泰尔,Gawker和言论自由

杰森威力克,写作兴趣为美国国防泰尔:

It’s also not clear what policy response Gawker’s outraged defenders would recommendPut caps on the amount of money people can contribute to legal efforts they sympathize with? That would put the ACLU and any number of advocacy groups out of businessIt would also represent a far greater threat to free expression than a court-imposed legal liability for the non-consensual publication of what is essentially revenge pornIf Marshall and others are worried about the superrich harassing critics with genuinely frivolous lawsuits — as, yes, authoritarian characters like Donald Trump have attempted to do — they would have more success backing tort reform measures to limit litigiousness overall than attacking Thiel for contributing to a legitimate cause he has good reason to support.

威力克的观点是,希尔的霍根对高科为言论自由的范围内我不反对我的柜台威力克,是,它可能是愤怒和/或对希尔的行为没有提出任何形式的新立法障碍阻止这类事情。

威力克:

Fortunately, this debate does not needs to be resolved, because our First Amendment protects the speech rights of everyone, regardless of where they reside on the left-wing privilege totem pollAnd that means Peter Thiel’s right to back Hogan’s cause is not and should not be in dispute, no matter how much Gawker-sympathizers hand-wave about how the wealthy contrarian is ushering in a totalitarian oligarchy.

这是双方的言论自由希尔是免费的秘密回(显然战略引导)霍根的案件高科但Gawker创始人Nick Denton空气是免费的,他怀疑霍根硅谷亿万富翁支持者吗,《福布斯》杂志是免费的泰尔作为支持者说现在评论员震惊是免费的在泰尔表达他们的愤怒,也许尴尬他,使它不太可能,他或其他类似super-wealth将来会这样做威力克的防御泰尔打动我的是一块超级富豪的观点是一个愤愤不平的,而不是特权阶级

拿我来说,不要争论泰尔霍根的情况下的权利我只是认为他是一个混蛋,懦夫,他试图用秘密。