• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Jury sides with Hulk Hogan in his sex tape lawsuit against Gawker & awards him $115m

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

sikkinixx

Member
I'm sad Gawker is probably gonna get away with this relatively fine once it goes to appeal. They're a shitty company. There's no way they're gonna have to pay $100+ million bucks.
 
M

Madness

Member
AuthenticM said:
I cannot believe that there is a judge (and maybe judges) in the US that considers a fucking sex tape of interest to the public.

The US is definitely la-la-land.
Click to expand...

They didn't. That's why they awarded Hogan so much money and also criticized the fuck out of Gawker. That they violated individuals' privacy solely for clicks. The sex tape wasn't of interest to the public. And that even after a judge ordered them to take it down they said no blah blah.

How do you not understand that? Hulk even said that during that time if you started typing HUL into Google right away Hulk Hogan sex tape came up with images and links to the gawker page. So that even kids searching for HULU would see it.
 
B

BreezyLimbo

Banned
SapientWolf said:
I think the irony is that the racist rants were the better story anyway, and Gawker had a stronger case to post them.
Click to expand...

Yup they couldve posted just the audio and destroyed Hulk that way without getting into this kerfuffle. Unfortunately their priorities were way the fuck outta whack.
 
A

AuthenticM

Member
BreezyLimbo said:
But the opposite happened
Click to expand...

Ninja Scooter said:
I don't think you are understanding what happened here.
Click to expand...

Madness said:
They didn't. That's why they awarded Hogan so much money and also criticized the fuck out of Gawker. That they violated individuals' privacy solely for clicks. The sex tape wasn't of interest to the public. And that even after a judge ordered them to take it down they said no blah blah.

How do you not understand that? Hulk even said that during that time if you started typing HUL into Google right away Hulk Hogan sex tape came up with images and links to the gawker page. So that even kids searching for HULU would see it.
Click to expand...

In this article:

Since Hogan lives in Florida and Gawker is based in New York, Hogan originally filed a suit against the company in Florida’s Middle District federal court. He also asked the federal judge, James Whittemore, to grant a temporary injunction against the Gawker post, forcing the company to remove it. Judge Whittemore denied Hogan’s motion, ruling that Gawker’s publication of the video was protected by the First Amendment.

...

Gawker appealed the injunction, and Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal issued an immediate stay, which prevented the injunction from going into effect. Eight months later, the appeals court issued a scathing opinion that overturned Campbell’s order on the grounds that the video was newsworthy and Gawker's publication of it was protected by the First Amendment.
Click to expand...

Two courts, including a court of appeal, decided the sex tape was newsworthy.

That's insane.
 
S

SenorArdilla

Member
Serious question. Gawker stated under oath that they would upload sex tapes involving celebrity children.

Would this affect their chances of getting an appeal?
 
C

CDX

Member
Oxx said:
Do we have to wait until next week to hear about any kind of additional punitive damages?
Click to expand...

Punitive Damages will be decided by the jury on Monday.

So right now it's $115M + $???

So we'll be seeing an even larger amount in a few days.
 
Rktk

Rktk

Member
I got the impression Gawker was on the way out, overtaken by the liked of Buzzfeed. rather than quietly withering and dying it's death by Hulk Hogan, better way to go if indeed they do.
 
N

Nephtis

Member
FyreWulff said:
most of TMZ's stories are done in cooperation of with whomever they are reporting on.

A few celeb agents will even call them and other outlets to "randomly find them" when they're shopping at a certain store
Click to expand...

Yep. I think Craig Ferguson talked about this a couple of times - they would take pictures of him with his sons, and he went up to the cameraman and told them to please not do that, because he values his family's privacy. They respected that wish of his, deleted the pictures and backed off.

There are some that wouldn't respect that for sure, but a lot of the celebrities are complicit with what's out there.
 
F

FyreWulff

Member
Nephtis said:
Yep. I think Craig Ferguson talked about this a couple of times - they would take pictures of him with his sons, and he went up to the cameraman and told them to please not do that, because he values his family's privacy. They respected that wish of his, deleted the pictures and backed off.

There are some that wouldn't respect that for sure, but a lot of the celebrities are complicit with what's out there.
Click to expand...

oh for sure, not everyone is in with them, but the ones that are on there a lot are usually feeding them photo ops.
 
J

Joe

Member
A company that big has to have insurance for this sort of thing....

Have any of Gawker's employees posted any sort of reaction to this?
 
