![]() ![]() If Gawker can gather $80 million to pay up front, then that might be an attractive offer to Hogan. Hogan may decide it's a better idea to accept a settlement from Gawker. That whole process takes a long time and is rather expensive. If Gawker loses the appeal, then it will forfeit the bond to Hogan as payment towards the judgment and Hogan can try to collect the rest of it. That bond will protect Gawker throughout the appeals process, which could take quite a while. The court will set a bond which Gawker can pay to prevent Hogan from executing on the judgment while Gawker appeals the case. After they lose the motion, Hogan will probably ask for a judgment on the verdict and get it. Gawker will likely lose this motion, but they have to make it to set up an appeal. ![]() More realistically what will happen is that Gawker will ask for a Judgment Notwithstanding the Veridct (just checked - they did on Monday the 4th) based on their argument that, despite what the jury thinks, as a matter of law Hogan could not have expected privacy in another person's home and others. It's also likely that Denton or Daulerio will put or have already put money in places where it's hard to reach so he probably won't literally bankrupt them. I don't know how much money Gawker, Denton, or Daulerio have altogether, so I don't know the total amount Hogan could recover. #Gawker loses millions fullIf that doesn't pay the full judgment, Hogan can go after Denton or Daulerio unless they declare bankruptcy. That could either put Gawker out of business or under new management. If Hogan's attorneys are persistent, which they probably are given the amount of the judgment, they could eventually get control of Gawker and sell it to satisfy the judgment. If that gets turned into a judgment with those amounts, then they're all liable and Hogan can collect from any of them. Notice that Gawker, Nick Denton, and AJ Daulerio were all included in the verdict. Clem" in the top left and it's the most recent document from March 18. However, you can do things like ask a court for a "Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict," which essentially asks the court to give a judgment that ignores the verdict because the verdict can't be legally enforced for some reason.Ī copy of the verdict is available at the Pinellas County Clerk's website, which is here: (you have to click "Information on Bollea v. A judgment is a document that awards a party legal relief and is often based on the verdict. It's typically answers to specific questions. There's been a verdict, but not a judgment. Gamers are one of the most ignored and looked down upon groups in society, but the media has been painting them as “misogynists” and “bullies” for the past few months.īut as a sign that Gawker may start paying more attention to what its writers say in the future, the site’s editorial director Joel Johnson posted a statement on the front page saying that Gawker does not support bullying.Gawker doesn't owe Hogan anything yet. Read and Biddle both apologised for their tweets. Read’s post comes after he and another Gawker writer, Valleywag editor Sam Biddle, were embarrassed by tweets that seemed to support bullying of “nerds” and gamers. He also insulted Intel, an advertiser that left the gaming site Gamasutra for similar reasons, by writing, “Intel is run by cowardly idiots. Read yesterday said some unflattering things about gamers and made false claims about GamerGate. Max Read’s angry response to the situation won’t have made these advertisers feel any better. These letters are working.ĭozens of advertisers have changed their minds about sponsoring sites like Gawker because of how badly they treat their own readers. Since Gawker joined the fight with hateful games journalists who wanted to wrongly portray GamerGate as a misogynistic campaign running under the guise of a press ethics mission, GamerGate supporters have been writing earnest, polite letters to advertisers and sponsors. Instead of apologising for the tone of its coverage and the language of its writers, Gawker called the video game community, which was upset by Gawker’s biassed coverage of the GamerGate controversy, “dishonest fascists.” Gawker has been defiant in the face of a large number of advertisers leaving after a letter-writing campaign by video game fans and readers who were sick of the way its journalists yelled at, made fun of, and bullied them. As a result, brands like Adobe, Mercedes, and BMW are thought to have rethought their relationships with Gawker. Max Read, the editor-in-chief, says that consumer activism has already cost the publisher thousands of dollars. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |