Hulk Hogan Settles With Gawker For $31 Million (go.com)

Gawker Media, which filed for bankruptcy after losing a lawsuit brought by the former professional wrestler Hulk Hogan, has settled the case. The settlement, which court documents indicate is for $31 million, comes less than eight months after a jury awarded Mr. Hogan $140 million in damages in an invasion of privacy case lawsuit over Gawker's publication of a video that showed Hogan having sex with a friend's wife. From a report on ABC: Settlement documents filed at a New York federal bankruptcy court stipulate that Hogan, whose real name is Terry Bollea, will get $31 million plus share with other creditors 45 percent of any additional funds that come into the bankruptcy court by virtue of third-party claims brought by Gawker. Hogan's camp said in a statement: "After almost five years of litigation all parties agreed it was time to resolve this matter. This will allow people to go about their lives and concentrate on things more important than continued court proceedings. As in any case involving negotiation all parties give-and-take. We would like to thank everyone involved in the process." In a blog post on the settlement, Nick Denton, the founder of Gawker Media, wrote: "After four years of litigation funded by a billionaire with a grudge going back even further, a settlement has been reached. The saga is over."

Comments

Poor Nick Denton

[HBI]

His company was destroyed because he ignored the law. Let's all feel sorry for him. I'm playing the world's smallest violin.

A boil has been excised from the ass of humanity.

Re:Poor Nick Denton

[KiloByte]

His company was destroyed because he ignored the law. Let's all feel sorry for him.

Well, let's see how ignoring the law works for, let's say, Clinton. Hmm... perhaps some animals are more equal than others?

Re:Poor Nick Denton

[ganjadude]

yeah sorry but..... no you got things backwards. I take it you were ok with the fappening as well right?

IMO gawker fucked up by saying the hulk video was fine but not the fappening. either both are, or neither

Re:Poor Nick Denton

[Anonymous Cow Ward]

People funding other people's lawsuits is an old practice, and it's very valuable. Without it, the ACLU wouldn't be able to help people sue in civil rights cases, for instance. There's no more possible damage to freedom of the press for this than there is for other lawsuits; if it's without merit, it won't get far, and if the case has merit, then we should celebrate justice happening. Gawker wasn't sued because of good reporting; they were sued because they broke the law and also defied a judge's order to take the tape down after the fact. This case sets no real precedent, and whining that Gawker got punished for breaking the law flagrantly and without remorse is just silly.

Re:Poor Nick Denton

[vadim_t]

Yes, tell yourself this was all about one particular asshole and there's no collateral damage possible to freedom of the press or freedom of speech.

You intend as sarcasm, but that's entirely correct.

Peter Thiel is straight up evil. By all means, sue gawker for invasion of your privacy, outing a billionaire is not very nice I suppose. Billionaire responding by funding lawsuits against the news organization until it shuts down is censorship by any useful meaning of the word though.

Thiel did nothing more than exactly the same thing that's done by the EFF and the ACLU: supporting somebody who has a grievance, but lacks the money to pay for lengthy litigation.

I would have agreed with you if Thiel was supporting completely unfounded lawsuits that had no other purpose than making Gawker lose money by paying for lawyers. But that wasn't the case, Bollea had a very genuine grievance with Gawker, and all Thiel did was contributing money to it. It's not any different than when people fund litigation through aligned organizations (EFF, ACLU), friends and family, or crowdfunding. There's nothing illegal or immoral about it.

Furthermore what is actually disturbing is the implication that money makes right, and the right situation is where one loses a lawsuit not due to lack of merit, but due to the lack of funding, and that there's something wrong with a third party counteracting this.

Re:Poor Nick Denton

[Cruciform]

Exactly. Even if you don't like Hogan or Thiel, the funding of legitimate lawsuits is hardly unethical.
If he was bombing them with nuisance suits for death by a thousand cuts it would be different.
But Gawker was in the wrong. Allowing those who have grievances with them to proceed freely does absolutely nothing to limit "freedom of the press".

Millionaires

[Princeofcups]

A millionaire sued another millionaire and millions changed hands. Everyone is scum in this situation. Plaintiff, defendant, and lawyers. Just an average day in America.

Re:The party I have the least respect for

[mattyj]

Doesn't matter, status of the relationship, regardless of how skeezy it is. In the US, you can't publish a sex tape without the consent of everyone that's in it. That's really the only question here. I'm not a fan of anyone in this story, but Gawker willfully, purposely, knowingly, blatantly broke the law. I'm no celebrity but as someone who likes his privacy, I'm pretty glad they got sued and lost.

It's interesting. When you see these 'leaked' sex tapes of celebrities that _aren't_ suing Gawker media, that's not a leak. That's a consensual, for-profit marketing ploy for said celeb.

justice?

[srw]

It's a sad state of affairs when you need a billionaire with a grudge backing you to get any justice.