Author Topic: Gawker files for bankruptcy  (Read 4089 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tolpuddle Martyr

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3716
  • Have you got thumbs? SHOW ME YOUR FUCKING THUMBS!
Re: Gawker files for bankruptcy
« Reply #15 on: June 11, 2016, 09:37:20 pm »
I thought Thiel was pretty open about the fact that he was funding it because he had a grudge against Gawker. The fact that his motives weren't pure doesn't change the fact that it was appropriate to help fund someone who couldn't afford to litigate when they had a genuine claim.
And Hogan's claim is legit, publishing pictures of you fuckin' without your consent is as creepy as it gets. My concern is this, whats stopping other parties with deep.pockets and a grudge from using Thiel's third part litigation model against other press outlets with a view to shutting them down. What's stopping tobacco, fossil fuels, arms manufacturers, pharmaceuticals etc from adopting this model and funding every lawsuit against pesky publications who expose their actual wrongdoing?

Thiel's grievance was genuine, so was Hogan's. My concern is purely and simply with setting up a slush fund with the sole purpose of obliterating critical media.

Offline davedan

  • Lord Cracker
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3539
Re: Gawker files for bankruptcy
« Reply #16 on: June 11, 2016, 09:53:21 pm »
I think you might find that some organisations already do it. Scientology for instance.

Edit: Funding another person's litigation used to be illegal in the common law world. It was the torts of Champerty and Maintenance. Those torts have been largely abolished. Perhaps partly in the belief that unmeritorious claims and abuses of the process can be otherwise regulated with the processes of the Court.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2016, 09:55:07 pm by davedan »

Offline Tolpuddle Martyr

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3716
  • Have you got thumbs? SHOW ME YOUR FUCKING THUMBS!
Re: Gawker files for bankruptcy
« Reply #17 on: June 11, 2016, 10:13:44 pm »
Yeah, I'd read that Gawker was planning to counter sue for something like that. I didn't know a bankrupt company could do anything but sit tight and wait for the liquidators to have their merry way with them but I'm no expert on company law. Where's queenie when you need her?

Offline davedan

  • Lord Cracker
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3539
Re: Gawker files for bankruptcy
« Reply #18 on: June 11, 2016, 10:33:19 pm »
Once controllers are appointed, either liquidators or administrators have control of the Company. The decision to bring any such claim is for them to make. However if they were to countersue, it probably should have been in the same proceedings. Meaning it may already have been dismissed. Certainly the former directors of the Company have no say in what happens.

Offline The_Queen

  • Royalty & Royalty-free
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1840
  • Gender: Female
  • And here we go...
Re: Gawker files for bankruptcy
« Reply #19 on: June 11, 2016, 11:05:25 pm »
You know I don't have a problem with Thiel. I think UP's position is difficult because of the hypocrisy. But that's only a problem if you want to hold him to any form of consistency. This is just a great example of UP's 'morals' being determined by whether he likes the person (Organisation) or not.

No double standard here.  Invasions of privacy like these deserve to be punished.

Such great debate skills. I expect your rebuttal to this post will be "I know you are, but what am I?"
Does anyone take Donald Trump seriously, anymore?

Offline Sigmaleph

  • Ungodlike
  • Administrator
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3615
    • sigmaleph on tumblr
Re: Gawker files for bankruptcy
« Reply #20 on: June 11, 2016, 11:29:02 pm »
I thought Thiel was pretty open about the fact that he was funding it because he had a grudge against Gawker. The fact that his motives weren't pure doesn't change the fact that it was appropriate to help fund someone who couldn't afford to litigate when they had a genuine claim.
And Hogan's claim is legit, publishing pictures of you fuckin' without your consent is as creepy as it gets. My concern is this, whats stopping other parties with deep.pockets and a grudge from using Thiel's third part litigation model against other press outlets with a view to shutting them down. What's stopping tobacco, fossil fuels, arms manufacturers, pharmaceuticals etc from adopting this model and funding every lawsuit against pesky publications who expose their actual wrongdoing?

In principle, that you need to be right rather than just well-funded to win.

In practice, I'm not sure how well that holds, but I don't think Thiel invented this? Is there reason to think Thiel doing this changed anything?
Σא

Offline Tolpuddle Martyr

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3716
  • Have you got thumbs? SHOW ME YOUR FUCKING THUMBS!
Re: Gawker files for bankruptcy
« Reply #21 on: June 11, 2016, 11:36:39 pm »
Maybe not, Thiel certainly didn't invent predatory litigation. If Gawker does counter sue it could.change things however necause that could set a legal precedent. That's a big if though. So, I know that it's a deeply unsatisfying answer Sigma but, I don't know. That's my answer.

Offline Lt. Fred

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2994
  • Gender: Male
  • I see what you were trying to do there
Re: Gawker files for bankruptcy
« Reply #22 on: June 18, 2016, 12:06:14 am »
Rarely has UP's dishonest hypocrisy been so obvious as this case. Let's remember what he believes shall we?

1) Nobody should ever do anything to someone who says something they don't like.

2) Peter Thiel is quite right to fund any and all lawsuits, including frivolous ones, in order to punish Gawker for saying something he didn't like.

Hack.
Ultimate Paragon admits to fabricating a hit piece on Politico.

http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=6936.0

The party's name is the Democratic Party. It has been since 1830. Please spell correctly.

"The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time."
-FDR