Have you ever heard of a Supreme Court case?

"Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney" (braddelaparker) 06/08/2016 at 09:53 • Filed to: None

13

32

A solid majority of them are funded in the exact way that Peter Thiel has funded Hogan’s lawsuit against Gawker. A monied backer finds cases they support that have standing and ripeness and fund them. Thiel’s actions can’t possible set a bad precedent because they’re not setting a precedent at all. How do you think the ACLU works?

mcseanerson > Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney 06/08/2016 at 09:59

1

Is there a new post from Gawker about how amazing and righteous they are and how Peter Thiel is the devil and hates truth and freedom?

Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney > mcseanerson 06/08/2016 at 10:00

1

THIS IS A FREEDOM OF THE PRESS ISSUE!!!11!1!!1!!!juan!1!1!

Nah, I’ve just been noodling on a way to get it through to people that this isn’t anything new and is actually par for the course for civil torts and the Supreme Court parallel popped into my head and I needed to spew it.

StingrayJake > Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney 06/08/2016 at 10:03

0

NRA has an entire legal arm dedicated to backing court cases and pushing them to the Supreme Court (if possible).

Ash78, voting early and often > Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney 06/08/2016 at 10:03

3

IIRC, both the Hogan and Thiel issues stem from a sex story (layered with corruption and racism, maybe, but ultimately sex and orientation). This whole thing has gotten awfully high & mighty considering it stemmed from a bunch of click-baity, muckraking garbage. This isn’t like Julian Assange or Edward Snowden, but Gawker sure acts like it is.

TheBloody, Oppositelock lives on in our shitposts. > Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney 06/08/2016 at 10:04

2

But what about the feelz? Have you take the feelz into consideration?

vondon302 > Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney 06/08/2016 at 10:06

0

Truth

Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney > StingrayJake 06/08/2016 at 10:07

2

It’s the way that civil torts work, and to be honest I don’t have a problem with it because it eliminates funding as a prerequisite for being able to succeed in court, regardless of the side of the issue or politics that you’re on. The irony is even greater in the case of the Hulk/Gawker case in that, typically, the corporate defendant is the one that can outfund the plaintiff, bringing the suit to a rather quick end, a scenario that I take pretty even odds on a bet that Gawker has been on the outfunding side of before, too.

deprecated account > Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney 06/08/2016 at 10:20

1

If you keep being so logical Kinja might implode on itself. Be careful.

Sam > Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney 06/08/2016 at 10:21

11

I think Gawker’s whole stance on the issue is amazing. This is in fact an issue of ‘freedom of the press’, but it’s in regards to the freedom of individuals to have privacy from the press in their lives. Gawker is the bad guy here, even if Thiel is a shitty person. The press doesn’t have a right to turn people’s exclusively private affairs into a headline. Doubly so when it is in an effort to ruin their life, and even more when they are doing it because the person is part of a rival company.

Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney > TheBloody, Oppositelock lives on in our shitposts. 06/08/2016 at 10:21

2

What are these “feels”?

Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney > deprecated account 06/08/2016 at 10:23

1

But how will we know if it’s a regularly scheduled Kinja implosion or if it was a user-generated Kinja implosion?

deprecated account > Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney 06/08/2016 at 10:27

1

mcseanerson > Sam 06/08/2016 at 10:29

3

The way I see it is the argument everyone, including Gawker, loves to make regarding freedom of speech. You’re free to say whatever you want but it doesn’t mean you’re free from repercussions from it.

Dru > Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney 06/08/2016 at 10:30

0

I think GM could have put this whole thing behind them with minimal pain if they had just taken the thing down at the first request.

Sam > mcseanerson 06/08/2016 at 10:32

6

I always liked the old adage “your rights stop where someone else’s begin”. Thiel and Hogan have a right to maintain private lives, especially when nothing they did was illegal.

MUSASHI66 > Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney 06/08/2016 at 10:44

0

It is a shame that the number of zeros on your bank account determines how good your legal services can be and how far you can push your case. I am pretty sure that the founding fathers didn’t intend for this to happen.

We can laugh at the corruption in other countries legal systems, but in a way, our legal ways of influencing people with money are not much better.

BigBlock440 > MUSASHI66 06/08/2016 at 10:54

0

It is a shame that the number of zeros on your bank account determines how good your [insert good or service here] can be

MUSASHI66 > BigBlock440 06/08/2016 at 10:58

1

Well, I don’t agree with that statement. Better service in an expensive restaurant, or in a dealership for a high end car versus in a Mitsubishi dealership, better haircut at an expensive salon versus GreatClips... all of those depend on how much money you want to spend, as they should.

But, for a country that prides itself on “freedom and justice for all”, to have justice be determined by your bank account, it is simply wrong.

