23 ms·
Gawker Can’t Shield Founder from Hulk Hogan Sex-Tape Verdict
- davidw 10y agoHow does that work out? Isn't it a limited liability company? I know there's "piercing the corporate veil", but why would that apply in this case?
- nostrademons 10y agoDenton was apparently named as a defendant in the lawsuit as well, and the court yielded a $10M judgment against him personally. Gawker also gave Denton a $200K personal loan right before bankruptcy for the purposes of potential bankruptcy filings related to the lawsuit; this might be a good case for piercing the corporate veil as well.
- danieltillett 10y agoIs Denton a complete moron to think this was going to be OK. Given the way Gawker ran the court case the evidence is piling up that Denton is not the smartest tool in the shed.
- nostrademons 10y agoI think it may be that he got away with it for a decade, and so it became normalized in his head. For the rest of us, Gawker was a lawsuit waiting to happen; for him, it was literally business as usual.
- slowernet 10y agoThe court case has not concluded. A gay, foreign media magnate known for publishing lurid expose (in addition to a lot of excellent and funny reporting [1]) was never likely to receive sympathetic treatment from a jury of people from Hulk Hogan's hometown. Let's see how things go on appeal. [1] http://gawker.com/heres-what-gawker-media-does-1779858799 http://gawker.com/heres-what-gawker-media-does-1779858799
- danieltillett 10y agoIs anyone in a position to appeal? I was under the impression that Gawker had to cough up a huge amount of cash to be able to appeal.
- FireBeyond 10y agoThey were trying to seek some money to cover the $50M in collateral that would be required for appeal (to be held in trust). Even at this stage, Gawker/Denton offered Bollea shares in Gawker from their expected sale, _and_ Bollea _accepted_. And then withdrew. I can't help but suspect if it was because Thiel's lawyers advised him not to, the same way they dropped the tort that was covered by Gawker's insurance. I find this interesting too - it was one thing when it was just that insurance claim. Then Hogan is willing to accept collateral from Gawker's prospective sale (indicating it's not him that's looking for Gawker's abject destruction), but lawyers, funded by Thiel, have him drop this, too. I think one of the fundamental tenets of justice (and to be quite clear, I feel Denton and Gawker both deserve to be reamed - for varying severities of the word - for their actions in this case) is the right to face your "accuser"/opponent. Not what looks more and more to me like their puppet.
- FireBeyond 10y agoGawker had indemnified Denton before this lawsuit came to pass, agreeing to cover legal costs related to Denton being personally sued in matters that related to Gawker. I think other comments here implying there's some looting going on are not quite on point.
- tracker1 10y agoFor that matter, I'm not sure how he can sell the company without the court verdict being part of the debt in order to purchase/sell the company.
- mikeryan 10y agoThe proceeds of the sale in bankruptcy go to the company's creditors of which Hogan is the largest
- tptacek 10y agoLimited liability doesn't apply apply to torts committed by company officers.
- encoderer 10y agoThe "Limited" in an LLC means that an investor in the company cannot lose more than the capital they've invested. It doesn't do anything to protect officers.
- Ping938 10y agoFunny thing is Gawker gave secret $200K Loan to Nick Denton before bankruptcy.
- FireBeyond 10y agoSecret? Gawker is private. My private employer doesn't disclose employee loans, why should any other?
- Ping938 10y agoSecret in a way that they had to disclose this to Florida courts, because it was couple days before bankruptcy. >“During the week ending June 10, 2016, at the same time that it was negotiating a DIP loan that has an effective interest rate near 30%, either Debtor or one of its affiliates made a payment of $200,000 in the form of a loan to the CEO for purposes of paying for personal bankruptcy counsel … The sole disclosure we found of this ‘loan’ was buried in a bullet point to an exhibit to Debtors’ motion for DIP financing. This loan was concealed from the Florida Court” http://www.businessinsider.com/hulk-hogan-gawker-made-secret-loan-to-denton-before-bankruptcy-2016-7 http://www.businessinsider.com/hulk-hogan-gawker-made-secret...
