by Mike Masnick
Mon, Oct 6th 2008 11:24pm
Monday morning, we wrote about how a judge had issued a temporary restraining order against RealDVD until he had time to review the details and rule one way or the other on a pre-trial injunction. In our comments, one of our readers suggested this story was incorrect, as there didn't appear to be an actual restraining order on file -- suggesting that Real Networks may have pulled the software on its own. Yet, it turns out that, yes, in fact there was a temporary restraining order, but the judge ordered both sides to keep it secret. This is quite odd, as almost everyone immediately figured it out from Real pulling the software, and then it was confirmed by Real in a filing responding to the court. But all this does is raise a simple question: what could possibly be the rationale for keeping the temporary injunction secret?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- JEFTA: The Latest Massive 'Trade' Deal You've Never Heard Of, Negotiated Behind Closed Doors, With Zero Public Scrutiny
- Utah Judge Won't Let The Constitution Get In The Way Of A Little Prior Restraint
- Why The DMCA's Notice & Takedown Already Has First Amendment Problems... And RIAA/MPAA Want To Make That Worse
- Former RIAA Executive Attacks Fair Use
- Court Says Location Of FBI's Utility Pole-Piggybacking Surveillance Cameras Can Remain Secret