B

Brakke

Banned
SenorArdilla said:
Serious question. Gawker stated under oath that they would upload sex tapes involving celebrity children.

Would this affect their chances of getting an appeal?
Click to expand...

Why would that matter. Gawker aren't on trial for doing that. Gawker haven't done that.

Joe said:
A company that big has to have insurance for this sort of thing....

Have any of Gawker's employees posted any sort of reaction to this?
Click to expand...

Jason replied in the Gaming side version of this thread: http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=198667991

Patrick Klepek's most recent tweet: https://twitter.com/patrickklepek/status/710970382606540800
 
R

RBH

Member
T7sXItB.jpg




http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=198674024#post198674024
 
F

funkystudent

Member
The clip currently of the front page of reddit of the Gawker guy getting grilled for saying that he was joking about how he wouldn't post a sex video of someone under the age of 4 is amazing and hard to watch.

I feel bad for the legit writers working for that organisation. I know full time gigs are hard and you gotta do it but man. Its a shame so many good sites have closed over the recent years.....

edit.

Link https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/4b3ld4/that_moment_when_gawker_editor_realises_that/
 
S

SeanTSC

Member
Man, after seeing the Child Porn comments I have absolutely no sympathy for Gawker. How does a human being get to the point where they become that much of a scumbag? It's difficult for me to understand how someone can become that shitty of a person. What path does someone go down in life to get to the point where they do shit like that?

I'm sorry that your jobs are in jeopardy, Jason, and Stephen, but you work for/with some monsters and I hope that Gawker doesn't get the verdict reduced in appeals at all.
 
S

Skeyser

Member
SeanTSC said:
Man, after seeing the Child Porn comments I have absolutely no sympathy for Gawker. How does a human being get to the point where they become that much of a scumbag? It's difficult for me to understand how someone can become that shitty of a person. What path does someone go down in life to get to the point where they do shit like that?

I'm sorry that your jobs are in jeopardy, Jason, and Stephen, but you work for/with some monsters and I hope that Gawker doesn't get the verdict reduced in appeals at all.
Click to expand...

I mean, he's a fucking moron for saying that in court, but he clearly was being sarcastic...
 
S

SeanTSC

Member
Skeyser said:
I mean, he's a fucking moron for saying that in court, but he clearly was being sarcastic...
Click to expand...

You don't be sarcastic about that kind of shit, especially in a deposition under oath. It's not funny and it's endorsing child porn whether you're joking or not. "I was being sarcastic" doesn't take away from him being a complete shithead and a bad person.
 
M

Manmademan

Member
SeanTSC said:
Man, after seeing the Child Porn comments I have absolutely no sympathy for Gawker. How does a human being get to the point where they become that much of a scumbag? It's difficult for me to understand how someone can become that shitty of a person. What path does someone go down in life to get to the point where they do shit like that?

I'm sorry that your jobs are in jeopardy, Jason, and Stephen, but you work for/with some monsters and I hope that Gawker doesn't get the verdict reduced in appeals at all.
Click to expand...

yep. haven't been following this one up until the verdict was read, but if I had ANY knowledge at all of the shit that was going on here I would have walked a long time ago.
 
Sapiens

Sapiens

Member
Skeyser said:
I mean, he's a fucking moron for saying that in court, but he clearly was being sarcastic...
Click to expand...


So? It goes beyond being a moron for this situation, especially when your employees' jobs are in the line. This guy's comments here are beyond moronic, certainly indefensible and downright contemptuous of every party involved.
 
Enosh

Enosh

Member
funkystudent said:
The clip currently of the front page of reddit of the Gawker guy getting grilled for saying that he was joking about how he wouldn't post a sex video of someone under the age of 4 is amazing and hard to watch.

I feel bad for the legit writers working for that organisation. I know full time gigs are hard and you gotta do it but man. Its a shame so many good sites have closed over the recent years.....

edit.

Link https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/4b3ld4/that_moment_when_gawker_editor_realises_that/
Click to expand...
sounds like someone needs better lawyers if they didn't point out that joking about a 4 year old sex tape might be a bad idea
 
S

SolidSnakex

Member
Enosh said:
sounds like someone needs better lawyers if they didn't point out that joking about a 4 year old sex tape might be a bad idea
Click to expand...

The amazing thing is that he was in the room with three of his lawyers when he said that and he was able to comb over what he said afterwards to change anything that might've been incorrect, and they still left that bit in.
 
T

twinturbo2

butthurt Heat fan
Mary Beth Williams, Salon writer who was targeted by Gawker once, is laying it into Gawker on Twitter now.