- FireBeyond 10y agoFurther replying since the sibling is dead: "First, Gawker has indemnified Denton, meaning that it has agreed to pay his legal tab. So theoretically, a judgment against Denton becomes Gawker's liability. But Hogan says that this indemnification agreement specifically precludes anything Denton does that constitutes misconduct or gross negligence. Hogan asserts that what the jury in the sex-tape case concluded qualifies as such and means Denton isn't indemnified. And even if otherwise, Hogan still doesn't believe this merits an injunction." It's definitely not proven problematic. Of course Hogan's lawyers are complaining about it, but it's not contentious that Gawker had indemnification in place.
- vonklaus 10y agoHow in the world did the court come up with a $140M sum for the settlement? This seems so excessive, it is actually comical. Obviously, everyone has beleaguered this point, but I feel obligated to state it one more time: Scumbaggery and poor taste shock journalism are pretty shitty, but fuck Peter Theil if he thinks setting a precedent like this is net good for anything other than his petty vendetta. edit: Yes, Gawker and Valleywag are pretty shitty. They probably have cause 140M worth of damage, just not to Hulk Hogan. Also, setting this precedent is so fucking dangerous that to argue that you don't like them and they deserve it is so infantile that if we accepted such arguments we would have shed nearly all of the rights afforded to us bu the U.S. Constitution. Also. This has nothing to do with left v. right.
- Overtonwindow 10y agoI'm not sure how they came up with it, but the figure was not a settlement. It was a judgment awarded by a jury. I don't know if it was six or 12, but a jury of citizens told Gawker to go pound sand.
- serge2k 10y ago> fuck Peter Theil if he thinks setting a precedent like this is net good for anything other than his petty vendetta a precedent that if you engage in trashy tabloid "journalism" and egregiously invade people's privacy that you can end up sued into oblivion? Sounds like a perfectly reasonable precedent.
- fatbird 10y agoThe precedent isn't about the quality of your journalism, it's "get a billionaire angry, get sued into oblivion". That's what scares people. Mother Jones nearly faced the same fate for very good journalism.
- nostrademons 10y agoDon't forget the part about publishing a sex tape without knowledge of the party involved. Mother Jones won their lawsuit, because the statements they published were both true and in the public interest. There is a very large difference between what Gawker did and what Mother Jones did, and the judgments reflect that.
- chubot 10y agoWow. I wonder if Thiel calculated the exact amount it would take to put Gawker out of business AND send Denton into personal bankruptcy. I mean, as a venture capitalist, you have pretty good insight into the finances of companies at a macro level. You're used to doing a little bit of "estimation from the outside", i.e. for both potential investments and for competitors. And he was also a lawyer. This is the most ruthless revenge story ever, not least because it was all legal... Thiel seems like a nerdy and curious fellow -- almost gentle, if he weren't so opinionated. But I guess everyone now knows not to mess with him.
- dopamean 10y agoHe seems like a real asshole to me. Nothing I have read about him has given me the impression that there is anything gentle about him at all.
- gremlinsinc 10y agoCareful -he might sue you next, apparently he's sue-crazy!
- maratd 10y agoActually, Gawker and Denton are the assholes. When confronting assholes, it's easy to be mis-perceived as one.
- dboreham 10y agoOk but...meanwhile on Wall St. individuals can't be held accountable for corporate actions.
- threeseed 10y agoThey could have been held accountable. But the government had to make a choice. (a) Settle and get home loan relief and other measures in place immediately for struggling families. (b) Engage in possibly a decade long, expensive fight that they might not be able to win.
- chii 10y agoAnd this creates the moral hazard of to big to fail banks. When you try to fix a drug addicts problem, you don't just fix the symptom, but also must fix the cause. It's not too dissimilar for societal problems imho.
- paulpauper 10y agobernie madoff? I think he went to jail Just Google "arrested for ponzi fraud' ...tons of results. Alan Stanford..another one. High profile and wealthy are not immune to the long arm of justice. Martin Shkreli (pending)..Bernard Ebbers..Andrew Fastow ..many more
- paulpauper 10y agoIf Denton secured money overseas, collecting will be hard