You are the kind of person who likes the first amendment only for compliments, it supposed to be for these kind of stuff, the ugly shit.

Again, he's a public figure.

Not American, but the Hogan story wasn't under trial. The sex tape was. The jury made the right choice.

The only reason the trial exists is not because of the tape, is because of Thiel's thin skin, cause he didn't have any grounds on his.

I don't think you understand how this is an abuse of money on the juritary system.

What? Without the tape there wouldn't have been a trial.

I think you've bought into a narrative created by fearful journalists.

Without Thiel's money there wouldn't be a trial.

Trust me, Hulk Hogan and Thiel aren't friends, he just has a personal vendeta with it.

And I think you bought into a narrative of Silicon Valley cocksuckers ;-)

That's how the first amendment works for public figures.

And it's not as if gawker doesn't regularly break important news -- viz the crack mayor, Chris Lee / republicans cruising for strange, etc.

Nobody was trying to stop Gawker from breaking important news, or any other kind of news. That's a false narrative driven by journalists who want to be able to do anything without oversight.

The issue wasn't that Gawker published that Hogan wasn't having an affair.

Again: the story wasn't the issue. The story didn't go to trial. The jury was not deciding whether Gawker had a right to publish the story.

The issue was Gawker publishing a sex tape to go with the story.

You're disingenuous -- you merely have to read comments in this very thread to see dozens of people who want to prevent Gawker from breaking news.

The sex tape was apparently legal as under first amendment law as understood by lawyers at the time gawker published it.