Slashdot Mirror
Peter Thiel's Lawyer Wants To Silence Reporting On Trump's Hair (gawker.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Follow the report that Gawker has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy after facing multiple lawsuits funded by tech billionaire Peter Thiel, it's being reported that Thiel's lawyer, Charles J. Harder, is threatening to sue Gawker for reporting on the company that made Donald Trump's hair, claiming copyright prohibits Gawker from republishing his threat. He sent the company a letter on behalf of Edward Ivari, the owner of the company Gawker suggests may be behind Trump's hair. Gawker said it was sent a six-page letter that claims the story "was 'false and defamatory,' invaded Ivari's privacy, intentionally inflicted emotional distress, and committed 'tortious interference' with Ivari's business relations." Gawker reporter Ashley Feinberg suggested in a lengthy Gawker story that Trump secretly underwent Ivari International's $60,000 "microcylinder intervention" treatment, with the company's offices located on the 25th floor of Trump Tower. Gawker called Ivari's claims "ridiculous," and noted that the statements at issue were pulled from his own publicity materials and from public records of a 2001 lawsuit against the company.
Actually, what matters is that a prominent silicon valley VC is fairly publicly going after Gawker for personal reasons. The Hulk Hogan lawsuit, while valid, was bankrolled by Thiel. Now, Gawker is going bankrupt. And Thiel's lawyer continues to go after them.
While I'm not exactly a fan of Gawker, nor do I think Hulk Hogan's lawsuit was unfounded - the problem I have is that a very rich person basically paid lawyers to find problems and subsequently destroy a media entity that he didn't like. This is somewhat dangerous precedent - don't piss off the rich.
Now, regardless of the degree of truth or confidence a journalist may have in their story, they and their editors are likely to think twice before reporting on anything involving the very rich. "Remember what happened to Gawker?"
This matters? WTH? With everything going on in the tech world should we be worried about a lawsuit about Trumps hair?
I'm guessing from your comment that you're ignorant of the context here. Peter Thiel personally dislikes Gawker, and is now bankrolling third-party lawsuits against them. It's "news" because the very wealthy are openly perverting the United State's permissive litigation rules in order to quell disfavored speech. It's "for nerds" because those wealthy individuals happen to be high profile tech VCs targeting new media websites using, among other things, intellectual property law.
.:Semper Absurda:.
While I'm not exactly a fan of Gawker, nor do I think Hulk Hogan's lawsuit was unfounded - the problem I have is that a very rich person basically paid lawyers to find problems and subsequently destroy a media entity that he didn't like. This is somewhat dangerous precedent - don't piss off the rich.
Translation: Rich people should have fewer rights than I do.
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread." - Anatole France
Yes, you should be worried about the ability of a thin-skinned person with lots of money to shut down a media outlet. Today Gawker, tomorrow the Washington Post, then the NY Times.
Do you think that a democracy can function if the only news that is published is news that offends no one?
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
No, what matters is that a Silicon Valley 'Libertarian' is using the full power of the State to shut up his critics.
Once more proving that Libertarianism is nothing more than an attempt to sell Aristocracy to the gullible.
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?