Before all of these #MAGA attacks on #TaylorSwift, all I knew about her was that she was a rather successful pop singer. Because of this "holy war" against her, I have done some, admittedly shallow, research on her, and I am actually currently listening to her "Taylor's Version" album.
"Judge orders Oregon newspaper not to publish documents linked to Nike lawsuit"
No, no, no, no, no, no, fuck no.
I really think U.S. Magistrate Judge Jolie Russo is full of shit with her verdict. She's not just asking that the newspaper hold into their information for a while, she wants the documents returned to the attorney who erroneously released them to the newspaper.
If I recall correctly, this is a classical case given to law students in law school.
Q: What happens if an attorney releases information inadvertently to a newspaper?
A: That attorney is shit out of luck.
I mean, they can always ask nicely, but the newspaper cannot be forced to return the information. This type of situation even happened when the court itself released documents that were under seal. You cannot claw them back.
Now, I'm not a lawyer. Is there something that makes this case special?
I'm very glad to see farmers win the right to repair their tractors. It's a win for consumers against bogus #IP objections from manufacturers. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64206913
Meta cancelled climate change ads, then cancelled a local newspaper that reported about the ads, then a blogger who reported on the paper's cancellation, and now has escalated to blocking all of LGF ( littlegreenfootballs.com )