
Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict - acdanger
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-19/gawker-can-t-shield-founder-from-hulk-hogan-sex-tape-verdict
======
chubot
Wow. I wonder if Thiel calculated the exact amount it would take to put Gawker
out of business AND send Denton into personal bankruptcy. I mean, as a venture
capitalist, you have pretty good insight into the finances of companies at a
macro level. You're used to doing a little bit of "estimation from the
outside", i.e. for both potential investments and for competitors. And he was
also a lawyer.

This is the most ruthless revenge story ever, not least because it was all
legal...

Thiel seems like a nerdy and curious fellow -- almost gentle, if he weren't so
opinionated. But I guess everyone now knows not to mess with him.

~~~
dopamean
He seems like a real asshole to me. Nothing I have read about him has given me
the impression that there is anything gentle about him at all.

~~~
maratd
Actually, Gawker and Denton are the assholes. When confronting assholes, it's
easy to be mis-perceived as one.

~~~
dopamean
You say "actually" as if you're trying to correct me in some way...

~~~
maratd
Were you talking about Thiel or Denton? It seems like you were talking about
Thiel, so yes, I was correcting you.

~~~
FireBeyond
That's rather presumptuous of you. Denton being an asshole in no way precludes
Thiel from being an asshole.

~~~
maratd
Isn't it equally presumptuous of you to assume that he is? Your only source of
evidence is his financing of an aggressive lawsuit against a known asshole and
his company.

~~~
FireBeyond
Maybe I think Thiel is an asshole because of his funding of Palantir?

~~~
internaut
Thiel's explanation is that it was better to sift through the data torrent
more judiciously than collecting every particle of data on every man, women
and child forever. That is relevant surveillance on a limited pool vs mass
surveillance. Supposing a state to be malevolent, then an efficient malevolent
state ought to be still less evil than an inefficient malevolent one.

This was in the context of the sentiment after 9/11.

Unfortunately it later turns out the government with its god-like power of
'infinite money' decided to do both at the same time, which explains his
disgust at the NSA post-Snowden.

Surely a giant database in the sky could never fall into enemy hands with data
transfer and data medium densities growing exponentially.

In the future, wars shall be lost because some dork left a usb drive on a
train somewhere.

------
davidw
How does that work out? Isn't it a limited liability company? I know there's
"piercing the corporate veil", but why would that apply in this case?

~~~
nostrademons
Denton was apparently named as a defendant in the lawsuit as well, and the
court yielded a $10M judgment against him personally.

Gawker also gave Denton a $200K personal loan right before bankruptcy for the
purposes of potential bankruptcy filings related to the lawsuit; this might be
a good case for piercing the corporate veil as well.

~~~
danieltillett
Is Denton a complete moron to think this was going to be OK. Given the way
Gawker ran the court case the evidence is piling up that Denton is not the
smartest tool in the shed.

~~~
slowernet
The court case has not concluded.

A gay, foreign media magnate known for publishing lurid expose (in addition to
a lot of excellent and funny reporting [1]) was never likely to receive
sympathetic treatment from a jury of people from Hulk Hogan's hometown.

Let's see how things go on appeal.

[1] [http://gawker.com/heres-what-gawker-media-
does-1779858799](http://gawker.com/heres-what-gawker-media-does-1779858799)

~~~
danieltillett
Is anyone in a position to appeal? I was under the impression that Gawker had
to cough up a huge amount of cash to be able to appeal.

~~~
FireBeyond
They were trying to seek some money to cover the $50M in collateral that would
be required for appeal (to be held in trust).

Even at this stage, Gawker/Denton offered Bollea shares in Gawker from their
expected sale, _and_ Bollea _accepted_.

And then withdrew. I can't help but suspect if it was because Thiel's lawyers
advised him not to, the same way they dropped the tort that was covered by
Gawker's insurance.

I find this interesting too - it was one thing when it was just that insurance
claim. Then Hogan is willing to accept collateral from Gawker's prospective
sale (indicating it's not him that's looking for Gawker's abject destruction),
but lawyers, funded by Thiel, have him drop this, too.

I think one of the fundamental tenets of justice (and to be quite clear, I
feel Denton and Gawker both deserve to be reamed - for varying severities of
the word - for their actions in this case) is the right to face your
"accuser"/opponent. Not what looks more and more to me like their puppet.

------
dboreham
Ok but...meanwhile on Wall St. individuals can't be held accountable for
corporate actions.

~~~
threeseed
They could have been held accountable. But the government had to make a
choice.

(a) Settle and get home loan relief and other measures in place immediately
for struggling families.

(b) Engage in possibly a decade long, expensive fight that they might not be
able to win.

~~~
chii
And this creates the moral hazard of to big to fail banks.

When you try to fix a drug addicts problem, you don't just fix the symptom,
but also must fix the cause. It's not too dissimilar for societal problems
imho.

------
paulpauper
If Denton secured money overseas, collecting will be hard

------
Ping938
Funny thing is Gawker gave secret $200K Loan to Nick Denton before bankruptcy.

~~~
FireBeyond
Secret? Gawker is private. My private employer doesn't disclose employee
loans, why should any other?

~~~
FireBeyond
Further replying since the sibling is dead:

"First, Gawker has indemnified Denton, meaning that it has agreed to pay his
legal tab. So theoretically, a judgment against Denton becomes Gawker's
liability. But Hogan says that this indemnification agreement specifically
precludes anything Denton does that constitutes misconduct or gross
negligence. Hogan asserts that what the jury in the sex-tape case concluded
qualifies as such and means Denton isn't indemnified. And even if otherwise,
Hogan still doesn't believe this merits an injunction."

It's definitely not proven problematic. Of course Hogan's lawyers are
complaining about it, but it's not contentious that Gawker had indemnification
in place.

