I suppose that you could make the case that Gawker derived some benefit from their link to the site where the anonymously, and cowardly, posting resided but the judge in this case wasn't sufficiently impressed to allow the case to go forward. This points to a need to change the law, right? Or would that lead to more censorship.
You have to give Quentin Tarantino credit, though--he wants to create and he's running up against the tidal wave of bullshit that inhibits creation these days. Everything you say or do can be stolen in an instant and others can profit from your labors. This is rapidly becoming a world where the only creative outlets are going to be things that people do for free and walk away from. Film, as a medium, could be replaced with nothing.
Tarantino needs to go after whoever jacked his script and then burn that person. That's his only real recourse here.