Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Peter Thiel's Lawyer Wants To Silence Reporting On Trump's Hair (gawker.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the back-and-forth dept.

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.

3 of 301 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Really? by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Don't do illegal things or commit civil torts, and you have nothing to worry about from anyone, whether rich or poor.

    In practice that doesn't work, of course, because everybody breaks laws all the time. So the next best thing to do is to avoid calling attention to yourself by acting like a complete sociopath. Unfortunately Gawker's founder skipped kindergarten that day.

  2. Re:Really? by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Its 'Anarchy Lite' - all the great flavour of anarchy, with no loss of privelage

  3. I guess the lesson here by sabbede · · Score: 3, Interesting
    is that homophobia is bad. Gawker wanted to take Thiel down a peg by revealing his sexuality, the implication being that homosexuality is bad (why else would it hurt him?). Rather appalling considering that the man who owns Gawker is himself gay. Perhaps it would be different if Thiel was a hypocritically anti-gay activist, but no, it was just a private and personal matter.

    I don't know if it's right for Thiel to pursue his vendetta, but I can't really blame him.