I totally understand why Peter Thiel felt the way he did about Gawker. Outing someone is a HORRIBLE thing to do. I can't underscore that enough. Especially in the way that they did. They engaged in yellow journalism and hid behind the shield of reporting.
That being said, this idea that we can extinguish the flame of reporting with a firehose of money is a horrible precedent. This is essentially saying that the rich few can determine what is reported to the masses due to their wealth. Allowing things like this endangers the important investigative reporting that uncovers things like bad working conditions, corruption and other horrible things that go on in society.
Don't understate the serious amount of wrongdoing on Gawker's part in that lawsuit. After that giant, public "we're not going to obey the court order we were just given" article, there's no way in hell Gawker was planning on wining the lawsuit. My guess is they were planning on out-spending Hogan and pushing a settlement on him when he ran out of money.
It wasn't until much later that they found out they wouldn't be able to buy their way out of trouble.
Funding lawsuits for profit is a well-known society anti-pattern called "champerty." It is no longer illegal (as blocking it interfered with access to justice) but when used for profit or other agendas it is pretty damaging (think patent trolls).
A key issue related to champerty is barratry (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barratry_(common_law)), being: "overly officious in instigating or encouraging prosecution of groundless litigation" or who bring "repeated or persistent acts of litigation" for the purposes of profit or harassment.
Champerty (the funding of the litigation of others) is a problem in no small part because it allows the wealthy to engage in barratry (frivolous or vexatious litigation).
The only attack is a single phrase, referring to him as a "sociopathic billionaire". I don't think his status as a billionaire is questioned, so you must object to the use of the one word "sociopathic". Let's check the DSM-IV:
Antisocial personality disorder is characterized by a lack of regard for the moral or legal standards in the local culture. There is a marked inability to get along with others or abide by societal rules. Individuals with this disorder are sometimes called psychopaths or sociopaths.
Well, not exactly clear-cut, but I think a reasonable set of people, perhaps including Thiel, would agree that he has "a lack of regard for the moral or legal standards in the local culture"
Can you blame them? Trump backer, vampire, "I-don't-like-this-publication-so-lets-kill-it", "competition-is-for-chumps", "lets-create-a-state-in-international-waters-so-we-can-do-whatever" Thiel is just a toxic character these days.
While it is an attack, their cite a link for every claim they make against him. IMO they're entitled to attack as long as they have the evidence to back it up.
The ability to sell portions of your right to justice is both an important freedom and a check on the ability of those with power to trample on those without. It is interesting that so many people who claim to champion the rights of the powerless are vigorously opposed to the concept.
> The ability to sell portions of your right to justice is both an important freedom and a check on the ability of those with power to trample on those without.
How? If everyone has equal access to justice and the justice system, there is no need to "sell portions of your right to justice".
[+] [-] John23832|9 years ago|reply
That being said, this idea that we can extinguish the flame of reporting with a firehose of money is a horrible precedent. This is essentially saying that the rich few can determine what is reported to the masses due to their wealth. Allowing things like this endangers the important investigative reporting that uncovers things like bad working conditions, corruption and other horrible things that go on in society.
[+] [-] drspacemonkey|9 years ago|reply
It wasn't until much later that they found out they wouldn't be able to buy their way out of trouble.
[+] [-] gumby|9 years ago|reply
True, but he did feed the beast, producing a Streisand Effect. I had no idea he was gay (not that I care either way) until he won this lawsuit.
[+] [-] TazeTSchnitzel|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jmount|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bmh_ca|9 years ago|reply
Champerty (the funding of the litigation of others) is a problem in no small part because it allows the wealthy to engage in barratry (frivolous or vexatious litigation).
[+] [-] thrill|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Grue3|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Shanea93|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yeahyeah|9 years ago|reply
Antisocial personality disorder is characterized by a lack of regard for the moral or legal standards in the local culture. There is a marked inability to get along with others or abide by societal rules. Individuals with this disorder are sometimes called psychopaths or sociopaths.
Well, not exactly clear-cut, but I think a reasonable set of people, perhaps including Thiel, would agree that he has "a lack of regard for the moral or legal standards in the local culture"
[+] [-] bantunes|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] untog|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] exratione|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] John23832|9 years ago|reply
How? If everyone has equal access to justice and the justice system, there is no need to "sell portions of your right to justice".
[+] [-] Overtonwindow|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mc32|9 years ago|reply