You Won’t Be Able to Sue the Next Gawker(medium.com)

24 pointsby codybrownvor 10 Jahren0 comments

You Won’t Be Able to Sue the Next Gawker

https://medium.com/@CodyBrown/you-wont-be-able-to-sue-the-next-gawker-e6c8a3900969#.vykyz67az

8 comments

gozur88vor 10 Jahren

It's a little disingenuous to call what Gawker does "dissent". It's also disingenuous to pretend Gawker has some new and clever business model - it's just tabloid journalism without the sort of brakes a good lawyer and basic human decency would normally provide.

Also it's odd the way the author shoehorns Donald Trump in at every opportunity. I get the impression the article would never have been written if Thiel didn't have a connection to someone the author despises.

npizzolatovor 10 Jahren

Is it really shoehorning when Thiel's lawyer is threatening Gawker with a lawsuit about an article they wrote about Donald Trump?[1] Seems like that's very relevant.

[1] From the article, http://gawker.com/now-peter-thiels-lawyer-wants-to-silence-r...

bllguovor 10 Jahren

Hard to take this seriously when the author opens with an underhanded attack on Thiel's political views. Irritating formatting as well.

[deleted]vor 10 Jahren

fwnvor 10 Jahren

Wow, this is remarkably biased.

It doesn't even consider systemic problems like exorbitant legal expenses and deforms US law making to some kind of corporate contract killer.

cpncrunchvor 10 Jahren

What is the title referring to?

benbenolsonvor 10 Jahren

My thinking was that it meant that Gawker's bankrupt, so you can't sue it in the future.

cpncrunchvor 10 Jahren

But that has nothing to do with the "next" Gawker. I assumed the article was going to say that the Gawker owners were going to set up an unsuable company structure. Perhaps just extract all the profit out of the company every month and rely on a line of credit for expenses. Would that be workable? People could still sue you, but they wouldn't get much.