> Peter Thiel is not directly damaging Gawker with his money. He's doing so via the intermediary of the justice system, where for whatever reason money has rele

> Peter Thiel is not directly damaging Gawker with his money. He's doing so via the intermediary of the justice system, where for whatever reason money has relevance. It is there that we should find danger, not that Peter Thiel circumstantially decided to send his wrath in the direction of Gawker. I felt the same way reading this thread. I also thought about an h3h3 video I saw earlier today https://youtu.be/fEGVOysbC8w https://youtu.be/fEGVOysbC8w where they talk about fair use and how a lawsuit can cost you $100k in legal fees if you prevail. The question to ask should be: should our legal system be a game of chicken? or a sick twisted game of poker where you can't call "show" but just keep raising stakes? I hope we have not forgotten that the attorneys responsible for Aaron Schwartz's case are still in charge of things. I am by no means endorsing what Mr Thiel is doing. I think it is in extremely poor taste (even though I hate gawker). I simply agree that our attention should be more focused towards fixing our broken "justice" system. edit: no, the winner getting reimbursed for legal cost by the loser is not a fix