Gawker Media - Feat. Kotaku, Jezebel, and Friends

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
AnOminous said:
Not really relevant. "I don't like him" isn't a reason for not taking an appeal and unlike the original judge, the appellate panel has no particular reason to be personally resentful of them.
Click to expand...

I think the point being made is that Denton clearly has a gross disregard for the law and the judicial system, and it could be argued that this could bare heavily on how the trial went the first time around, and could factor quite heavily into the likely appeal.

"I don't like him" is very different from "This man clearly has little regard for the law in the pursuit of business."
 
Ponderous Pillock said:
I think the point being made is that Denton clearly has a gross disregard for the law and the judicial system, and it could be argued that this could bare heavily on how the trial went the first time around, and could factor quite heavily into the likely appeal.

"I don't like him" is very different from "This man clearly has little regard for the law in the pursuit of business."
Click to expand...

Appellate questions are general, though, not specific. It's not "is Nick Denton an utter dick." It's something like "is a media outlet that releases footage generated by an invasion of privacy by a third party liable for invasion of privacy" or "is jury instruction X proper in an invasion of privacy case" or "is it proper for the judge to exclude witness testimony based on her own judgment as to the credibility of the witness?"

The answer to those general questions is precedent in future cases involving any close enough set of circumstances.

Appeals courts have to think about what effect their ruling will have in future cases.
 
Splendid Meat Sticks said:
I guess Gawker's last hope might be that Bubba claims that Hogan knew he was being filmed.
Click to expand...

Hogan already sued Bubba for filming him without his knowledge, and Bubba settled for $5k.

I don't know if that'll prejudice any future testimony but it feels like it should.
 
NumberingYourState said:
Where was I when Gawker was die?

Oblig.:

CELEBRATORY SMASH BROTHER!!!
Click to expand...

I'd be lying if I said I wasn't absolutely thrilled when I saw the verdict.

I wonder if Hulk's daughter Brooke is writing another retarded poem about it as we speak.
 
What you gonna do, when $115m debt runs wild on you?
 
Last edited:
I'm really late on this, but this just further fuels my idea that Hulk Hogan is the closest thing to a real life superhero there is.
 
The Jumping Dwarf said:
I'm really late on this, but this just further fuels my idea that Hulk Hogan is the closest thing to a real life superhero there is.
Click to expand...
:hulk:He martyred himself to save everyone else from Gawker's cancer. He's truly a hero. A real American who fights for the rights of every man.:hulk:
 
Van Darkholme said:
Sheiky baby telling it like it is
[MEDIA=twitter]711028565291229184[/MEDIA][MEDIA=twitter]710995166342070272[/MEDIA][MEDIA=twitter]711000043948531713[/MEDIA]
Click to expand...
I can't tell if the iron sheik is for or against hulk hogan on this one.
 
IMO, anything that rustles an SJW's Jimmies (or Janeys, as they may insist on it being called) is it's own good enough reason.

Meowthkip said:
Here's the thing, though:

Hulkster got kicked out of the WWE Hall of Fame for one dropping of the N-Bomb, in private, recorded by somebody who thought he was his friend who took video of his wife having sex with other men because he was into that.
Click to expand...

HH has been on WWE's Shit List ever since he jumped ship to be a part of Ted Turner's WCW. They started referring him as "The Huckster" after that. And then when WCW folded and was bought up by WWE, they made sure that Hogan was never allowed to forget that McMahon was not pleased.
 
lol i was going around trying to find pics of hipsters crying over this but it turns out there are floods of comments both on facebook and tumblr, even on gawker/kotaku/jezebel's own pages on there, of people making fun of gawker and telling them to get fucked and are posting hulk hogan memes.

this brings me to the conclusion that literally no one cares about gawker but gawker itself.
 
AnOminous said:
Appellate questions are general, though, not specific. It's not "is Nick Denton an utter dick." It's something like "is a media outlet that releases footage generated by an invasion of privacy by a third party liable for invasion of privacy" or "is jury instruction X proper in an invasion of privacy case" or "is it proper for the judge to exclude witness testimony based on her own judgment as to the credibility of the witness?"

The answer to those general questions is precedent in future cases involving any close enough set of circumstances.

Appeals courts have to think about what effect their ruling will have in future cases.
Click to expand...

In this case, Gawker pushed footage they knew had been taken under unlawful circumstances before they got ahold of it and doubled down on it even when a court ordered them to take it down, so I doubt an appeal will strike that down as valid.
 
Na na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey, goooodbye!
I think the reason A.J. Daulerio said "I would release the sex tape of someone 5 and up" (in the US court of law, mind you) is because he knew that the company was fucked and was gonna go under.
 
Cynical said:
In this case, Gawker pushed footage they knew had been taken under unlawful circumstances before they got ahold of it and doubled down on it even when a court ordered them to take it down, so I doubt an appeal will strike that down as valid.
Click to expand...

If that made something illegal to report on, then any number of completely legitimate news stories would be off limits forever. Lots of things were obtained illegally or by someone doing something unlawful and then ended up being reported on. Illegal leaks are the source of a lot of news.
 
I do find it kind of funny watching them all declare that they've always been at war with Eurasia disliked Gawker's dodgy practises and always had a beef with them.

Aside from when it was convenient, and Gawker was the main site stoking the fires for click bait purposes and whipping up an entire frenzy around how gamers were dead and all the other shit their staff posted on twitter that in a lot of other places would get them a rap for not representing the company in the best light.

Like has been said elsewhere before "This is why you can't have nice things."

EDITING OUT DOUBLE POST::

AnOminous said:
If that made something illegal to report on, then any number of completely legitimate news stories would be off limits forever. Lots of things were obtained illegally or by someone doing something unlawful and then ended up being reported on. Illegal leaks are the source of a lot of news.
Click to expand...

That legal slap fight will boil down to a public interest debate. Which Gawker really can't have because the only people who benefited in the interim was not the public as it served nothing but voyeruistic interest, but Gawker, who likely made a fair wedge on advertising.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom