You Won’t Be Able to Sue the Next Gawker

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

24 points by codybrown 9 years ago

gozur88 9 years ago |

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.

npizzolato 9 years ago | |

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...

bllguo 9 years ago |

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

fwn 9 years ago |

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.

cpncrunch 9 years ago |

What is the title referring to?

benbenolson 9 years ago | |

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

cpncrunch 9 years ago | | |

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.