Does Bezos actually know what the case is about?
'Bezos said earlier this week: "I don't think a billionaire should be able to fund a lawsuit to kill Gawker," adding, "the best defense against speech you don't like is a thick skin. If you can't tolerate critics, then don't do anything new or interesting." '
First up, Thiel was angry mostly about being shamelesely 'outed' as gay by Gawker - not for them being "critics" of him doing something "new or interesting". What then does Bezos hold up as the best defence against being outed as gay by Gawker? "Don't do anything gay", perhaps?
That dealt with, however, and now considering the actual lawsuit being funded, I'd also like to hear what Bezos believes is the "best defence" against Gawker publishing revenge porn?
While Thiel's motivation for funding the case may well be the grudge he holds against Gawker, that doesn't affect the merits of the case one iota.
Considering the gross a breach of privacy that has occurred here, is Bezos suggesting that the plaintiff shouldn't get the best legal representation possible? Legal costs are a big factor for people and accepting a settlement offer can be attractive to avoid a prolonged case and mounting legal bills.
It might be argued that the plaintiff may have accepted the $10m settlement offer without Thiel's backing. But I don't see why not having to accept the offer is a bad thing. It's been pointed out that the route that has been taken may well result in the plaintiff getting little to no compensation and the implication is that Thiel is being manipulative in order to achieve his own goals rather than get justice and fair compensation for the plaintiff.
But again, remember the facts of the case: the plaintiff had his privacy violated in the crudest fashion by the defendant, who did so with callous disregard in the pursuit of per-click revenue.
Given that, is it really THAT unreasonable that the plaintiff actually cares more about stopping Gawker, and thus preventing them from doing this to anyone else, more than he cares about monetary compensation?
Might he - of his own accord and without manipulation by Thiel - not actually want to destroy Gawker?