4 ms·
I think Gawker was wrong, and deserved to be seriously damaged by this (and many other things), but lets not pretend that this wouldn't have hurt them if they w
by nohat 10y ago
I think Gawker was wrong, and deserved to be seriously damaged by this (and many other things), but lets not pretend that this wouldn't have hurt them if they weren't wrong. Defending yourself takes an enormous amount of energy, time, and money. If a billionaire hates you they can fund lots of lawsuits against you that would have otherwise never materialized. This would constantly drain you, even if you win, even if you win costs. Since the billionaire is just funding it, they don't even need to step into the court room to ruin your life.
In this case Thiel waited (probably) until Gawker had done something particularly bad (at least liability wise). That's good, but its easy to see what someone of his resources could choose to do with no apparent repercussions. Of course this is disturbing. The fact that our court system is abusable in this fashion doesn't mean we shouldn't be concerned about the individuals who might so abuse it.
The article took this case as proof and omen way beyond what it actually shows, but its not nothing.
- BurningFrog 10y agoSo your complaint is that Thiel could have done something else than what he did, and that would have been bad? In reality Thiel didn't abuse the court system with meritless cases. Had he done that, I would also have been disturbed. But since he didn't, it's hard for me to get upset about it.