hard for me to feel bad for gawker. i’m no fan of hulk hogan, either, but they are so slimy.
I wonder if they’ll appeal or just… die? I guess endless appeals would be a lot cheaper at this point.
If The Fappening wasn’t cool, then this isn’t cool, so I’m glad they lost. It’s a damn sex tape, not the Snowden documents.
I can’t read the words “Hulk Sex Tape” without picturing some kind of Avengers slashfic.
Fiction, once again, being much nicer than reality.
Apparently they are going to have to put up $50m in escrow just to appeal.
Gawker admits they published about 2 minutes of video from the sex tape. Other venues decided that “newsworthiness” was satisfied by publishing stills.
So did Hogan make a sex tape without the intention of it being leaked or was he looking for some of that Kardashian type of press, but with a twist?
St Petersburg, Florida… no surprise there.
I decided to stop visiting gawker sites after i received a tirade of abuse from a forum moderator after suggesting they tone down their pro-apple bias a little and at least be fair.
Nice to see i made the correct decision, as this proves that Gawker really are bad to the core…
My fruede would be a lot schadenier if the New York Times had been made to pay for their blatantly dishonest Iraq War reporting.
Yeah but in the NYT’s defense didn’t a lot of the Iraq narrative come from highly placed officials in the government at the time?
“We don’t need the First Amendment to protect what’s popular,” responded Gawker attorney Michael Sullivan in his own closing. “We need a First Amendment to protect what’s controversial.”
I am confused. Sex tapes are popular. This argument defeats itself.
Which they passed uncritically and unsourced as researched fact.
Be glad i don’t care to post a gif I have sitting on my hard drive that got popuar after age of ultron.
Edit: mostly because said Gif is nsfw and here is not a place for such things.
Hogan didn’t make the tape. His former best friend, whose wife Hogan was having sex with in said tape, filmed them without Hogan’s knowledge and subsequently put it on the Internet without Hogan’s permission. Gawker then put a short clip from the tape on their website. I’m no fan of Gawker, but Hogan was suing them because a) his former best friend isn’t rich, and b) he can’t sue the internet. Gawker didn’t let the horse out of the barn. They just took a picture of the horse and published it. I suspect the jury ruled in Hogan’s favor because Gawker’s publisher’s testimony made it clear that Gawker is full of loathsome human beings. I suspect this won’t hold up on appeal, but IANAL.
I think it will hold up to an appeal. If the appeals court will hear it.
Because people are missing a huge point here, in the comments:
Taping someone during sexual activity, without their consent or knowledge, while under a reasonable expectation of privacy is a form of sexual assault.
What gawker did was sell the film of this crime to the public, which is also a violation of the victim’s rights.
If there was any justice at all, many people would be facing criminal charges over this.
Instead, the guy was only able to sue for damages.
Gawker isn’t the thief, they’re just the fence. But a willing fence isn’t any better than a thief.