Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Reply To Thread

Hogan v. Gawker Royal RumbleFollow

#1 Mar 09 2016 at 2:36 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
29,373 posts
Some hilarity coming out of this. Gawker has invoked the "But I'm a Jew" defense and has said that they probably wouldn't post a celebrity *** tape if the celeb pictured was "like 4 years old". Not even joking. He was being specific.
Quote:
A.J. Daulerio, 41, was sitting ramrod-straight in the Florida courtroom during the incredibly awkward moment when he was asked by Hulk Hogan’s lawyer, “Can you imagine a situation where a celebrity *** tape would not be newsworthy?”

Daulerio answered flatly, “If they were a child.”

“Under what age?” he was asked.

“Four,” he said.

“No 4-year-old *** tapes, OK,” the attorney said.
I'm going to go pick up some hot dogs and marshmallows to roast over their smoldering corpse later. Everyone cool with mustard and ketchup or does one of you weirdos need mayo or something?
#2 Mar 09 2016 at 2:46 PM Rating: Good
******
49,744 posts
I like that Hogan's defense is basically "It's okay if my character talks about it but not anyone else when it's about me."
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#3 Mar 09 2016 at 2:47 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,369 posts
I'm a fan of BBQ sauce, really depends on the type of meat though. You getting anything good, or are these just the 99 cent hot dog packs made from whatever random animal wandered into their factory today?

Seriously though, I'd image four is an example more-so than a hard limit. Anything like that involving anyone under 18 at the time would land them in hot water pretty fast.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#4 Mar 09 2016 at 3:01 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
29,373 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
I'm a fan of BBQ sauce, really depends on the type of meat though. You getting anything good, or are these just the 99 cent hot dog packs made from whatever random animal wandered into their factory today?
Since we're talking charring over open flame, I don't think we really need the good stuff.

someproteinguy wrote:
Seriously though, I'd image four is an example more-so than a hard limit. Anything like that involving anyone under 18 at the time would land them in hot water pretty fast.
Oh, I know that's probably what they meant, but the way the question was worded...it's a weird choice.
#5 Mar 09 2016 at 3:12 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,369 posts
The One and Only Poldaran wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
I'm a fan of BBQ sauce, really depends on the type of meat though. You getting anything good, or are these just the 99 cent hot dog packs made from whatever random animal wandered into their factory today?
Since we're talking charring over open flame, I don't think we really need the good stuff.

someproteinguy wrote:
Seriously though, I'd image four is an example more-so than a hard limit. Anything like that involving anyone under 18 at the time would land them in hot water pretty fast.
Oh, I know that's probably what they meant, but the way the question was worded...it's a weird choice.
Ketchup will be fine then, thanks. You fine with Bud Light? I mean, if we're doing it that way and all.

But yeah weird choice. Why he wouldn't just say "underage" is a little concerning. Makes one wonder if they'd try to play the "I didn't know s/he was..." card. Then again, being on the spot in the court room probably wouldn't lead me to say the most well thought out replies either. Heck, I'll even edit my forum replies 20 times before I'm happy. Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#6 Mar 09 2016 at 6:49 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
20,911 posts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBcxwrNTpGg&t=0m58s
Because apparently the embedded youtube videos cannot be time linked.

Edited, Mar 9th 2016 6:50pm by Allegory
#7 Mar 10 2016 at 8:41 AM Rating: Good
******
49,744 posts
What a defense. "I don't have a ten inch penis, my character does."


Edited, Mar 10th 2016 9:42am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#8 Mar 19 2016 at 2:00 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
29,373 posts
Gawker ordered to pay $115 million. So far. It will probably go up:
Quote:
The jury awarded Hogan $55 million for economic injuries and $60 million for emotional distress. Those same jurors will reconvene next week to consider punitive damages on top of the $115 million already awarded.
#9 Mar 19 2016 at 2:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Today I learned that there's no constitutional right to appeal a civil judgement and, if Gawker Media wanted to appeal this, they'd need to post a $115mil bond (or higher, depending on the punitive results). In short, you can't use an appeal to delay payment.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#10 Mar 19 2016 at 3:49 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
29,373 posts
Actually, they can put down 50mil now in order to appeal as there's a cap due to state statute. Alternatively, they can pay 10% non-refundable to a bond company.
#11 Mar 19 2016 at 4:24 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,884 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Today I learned that there's no constitutional right to appeal a civil judgement and, if Gawker Media wanted to appeal this, they'd need to post a $115mil bond (or higher, depending on the punitive results). In short, you can't use an appeal to delay payment.