Decay buys too many beaters > Sam 06/08/2016 at 11:20

1

Team America summed this up nearly perfectly.

Theil is a dick

Gawker are the assholes

Don’t know who the pussies are, probably the gawker commentariat

Party-vi > Sam 06/08/2016 at 11:25

0

Terry Bollea has the right to a private life. Hulk Hogan is a character portrayal that Bollea has taken to with gusto. Hulk Hogan is a public figure, and everything from creepily incestuous photos and comments to racist diatribes to railing his friend’s wife is newsworthy.

Sam > Party-vi 06/08/2016 at 11:28

1

That is irrelevant. Regardless of whether someone has a public persona does not absolve their rights to having private business. Would it be alright for someone to publicize your private business online because you have the online public persona of ‘Party-vi’?

Party-vi > Sam 06/08/2016 at 11:36

0

Party-vi is not a public persona, it is my handle for Oppositelock. I do not promote my own products as “Party-vi”, I don’t generate income as “Party-vi”, and it’s not a character that has been in popular culture for decades. Terry Bollea has a certain expectation to a right to privacy, but being he is in character almost every time he’s out of the house it makes it very difficult for him to claim that certain things were done as Bollea vs being done as Hogan. All his radio interviews are as Hulk Hogan. His show was scripted as Hulk Hogan. The sex tape was a celebrity sex tape, and could be considered as an item of public interest just like every other celebrity sex tape in recent years. He team even filed for damages they would have received if the tape had been marketed! The man is a celebrity and should expect the privacy of one in his station. Any comparison to you or I is also irrelevant.

B/Xmrrmvr > Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney 06/08/2016 at 12:01

0

Nick Denton found his own sugar daddy.

fintail > Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney 06/08/2016 at 12:49

1

Will the new firm be called ThielHoganLLC once this is finished?

Couldn’t happen to a better pack of oversensitive egoistic bloggers.

mcseanerson > Party-vi 06/08/2016 at 15:10

0

The same logic justifies the fappening. Would you say that was newsworthy?

Party-vi > mcseanerson 06/08/2016 at 15:54

0

Nothing justified the hacking and stealing of multiple personal photos taken by celebrities and meant for their significant others. The story of the “fappening” was newsworthy, just like the story of there being a Hulk Hogan sex tape was newsworthy.

mcseanerson > Party-vi 06/08/2016 at 17:23

0

Should the photos have been published?

Party-vi > mcseanerson 06/08/2016 at 17:47

0

The photos were not “published”. Some journalist didn’t stumble upon the photos and write an article that got edited and then posted. A clandestine group of hackers that got their jollies off breaking into iCloud accounts and stealing very personal images released them on 4Chan, and from there the images spread on Reddit and Imgur. After this initial leak I’m sure the photos were referenced in articles about the iCloud leaks of celebrity photos, but don’t mistake the leak for someone actually publishing the photos as part of a journalistic endeavor.

The Hogan sex tape was first reported being shopped to Vivid Entertainment by TMZ, and then stills were released by another news outlet with an accompanying article. Gawker did nothing different except post an edited version of the film. Unfortunately they felt the film is worth possibly going bankrupt over.

Also, none of the celebrities involved with the iCloud leaks had a public persona that was different from their own - it’s not like Kate Upton is a stage name for someone who just acts as a model and in reality is a very different reserved person. Terry Bollea can’t reasonable act as Hulk Hogan and then argue he has a claim to privacy as Terry Bollea. It doesn’t make sense. We his racist remarks as Hulk Hogan? Terry Bollea would like you to think so.

mcseanerson > Party-vi 06/08/2016 at 17:52

0

I’m not arguing in favor of public personas. I’m not asking if the photos were published. I’m asking if Gawker or anyone else would have been in their rights to publish them. You seem to be implying Gawker was in their rights to publish a version of the sex tape. Would anyone have been in their rights to publish photos from the fappening?

Party-vi > mcseanerson 06/08/2016 at 17:57

0

I believe the sex tape was newsworthy and that Gawker had every right to publish news about it, and I believe that Hulk Hogan is a public figure and cannot expect as much privacy and ordinary people. I also believe that Gawker justified publishing it when they mentioned that Bollea (or Hogan) said he would never have sex with Clem’s wife, and then there is footage of it happening. Just because I agree with them having the right to publish it does not mean I agree they should have.

mcseanerson > Party-vi 06/08/2016 at 18:02

0

You still haven’t answered my question.

Party-vi > mcseanerson 06/09/2016 at 09:42

0

The question was “should the photos have been published”, which considering they were not published but were leaked doesn’t get an answer. Now if Gawker had published the iCloud hack photos in an article then yes I would condemn them for it, but they didn’t. Bollea put his sex life into public view with interviews, so that made the sex tape newsworthy. Whether it needed to be shown is another question, which I don’t think it did need to be shown.