[throwaway_tech]

I think you unfairly are blaming the "billionaires" here and failing to acknowledge the organization bankrupted themselves by violating the law.

They didn't have to violate the law and expose themselves to a lawsuit for damages. Even then, they didn't have to spend themselves into bankruptcy fighting the lawsuit. They could have saved all the legal costs and accepted a judgement. Of course they could have not violated the law and avoided the lawsuit altogether. It seems to make sense the person who was damaged by the organization personally dislikes them, but that has nothing to do with the company going bankrupt, their own behavior is what lead to them going bankrupt.

[powowow]

Cool.

Did you know that Peter Thiel, in his own words, decided to "create a shell company to hire former investigative reporters and lawyers to _find_ causes of action against Gawker", and to then give it a starting timeline and budget of "three to five years and $10 million"?

[throwaway_tech]

>"create a shell company to hire former investigative reporters and lawyers to _find_ causes of action against Gawker"

Cool.

As I said, you can point the finger at the "Billionaire" but at the end of the day Gwaker's is liable for their unlawful behavior resulting in damages, that can't be blamed on Thiel. A Jury found Gwaker liable and awarded Hogan $140M, that bankrupted Gawker, not Thiel.

If Gawker didn't willfully publish stolen sex tapes of Hulk Hogan in violation of his rights, then Thiel would have wasted $10M and 3-5 years looking for something that doesn't exist, and they would still be in business.

[powowow]

Yah good point.

Most small businesses would suffer no harm at all from an adversary with an initial $10MM allocated toward an attack. After all, most businesses have no employees who have ever done anything even remotely questionable. And besides, it's super cheap and easy to win in court if truth and justice are on your side. (and the same in print; there's no way to for an investigative journalist to create disproportionately bad press)

You're definitely correct, right, and very smart. I agree with all of your points.

[coldtea]

>Most small businesses would suffer no harm at all from an adversary with an initial $10MM allocated toward an attack

If those small businesses had done shitty things like Gawker, then let them suffer!

[mam2]

It's not "employee doing something questionable"... it was their entire business model.