
Gawker Media founder to file for personal bankruptcy - iamben
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-gawkermedia-founder-idUSKCN10C2RV
======
jedberg
I want to feel bad. I really do. I have a lot of journalist friends and they
have made cogent and reasonable arguments about how this will set a precedent
that will quell their speech. Even if they are reporting something that isn't
libelous, they will always fear in the back of their mind that a wealthy
person who doesn't like them will bring a case against them that will bankrupt
them, even if what they wrote was legit, just through having to defend
themselves.

On the other hand, I don't like Denton or Gawker because they have no ethics.
I was personally harmed by them when they decided to make their hobby doxxing
controversial reddit users, and I know someone whose life was completely
destroyed by Gawker but didn't have the money to sue.

I'm also not a fan of the fact that a lot of their early content was literally
them reposting reddit content without permission.

So if this were anyone else with any other media organization, I would totally
be on their side and agree that this is a travesty of justice that Theil was
able to fund this lawsuit.

But for Denton and Gawker? Good, they deserve to go down in flames.

Edit: I would like to add that some of those journalist friends work for
Gawker Media, are upstanding, ethical, and wonderful people, and will most
likely loose their jobs, and I feel terrible for them. It's just a few bad
eggs at Gawker that ruined it for everyone, but it came from the top (Denton).

~~~
zck
> So if this were anyone else with any other media organization, I would
> totally be on their side and agree that this is a travesty of justice that
> Theil was able to fund this lawsuit.

There are two different things here, and I'm not sure I understand all the
issues.

1\. The personal vendetta. I understand this. (At least, probably)

2\. The posting -- without permission -- of a sex tape made without Hogan's
knowledge and in a private location. This seems morally indefensible to me.
This is where I get a bit lost as to people defending Gawker. Shouldn't
posting such a video be illegal?

~~~
jedberg
> The posting -- without permission -- of a sex tape made without Hogan's
> knowledge and in a private location. This seems morally indefensible to me.
> This is where I get a bit lost as to people defending Gawker. Shouldn't
> posting such a video be illegal?

Yes, probably. The issue stems from the fact that someone else paid for the
lawsuit, which is a moral gray area, and in fact was illegal for a long time,
even before the US existed (in British common law):
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champerty_and_maintenance](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champerty_and_maintenance)

~~~
LA_Banker
>and in fact was illegal for a long time

Yeah, no. NYTimes v. Sullivan determined that public figures sacrifice a good
deal of their privacy when they when they enter the public sphere. For
instance, the same such video of, say, a governor would certainly be
newsworthy. Where it's unclear is to what degree is Hogan a public figure and
whether the actual publishing of it, as opposed to just reporting on it, is
constitutes newsworthiness.

In terms of lawsuit financing, it's perfectly legal. There's an entire
industry devoted to third-party lawsuit financing – otherwise, poor victims of
car attacks (or other consequences which injured their ability to work and
earn) wouldn't be able to pursue personal injury claims.

Without it, only those with means could pursue legal recourse.

~~~
jedberg
I was saying that funding other people's lawsuits was illegal for a long time.

~~~
LA_Banker
My mistake, I misread. I edited my post to address this.

------
darkarmani
> raised alarm bells in U.S. media circles over the prospect of wealthy
> individuals using the courts to muzzle the press

Is that really true? What legitimate media outlet thought this was about
muzzling the press? Libel has never been allowed.

~~~
NEDM64
That's because you are reading from a journalist.

They are like a mob in this case.

You're obviously right, it's libel, full stop. And Hulk Hogan didn't win
because he had Thiel money, he won because he was right, and if Gwaker would
win, it would be because of money, and that would be something anormal.

~~~
huac
> You're obviously right, it's libel, full stop.

Libel requires falsehood. That's not the case here.

~~~
NEDM64
Invasion of privacy, doesn't matter. It's a crime against Hulk Hogan and
whomever was on that tape.

------
erdevs
I wonder how much this will actually affect Denton. Often people file
bankruptcy as a means of protecting their assets, as opposed to accepting that
they have none.

I think Denton/Gawker were and are a net disservice to society. But they're
also far from the worst or most egregious examples of the archetype of a say-
anything-for-money tabloid.

What do others think of Thiel's hand in all this? On one hand, I respect it.
Well-played, thus far. On the other hand, it isn't good that a select few (the
extremely wealthy) can wield so much influence when other less wealthy people
who may have been similarly wronged simply cannot. Equal opportunity and equal
justice, etc. That lack of equality is likely a symptom of our costly and
cumbersome legal system, though. Also, anyone think this will blow back on
Thiel? Perhaps Denton can countersue? Perhaps behaving this way will have
costly knock-on effects elsewhere in life or business?

~~~
bradleyjg
Assuming he's a NY resident, the laws here are not particularly generous. For
example, our homestead exemption for a married couple tops out at $331,100.

I don't really understand all the ins and outs of chapter 11 bankruptcy (it is
more commonly used by companies than individuals) but I don't think he is
going to be able to retain all that much wealth if the judgment ends up
standing. On top of that he'll have to pay all "disposable income" to
creditors for five years.

~~~
ryanlol
He'd have to be a complete idiot to not have any offshore money.

~~~
bradleyjg
All assets have to be listed in the bankruptcy petition. He'd have to a
complete idiot to commit perjury given his prominence and the fact that one of
his creditors (Hogan) has good lawyers with unlimited budgets.

------
pkinsky
Hopefully we'll see less tabloids outing people for advertising revenue in the
future.

------
jondubois
Denton took some big risks and should have seen it coming. The ironic thing is
that in 5 years' time, this guy will probably be rich again. In fact, he
probably just transferred all his assets to foreign accounts.

The whole Gawker vs Hulk Hogan saga just shows what a joke the whole system
is. It's painful to live in this society and have to breathe the same air and
survive on the same currency as these people.

~~~
ptaipale
> _he probably just transferred all his assets to foreign accounts._

Wouldn't that be a crime, if done just prior to filing for bankruptcy? I don't
know the US legislation so well, but I would expect it to work that way.

(Over here (Finland), there is no personal bankruptcy in the same sense; debts
stick even if debtor has no assets, though there is a sort-of-Chapter-13
arrangement with some expiry provisions in 15 years).

------
geofft
I hear that the greatest people that you read about every day in business have
used the laws of this country, the chapter laws, to do a great job for their
company, for themselves, for their employees, for their family, etc.

------
Overtonwindow
Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.