I learned that Hulk Hogan's nudity was worth around twice as much as Erin Andrews's.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#12 Mar 21 2016 at 7:46 AM Rating: Good
******
49,744 posts
Yeah, but how much is Terry Bollea's nudity worth?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#13 Mar 21 2016 at 8:45 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
The One and Only Poldaran wrote:
Actually, they can put down 50mil now in order to appeal as there's a cap due to state statute.

I'll take your word for it -- the person who told me mentioned it could vary state by state but I didn't care enough to check up on it.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#14 May 25 2016 at 10:39 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,228 posts
Surprising exactly nobody, it turns out this was a proxy war by Peter Thiel all along.

The only question I think, is "Did Thiel commission the video, or was it just a happy accident?"
____________________________
Just as Planned.
Necro Warning: This post occurred more than thirty days after the prior, and may be a necropost.
#15 May 25 2016 at 10:51 AM Rating: Good
******
49,744 posts
See, now I don't know who to root for. On one hand Thiel backed Trump for California and supported/funded that whole man-man made sovereign island nonsense a few years back but on the other hand taking down clickbait sites is a noble endeavor.

Edited, May 25th 2016 12:52pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#16 May 25 2016 at 2:22 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
29,373 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
See, now I don't know who to root for. On one hand Thiel backed Trump for California and supported/funded that whole man-man made sovereign island nonsense a few years back but on the other hand taking down clickbait sites is a noble endeavor.
He backed Trump AND he's going after Gawker? Smiley: yippee
#17 May 26 2016 at 11:03 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
29,373 posts
Judge denied Gawker's request for retrial. Judgment stands. Smiley: grin
#18 May 26 2016 at 11:43 AM Rating: Good
Gave Up The D
Avatar
*****
12,278 posts
Right-Wing Billionaire Peter Thiel Is on a Mission to Destroy Gawker

Smiley: laughSmiley: lolSmiley: laughSmiley: lol

Edited, May 26th 2016 1:44pm by Shaowstrike
____________________________
Shaowstrike (Retired - FFXI)
91PUP/BLM 86SMN/BST 76DRK
Cooking/Fishing 100


"We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."
— James D. Nicoll
#19 May 26 2016 at 12:31 PM Rating: Good
******
49,744 posts
I kind of hope he goes after Outhousers next.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#20 May 26 2016 at 4:08 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,228 posts
Shaowstrike wrote:


The comments section is something special.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#21 May 26 2016 at 6:33 PM Rating: Good
Gave Up The D
Avatar
*****
12,278 posts
An Open Letter to Peter Thiel

Quote:
Peter Thiel,

Nearly a decade ago, after you had opened up to friends and colleagues, a *** writer for Gawker shared an item with the readers of Valleywag, a section for news and gossip about the rich and powerful of Silicon Valley. “Peter Thiel, the smartest VC in the world, is ***,” wrote Owen Thomas. “More power to him.”

And more power did indeed come to you. Your investments in Facebook and other companies have given you a net worth of more than $2 billion. You have tapped some of that fortune to support *** groups such as HomoCon. It is now clear that *** people are everywhere, not just in industries such as entertainment, but at the pinnacles of Silicon Valley power.

I thought we had all moved on, not realizing that, for someone who aspires to immortality, nine years may not be such a long time as it seems to most of us. Max Levchin, your fellow founder at Paypal, told me back in 2007 you were concerned about the reaction, not in Silicon Valley, but among investors in your hedge fund from less tolerant places such as Saudi Arabia. He also warned of the retribution you would exact if a story was published about your personal life.

Your revenge has been served well, cold and (until now) anonymously. You admit you have been planning the punishment of Gawker and its writers for years, and that you have so far spent $10 million to fund litigation against the company. Charles Harder, the Hollywood plaintiff’s lawyer who has marshaled your legal campaign, is representing not just the wrestler Hulk Hogan on your behalf, but two other subjects of stories in suits against Gawker and its editorial staff.

You told the New York Times that you are motivated by friends who had their lives ruined by Gawker coverage, and that your funding is a “philanthropic” project to help other “victims” of negative stories. Let us run through a few examples so that people can actually read the articles you find so illegitimate, and make their own judgment about their newsworthiness.

