An Odd Bit of Potential Shutuppery

If you use the courts to silence your critics, that’s shutuppery.  Same thing if you take your SJW’s to the college quad and chant until the dean or college president bows to your wishes.  That last one usually takes a day or so.

Hulk Hogan sued the Gawker website and won a judgement of $140 million dollars because of a sex tape.  I don’t expect to write much about it, except that I figure videotaping yourself having sex is a dangerous activity. Expecting to put somebody else’s tape on your website is just plain stupid.

Here’s the twist: The lawsuit might have been bankrolled by somebody who has a grudge against Gawker.  Someone who wants the site shut down.  His method?  Pay for Hulk Hogan’s lawyers, and structure the lawsuit so that Gawker’s insurance cannot pay.


To further complicate things, a new character has now been added to the drama: The rich benefactor who has been bankrolling and possibly also controlling the heavyweight battle from behind the scenes.

According to a report by Forbes, which the New York Times has since corroborated, Hogan’s legal case is being funded in part by Peter Thiel, a billionaire venture capitalist probably best known for being an early investor in Facebook and a co-founder of PayPal.


The billionaire has been a vocal critic of Gawker’s former Valleywag column for years, calling the New York-based publication “the Silicon Valley equivalent of Al Qaeda,” among other things. One of the stories that bothered Thiel most, Silicon Valley insiders say, was the one that outed him publicly as being gay in 2007.

Whose side am I on?  I worry that the entire incident might encourage other folks to fund lawsuits which have no merit.  Imagine a Brett Kimberlin if only he could afford actual lawyers.  I know Brett imagines that every time he gets his head handed to him in court.

Imagine an army of lawyers, suing as many right wing (or even left wing) sites in an attempt to bleed them dry.

As I finished this, I noticed a judge has denied Gawker’s request for a new trial.


8 thoughts on “An Odd Bit of Potential Shutuppery

  1. gmhowell

    Gawker is a filthy cesspool with only one marginally tolerable property (Jalopnik), so it pains me to no end to have to say I’m on the side of the corporate parent of Jezabel. Ugh.

    On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Dave Alexander & Company with Ukuleledave and David Edgren — This is the original Artisan Craft Blog wrote:

    > Dave Alexander (formerly ukuleledave) posted: “If you use the courts to > silence your critics, that’s shutuppery. Same thing if you take your SJW’s > to the college quad and chant until the dean or college president bows to > your wishes. That last one usually takes a day or so. Hulk Hogan sued the > Gawk” >


    1. Dave Alexander (formerly ukuleledave) Post author

      gm: Oh yeah, they’re pond scum. I just wonder what would happen if the next millionaire funds lawsuits into Right thinking blogs. Apparently, folks don’t even need to be slandered or hurt in order to sue. You just need the filing fee, a computer and printer. Oh, writing skill or consistent logic isn’t needed either. Lawyers cost money.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Gus Bailey

        I think this piece is telling, Dave. Implicit in your logic is that there is no justice, just power-plays; whoever brings the biggest guns wins.

        I may be naïve, being just a(nother) ghost in the machine, but I tend to believe that the system is still semi-functional.

        I will grant, that without a “Loser Pays” system the process can be the punishment.


      2. AJ Fornicarius Hoc

        The crucial fact you are both missing or ignoring is that Hogan didn’t record himself, nor did he supply the video to Gawker or otherwise release it. He was not wrong to expect privacy, and Gawker purposely, vindictively, exploited the tape in such a manner as to inflict the maximum amount of damage on Hogan.

        That’s why he won.

        AJ: I’m not talking about the merits of the case, although I didn’t know that Hogan did not know he was being recorded.

        My main point is that Hogan had a sponsor for his lawsuit. In a litigious environment, having someone pay for excellent lawyers matters. Dave

        Liked by 1 person

  2. A Reader #1

    See, e.g., Christian bakers and florists.


    1. AJ Fornicarius Hoc

      Except that The didn’t do it to enforce his own political/social agenda. He did it because he was personally offended by Gawker’s treatment of him and violation of his privacy, even though it wasn’t actionable. Hogan’s case was, and so an opportunity to give Gawker their just desserts.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s