Slashdot Mirror
Jury Orders Gawker To Pay $115 Million To Hulk Hogan In Sex Tape Lawsuit (zerohedge.com)
An anonymous reader writes: [Hogan's attorneys told jurors this is the core of the case:] "Gawker took a secretly recorded sex tape and put it on the Internet." And now they are paying for it, dearly. Also notable is that there doesn't seem to be anyone interested in defending them, as even the Twitter community (if it can truly be called that) has come out strongly in favor of the ruling against Gawker. Maybe they should have at least made more friends? They did make $6.5 million in net income in 2014 and their Wikipedia article states that they were last sold in 2009 for $300 million, so while they may not be put out of business, it seems likely they will at least be [changing] hands, and soon, with the jury ruling $55 million for economic injuries and $60 million for emotional distress. I think that's jury-speak for "body slam."
According to Ars Technica, Gawker Media was one of the first successful, large, digital-only news companies. "The stunning sum, which may have punitive damages added to it, is a life-threatening event for the New York-based network of news and gossip sites."
According to Ars Technica, Gawker Media was one of the first successful, large, digital-only news companies. "The stunning sum, which may have punitive damages added to it, is a life-threatening event for the New York-based network of news and gossip sites."
Hogan's signature move is the leg drop, not the pile drive.
Circumcision is child abuse.
It was recorded without his or the woman's consent. The woman and her husband had an open marriage, the man encouraged them to have sex and recorded it secretly. He then sold it to make money.
So you are supporting the #Fappening? Or is it only wrong when it happen to women?
I believe this is the tape that contained Hogan making racial slurs, which caused him to be kicked out of the WWE, lose his toy line, and most of his other various promotions, etc. His source of income is gone.
He's 62 now, so if he lives another 15 years, that's basically just 8 million dollars a year that he's charging. And his estate has also lost out from sales that would have happened after his death. And don't forget punitive damages.
$115 million seems fair considering that it was a humiliating invasion of privacy that left his career and estate in ruins and his personal reputation extremely damaged. (For comparison, Erin Andrews got $55 million for being spied on and recorded, which was unquestionably a highly traumatic experience invoked on her by a despicable person, but ultimately it may have helped her career if anything.)
If you are stupid enough to get recorded fucking
Do you even understand the concept of a secret recording? The point of a secret recording is that people caught by the recording device have no idea that they are being recorded, which makes it impossible for them to give consent to be recorded.
This is like saying that Erin Andrews' is at fault for herself being secretly recorded in her hotel room. Erin is the sports reporter that recently won a law suit against Marriott over secretly created nude footage. A hotel employee told her stalker what room she was staying in, then offering to put him in the adjacent room, whereupon he used a special drill bit to create an pinhole opening in the wall for a pinhole camera, and a hacksaw to alter the peephole in her door.
God almighty. You seriously think that women just love being secretly photographed in the nude by peeping toms?
Fuck this place has some real degenerates.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
It feels very strange to me that someone could be set for life, catapaulted to wealth far beyond what most individuals might accrue, based on a legal judgement like this.
I doubt the amount will stick, juries really have no idea how much in damages to award though the final number will be interesting to see.
It really is possible he's lost $55 million in income since his racist comments on the tape really hurt his career. But should Gawker be on the hook for that, even if they were wrong in publishing the tape?
Note that the summary omits many of the more lurid details of the case, such as:
-The fact that Gawker defied a court order to remove their posted copy of the sex tape: http://gawker.com/a-judge-told-us-to-take-down-our-hulk-hogan-sex-tape-po-481328088
-Court testimony by the Gawker reporter accused that they considered anybody above the age of four (not a typo) to be a valid subject for this kind of article: http://nypost.com/2016/03/09/gawker-editors-line-a-sex-tape-of-a-4-year-old/
The actual testimony is a absolutely fascinating train wreck: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Pr8S44o6N4. The defendants literally did everything they could to make both the judge and jury loathe them; so much so that the jury awarded above the originally requested amount when delivering a verdict.
The damages awarded is well and truly deserved for once so it's got a pretty good chance of sticking.