Sean Parker, a partner in your Founders Fund and an early backer of Facebook, is one of the friends who was covered extensively on Gawker’s Valleywag. Those stories, some of them by me, helped define the colorful character played by Justin Timberlake in The Social Network, the David Fincher movie about the founding of Facebook. Parker was stung more recently by criticism from his neighbors of the disruption to 10th St. in Manhattan when the street was dug up to get a Fios line to Bacchus House, the famous party venue where Parker had been planning to live. Valleywag covered that story, as well as his lavish and controversial wedding in the redwoods near Big Sur.

Hulk Hogan was the first client represented by Charles Harder in a suit against Gawker. As we now know, the famous wrestler and entertainer sued over snippets of a *** tape apparently in order to shut down reporting of a racist rant against a black man dating his daughter.

Ashley Terrill, also represented by Harder, is suing Gawker for $10 million for defamation. She is a reporter who offered information about the conflict between the founders of two dating apps, Tinder and Bumble, who herself became part of the story after claiming she was being harassed and surveilled by agents of Tinder co-founder Whitney Wolfe.

Shiva Ayyadurai is a Massachusetts entrepreneur who says he invented email—about a decade after email was actually invented. A story on Gizmodo, Gawker’s tech property, said straight out that his claims were false, as did the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times. Represented also by the lawyer you hired, Ayyadurai is suing Gawker for $35 million for defamation, though not the other news organizations that made the same point.

Peter Thiel—that is, you. Yes, Gawker has often been critical. Our writers have derided your views on female suffrage, mocked the libertarian separatist vision of offshore seasteads free of government interference, and questioned some of the businesses you have backed. There is much more. They don’t find you very likable.

This Is Why Billionaire Peter Thiel Wants to End Gawker

Why has Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel spent upwards of $10 million funding third-party…
Read more

I can see how irritating Gawker would be to you and other figures in the technology industry. For Silicon Valley, the media spotlight is a relatively recent phenomenon. Most executives and venture capitalists are accustomed to dealing with acquiescent trade journalists and a dazzled mainstream media, who will typically play along with embargoes, join in enthusiasm for new products, and hew to the authorized version of a story. They do not have the sophistication, and the thicker skins, of public figures in other older power centers such as New York, Los Angeles and Washington, D.C.

And I can see how tempting it would be to use Silicon Valley’s most abundant resource, a vast fortune, against the harsh words of the writers of a small New York media company. We have our devices; you have yours.

Among the million posts published by Gawker and other properties since the company was founded, there have undoubtedly been occasions we overstepped the line. In offsetting the fawning coverage of tech luminaries and others, sometimes our stories swing too far for my taste toward snark.

But this vindictive decade-long campaign is quite out of proportion to the hurt you claim. Your plaintiff’s lawyer, Charles Harder, has sued not just the company, but individual journalists.

A.J. Daulerio, author of the 2012 story on Hulk Hogan, is out of work and unable to pay the $100,000 in punitive damages awarded by the jury. In the Ayyadurai and Terrill complaints, Harder cynically paints author Sam Biddle as an abuser of narcotics, basing this claim on Biddle’s own writing about his struggle with anxiety and depression, and the physician-prescribed medication he takes to treat his mood disorders. John Cook, our executive editor, is accused of negligent hiring and retention.

Peter, this is twisted. Even were you to succeed in bankrupting Gawker Media, the writers you dislike, and me, just think what it will mean.

The world is already uncomfortable with the unaccountable power of the billionaire class, the accumulation of wealth in Silicon Valley, and technology’s influence over the media.

You are a board member of Facebook, which is under congressional investigation after our site Gizmodo reported on the opaque and potentially biased way it decides what news sources are seen by its billions of users.

Now you show yourself as a thin-skinned billionaire who, despite all the success and public recognition that a person could dream of, seethes over criticism and plots behind the scenes to tie up his opponents in litigation he can afford better than they.

You were the basis for the affectless venture capitalist in the HBO show, Silicon Valley; with this diabolical decade-long scheme for revenge, you are redefining yourself as a comic-book villain.

This story will play out in the press and the courts. Both are adversarial forums, in which each side selects facts and quotes to undermine the reputation and credibility of the other. We are confident of our arguments on the newsworthiness of our Hogan story, once it reaches the appeals court. Your main proxy, Hulk Hogan, has his.

We, and those you have sent into battle against us, have been stripped naked, our texts, online chats and finances revealed through the press and the courts; in the next phase, you too will be subject to a dose of transparency. However philanthropic your intention, and careful the planning, the details of your involvement will be gruesome.

I’m going to suggest an alternative approach. The best regulation for speech, in a free society, is more speech. We each claim to respect independent journalism, and liberty. We each have criticisms of the other’s methods and objectives. Now you have revealed yourself, let us have an open and public debate.

