit was frivolous and without merit, then Gawker would have actually had all its fees/costs paid for. However, as you know that isn't remotely close to reality, the case went to trial (which less than 10% do) and the Jury found Gawker liable and not just for $115M in damages but $25 in punitive damages...that is special damages designed to punish Gawker for their behavior. Tell yourself all you want Thiel is responsible. No one forced Gawker to fight an obviously losing case, they did so at their own peril and incurred additional unnecessary fees doing so...they have no one to blame but themselves. They could have just accepted a judgment and gone straight to calculating damages. Your position is effectively no different than blaming police and prosecutors for arresting/convicting a murder because they are well funded. Somehow you gloss over the fact that the murderer is culpable for their illegal act, and wouldn't be in prison if they didn't commit murder.
  - mam2 7y ago
    It's not "employee doing something questionable"... it was their entire business model.
  - coldtea 7y ago
    >Most small businesses would suffer no harm at all from an adversary with an initial $10MM allocated toward an attack If those small businesses had done shitty things like Gawker, then let them suffer!

throwaway_tech 7y ago

>"create a shell company to hire former investigative reporters and lawyers to _find_ causes of action against Gawker" Cool. As I said, you can point the finger at the "Billionaire" but at the end of the day Gwaker's is liable for their unlawful behavior resulting in damages, that can't be blamed on Thiel. A Jury found Gwaker liable and awarded Hogan $140M, that bankrupted Gawker, not Thiel. If Gawker didn't willfully publish stolen sex tapes of Hulk Hogan in violation of his rights, then Thiel would have wasted $10M and 3-5 years looking for something that doesn't exist, and they would still be in business.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
powowow 7y ago
Yah good point. Most small businesses would suffer no harm at all from an adversary with an initial $10MM allocated toward an attack. After all, most businesses have no employees who have ever done anything even remotely questionable. And besides, it's super cheap and easy to win in court if truth and justice are on your side. (and the same in print; there's no way to for an investigative journalist to create disproportionately bad press) You're definitely correct, right, and very smart. I agree with all of your points.
- throwaway_tech 7y ago
  I'm sorry you don't understand how civil lawsuits work. It would probably help you immensely to learn at least the basics before forming opinions though. >And besides, it's super cheap and easy to win in court if truth and justice are on your side. Well if Hogan's lawsuit was frivolous and without merit, then Gawker would have actually had all its fees/costs paid for. However, as you know that isn't remotely close to reality, the case went to trial (which less than 10% do) and the Jury found Gawker liable and not just for $115M in damages but $25 in punitive damages...that is special damages designed to punish Gawker for their behavior. Tell yourself all you want Thiel is responsible. No one forced Gawker to fight an obviously losing case, they did so at their own peril and incurred additional unnecessary fees doing so...they have no one to blame but themselves. They could have just accepted a judgment and gone straight to calculating damages. Your position is effectively no different than blaming police and prosecutors for arresting/convicting a murder because they are well funded. Somehow you gloss over the fact that the murderer is culpable for their illegal act, and wouldn't be in prison if they didn't commit murder.
- mam2 7y ago
  It's not "employee doing something questionable"... it was their entire business model.
- coldtea 7y ago
  >Most small businesses would suffer no harm at all from an adversary with an initial $10MM allocated toward an attack If those small businesses had done shitty things like Gawker, then let them suffer!