|
|
|
| Authored by: newbury on Tuesday, July 31 2012 @ 09:25 AM EDT |
Reuters is hoping that the judge is stupid. Ain't gonna happen! It is bound by
the order.
Reuters moved for intervenor status, to oppose the sealing of documents being
filed *as evidence* in the case. The presumption (which the judge has stated) is
that evidence must be publicly available.
After being granted status, IBM had to serve Reuters with the materials, so
Reuters got an unredacted copy of the Agreement. It would NOT have obtained that
copy without having become an intervenor. It would have remained a mere
spectator.
It got the document, because IBM was required to serve a copy on every party and
Reuters had just become a party. There is an outstanding motion to seal the
document so the public availability of the document is at issue. Reuters opposes
the sealing. That matter is unresolved. Reuters received the document in a
sealed state and it must remain in that status until the matter is resolved.
If Reuters published the document it would be in contempt of the Rules and the
Court Order. It became bound by those upon the filing of its motion for
intervenor status.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
