3 ms·
> will overshadow the principle at stake If we take a step back what is the key principle at stake here? I think the key principle is privacy. Should we allo
by sheepmullet 9y ago
> will overshadow the principle at stake
If we take a step back what is the key principle at stake here?
I think the key principle is privacy.
Should we allow a media company to ruin a persons reputation and career by violating his privacy in direct violation of a court order?
The real concern for me is that you need to find a supportive billionaire to be able to put a stop to it.
If the media turns on me tomorrow and invades my privacy I don't have a billionaire friend to turn to.
- aetherson 9y agoWhose reputation and career was ruined?
- sheepmullet 9y agoHulk Hogan! There was a reason the courts ordered gawker to pay massive damages.
- aetherson 9y agoWhat is it you would say Hulk Hogan's career is?
- sheepmullet 9y agoProbably advertizing/merchandizing? The courts found his career was damaged to the tune of $130 million.
- throwawayjava 9y agoYes, I think this is one case where both sides of the issue can agree the real problem is that our civil justice system seems to care more about the depth of your pockets than the veracity of your position. That needs to change, and you can find your way to this conclusion via sympathy with Hogan or with Gawker, but perhaps not via sympathy with Thiel (for the obvious reason).