If she wants her hatred to overtake her, and cheer on a precedent that may affect her employer, fine. But if Salon publishes something unflattering about, say, Paul Ryan, and the lawyers come knocking...
 
K

Kaizer

Banned
Fudgepuppy said:
Didn't Gawker do a post about horrible the fappening was?

They're pretty hypocritical.
Click to expand...

That was a separate sub site, Jezebel I believe, that condemned the Fappening photo leak but yeah it's really messy. I get that each individual blog site is it's own thing for the most part, but it just makes matters like this really muddled when one side of the organization is all like "yeah we love this!" and the other side is like "this is literally the worst thing ever omg!".
 
S

SapientWolf

Trucker Sexologist
twinturbo2 said:
Mary Beth Williams, Salon writer who was targeted by Gawker once, is laying it into Gawker on Twitter now.

If she wants her hatred to overtake her, and cheer on a precedent that may affect her employer, fine. But if Salon publishes something unflattering about, say, Paul Ryan, and the lawyers come knocking...
Click to expand...
If the unflattering thing isn't literally his dick then I think they'll be fine.
 
Z

Zaventem

Member
twinturbo2 said:
Mary Beth Williams, Salon writer who was targeted by Gawker once, is laying it into Gawker on Twitter now.

If she wants her hatred to overtake her, and cheer on a precedent that may affect her employer, fine. But if Salon publishes something unflattering about, say, Paul Ryan, and the lawyers come knocking...
Click to expand...

Going through the tags related to this case last night seems a ton of verified journalist have it out for them.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
twinturbo2 said:
Mary Beth Williams, Salon writer who was targeted by Gawker once, is laying it into Gawker on Twitter now.

If she wants her hatred to overtake her, and cheer on a precedent that may affect her employer, fine. But if Salon publishes something unflattering about, say, Paul Ryan, and the lawyers come knocking...
Click to expand...

There's a difference between publishing something unflattering and publishing a sextape. As shit as Salon is they seem to get that. Gawker did things no other news outlet would have done, that's why they got in trouble. Not because they were mean to Hogan.

Zaventem said:
Going through the tags related to this case last night seems a ton of verified journalist have it out for them.
Click to expand...

Well, Gawker does give the profession a bad name.
 
J

jorma

is now taking requests
Kaizer said:
That was a separate sub site, Jezebel I believe, that condemned the Fappening photo leak but yeah it's really messy. I get that each individual blog site is it's own thing for the most part, but it just makes matters like this really muddled when one side of the organization is all like "yeah we love this!" and the other side is like "this is literally the worst thing ever omg!".
Click to expand...

Hmm, didn't i read earlier in the thread that the jezebel editor testified in the trial? I don't know on behalf of who she testified but somehow i don't think she said that her bosses should be charged with sexcrimes. :)
 
F

funkystudent

Member
Enosh said:
sounds like someone needs better lawyers if they didn't point out that joking about a 4 year old sex tape might be a bad idea
Click to expand...

I havent been playing full attention but was saying "FREEDOM OF THE PRESS" in a sarcastic hipster douche voice their entire defence like I imagine in my head?
 
S

Skeyser

Member
SeanTSC said:
You don't be sarcastic about that kind of shit, especially in a deposition under oath. It's not funny and it's endorsing child porn whether you're joking or not. "I was being sarcastic" doesn't take away from him being a complete shithead and a bad person.
Click to expand...

Wereroku said:
It's generally a bad idea to be jokey when you are being questioned for a lawsuit. It tends to reflect poorly on the company.
Click to expand...

Sapiens said:
So? It goes beyond being a moron for this situation, especially when your employees' jobs are in the line. This guy's comments here are beyond moronic, certainly indefensible and downright contemptuous of every party involved.
Click to expand...

I was just pointing out he was being sarcastic. No shit you don't do that while under oath.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Jury awards $25M more to Hulk Hogan
3 4 5 6 7
325
44K
QuantumZebra replied
Netflix documentary considers the dangerous ramifications of Bollea v. Gawker for the
2 3 4 5
228
29K
keenerz replied
  • Locked
The Gawker saga is over: Settled with Hulk Hogan and other litigants for $32 Million
2
79
9K
Producer replied
  • Locked
Court ruling gives Hulk Hogan indemnity rights of former Gawker editor
0
1K
Dalek replied
  • Locked
Gawker Media Files for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy
2
573
Trojita replied
Top Bottom