The court cases will proceed as long as you fund them. And I am sure the war of headlines will continue. But, even if we put down weapons just for a brief truce, let us have a more constructive exchange.

We can hold the discussion in person with a moderator of your choosing, in front of an audience, under the auspices of the Committee to Protect Journalists, or in a written discussion on some neutral platform such as Medium. Just tell me where and when.

At the very least, it will improve public understanding of the interplay of media and power. Considering the amount spent on lawyers, $20 million between us at this point, there should be some public benefit.

In the meantime, here are some more pointed and immediate questions:

  • Have you or your representatives paid Hulk Hogan personally in addition to covering his legal expenses?

    You say that you are operating much like a contingency lawyer, so does that mean you will take a third of any final judgement, or more?

    You said you were funding several cases. Specifically, can you confirm you are funding Charles Harder’s work for Shiva Ayyadurai and Ashley Terrill?

    Is your goal to bankrupt, buy, or wound Gawker Media? If you were to own the company after a final judgment in the Hogan case, what would your editorial strategy be?

    You say that Gawker is not a legitimate news source. Do you take the same view of the other properties—Gizmodo, Deadspin, Jezebel, Kotaku, Jalopnik and Lifehacker?

    As a Facebook board member, how have your own views on politics and news influenced your contribution to corporate decisions?
    When you say your aim is deterrence rather than revenge, whom do you aim to deter?

    You said you wanted to even the legal playing field for people without your resources. If Gawker Media was forced to sell the company to pay a bond or fight these court cases, would you and your agents seek to block that transaction?

    Is Sean Parker the friend you mentioned that persuaded you to pursue this campaign?

    And lastly, I understand that you give codenames from Tolkien for all your projects. What’s this one? (Let me guess: Mordor.)
  • ____________________________
    Shaowstrike (Retired - FFXI)
    91PUP/BLM 86SMN/BST 76DRK
    Cooking/Fishing 100


    "We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."
    — James D. Nicoll
    #22 May 26 2016 at 6:44 PM Rating: Excellent
    Liberal Conspiracy
    *******
    TILT

    Gawker whines about how Gawker is going to die?
    ____________________________
    Belkira wrote:
    Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
    #23 May 26 2016 at 8:40 PM Rating: Good
    Gave Up The D
    Avatar
    *****
    12,278 posts
    Denton is trying to drum up public sympathy in his favor and outrage directed at Thiel. I think those are the anger and bargaining stages of Death.
    ____________________________
    Shaowstrike (Retired - FFXI)
    91PUP/BLM 86SMN/BST 76DRK
    Cooking/Fishing 100


    "We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."
    — James D. Nicoll
    #24 May 27 2016 at 4:29 AM Rating: Default
    *
    182 posts
    Denton is a moron or ****. No bother to settle any suit or admit any guilt. Just smirk throughout. His latest Open Letter is also full of hubris. I think there are no heroes in this tale, only villains.

    The one other remarkable thing is that Gawker is now, famously, a Union. So supposedly there might be a lot of Union member writers there decrying Denton, yet no. Zero. Zero articles about telling him to STFU. So I have to wonder what that Union contract was...if employees can't even call out awful owners....
    #25 May 27 2016 at 7:58 AM Rating: Excellent
    ******
    49,744 posts
    Shaowstrike wrote:
    Open Letter to Peter Thiel wrote:
    You say that Gawker is not a legitimate news source. Do you take the same view of the other properties—Gizmodo, Deadspin, Jezebel, Kotaku, Jalopnik and Lifehacker?
    Yes.
    ____________________________
    George Carlin wrote:
    I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
    #26 May 27 2016 at 10:06 AM Rating: Excellent
    Liberal Conspiracy
    *******
    TILT
    Is Denton implying that Jezebel and Kotaku ARE legitimate news sources?

    Come to think of it, is Lifehacker supposed to be a "legitimate news source"? I don't know if "Make the Perfect Breakfast Egg Sandwich Using Just a Microwave" qualifies as "legitimate news". Buzzfeed is probably covering the journalism world's "The Surprising Things You Can Safely Wash In Your Dishwasher" needs.

    Edited, May 27th 2016 11:08am by Jophiel
    ____________________________
    Belkira wrote:
    Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
    « Previous 1 2 3 4 5
    Reply To Thread

    Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

     

    Recent Visitors: 55 All times are in CDT
    Anonymous Guests (55)