Slashdot Mirror
'Legalist' Startup Automates The Lawsuit Strategy Peter Thiel Used To Bankrupt Gawker (gizmodo.com)
An anonymous reader writes from a report via Gizmodo: "Two Harvard undergraduates have created a service called Legalist that uses what they call 'data-backed litigation financing,' analyzing civil lawsuits with an algorithm to predict case outcomes and determine which civil lawsuits are worth investing in," reports Gizmodo. The process is very similar to what billionaire Peter Thiel did when he secretly funded a lawsuit from Hulk Hogan against Gawker Media. "Legalist says it uses an algorithm of 58 different variables including, as [Legalist cofounder] Eva Shang told the Silicon Valley Business Journal, who the presiding judge is and the number of cases the judge is currently working on. The algorithm has been fed cases dating back to 1989 and helps people figure out how long a case will last and the risks associated with it. In a presentation at Y Combinator's Demo Day on Tuesday [Legalist was developed as part of Y Combinator's Summer 2016 class], the founders claimed that the startup funded one lawsuit for $75,000 and expects a return of more than $1 million. Shang says the $1.40 is earned for every $1 spent in litigation financing, which can prove to be a profitable enterprise when you're spending hundreds of thousands of dollars." Shang told Business Insider in reference to the Gawker lawsuit, "That's the kind of thing we're staying away from here." The company will supposedly be focusing on commercial and small-business lawsuits, and will not be backing lawsuits by individuals.
Or - If you're a celebrity and you don't want your shit posted for all the world to see, keep your damn pants on and don't fuck your best friend's wife.
You should see the stories over at Gawker today. Oh the anger and outrage over Leslie Jone's nude photos and passport information leaked. But Hulk Hogan's sex tape is totally different...
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Thing is: Gawker didn't know that and thought they were on firm legal ground.
Then they must have had the dumbest lawyers in the history of both law and idiots. Although this was pretty obvious when they didn't amend Daulerio's deposition to clarify or remove the comment about 4 year olds.