4 ms·
It wasn't, but the damage amount is excessive.
by pcurve 10y ago
It wasn't, but the damage amount is excessive.
- icebraining 10y agoIt's interesting that it was actually higher than what the plaintiffs requested. It wasn't clear to me who sets that, the judge or the jury?
- jdmichal 10y agoJudges almost always set reward. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a heavy slap aimed at not obeying the court order to take down the video. http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/sentencing-law-faq.html http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/sentencing-la...
- yelnatz 10y agoHow was it excessive?
- cm2187 10y agoI would say the contrary would be problematic. What if this organisation could publish any dirt on you, could publish your most intimate pictures or details and if you were suing them, they would be fined only $10k, which they wouldn't care about because they make a lot more money abusing people? I would say this would be justice and ordinary citizens being helpless against big business.
- kebolio 10y agoI agree somewhat; the judge still could have bankrupted Gawker without taking too much off the number