Hulk Hogan's Motion Against Gawker Denied for Sex Tape Removal - Wrestle Newz twitter google

Hulk Hogan’s Motion Against Gawker Denied for Sex Tape Removal

Hulk Hogan was denied the motion to force Gawker Media to remove the excerpts from the sex tape featuring Hogan and Heather Clem. U.S. District Judge James D. Whittemore indicated that freedom of press was an important consideration in his ruling. Here is an excerpt from Tampa Bay Online.

“Plaintiff’s public persona,” the judge wrote, “including the publicity he and his family derived from a television reality show detailing their personal life, his own book describing an affair he had during his marriage, prior reports by other parties of the existence and content of the Video, and Plaintiff s own public discussion of issues relating to his marriage, sex life, and the Video all demonstrate that the Video is a subject of general interest and concern to the community.”

Share This on Facebook
  • Mick

    HAHA! Another failure in Hogan’s laundry list of screw ups.

  • Adam

    Seriously? Freedom of press over invasion of privacy? A sextape is not in the public interest, and anyone interested in this one should go seek professional help.

  • Brody Lawrence

    LOL! What’s Huckamania gonna do when the Internet runs wild with him? XD Serves you right Huckster you stupid dickhead. The only part of the judge’s decision that I disagree with, like Adam said, is that this poor man’s porno is of “general interest & concern to the community”. No one in their right mind is interested in that video nasty and I don’t even know how it would be of general concern to anyone. XP

  • Z…..

    What it means is that Hogan gave up his right to privacy in the matter entaled b/c of all of the other pulic things that are available to everyone that he has done. The things listed pertain to simlar acts as those he was upset about being published. A good example of this was actually on a recent tv show so I will use it here. Lady had a tattoo above her breast, claiming to have it removed. she was suing someone and he was being charged with helping her escape bail, but she used money he gave her for a new tattoo. attourneys tried to prove she still had the tattoo, but couldnt based on right to privacy. However, they found out that she used to waitress at a place where the uniform showed that part of the breast exposed. Therefore, it was now public knowledge and her right to privacy was notupheld. different situation, but it still compares

Follow Wrestle Newz