some judges slow to catch on to this new fangled Internet thingie

[Jack Burton]

But in a stunning and all-encompassing gag order signed over a year ago and now being appealed to Houston’s 1st Court of Appeals, attorney Calvin C. Jackson, who was accused of forging attorney signatures on court records, demands Google erase all mention of those accusations from the entire Internet including other websites….

Down the memory hole

As someone noted in the comments -- two words: Barbara Streisand

 

[Bunnykid68]

That's awesome

 

[MCgrease08]

Good luck with that.

 

[actaeon277]

So has anyone bothered to explain the definition of "useless" to the judge?

 

[Scutter01]

You would be freaking astonished at the number of otherwise very smart people (doctors, lawyers, etc.) who believe that the internet is literally magic. They have no idea how it works. They don't care how it works. All they know is that if they mash their hands on the keyboard, eventually they'll get either Facebook or porn. Seriously. I work with lawyers who are still using MS-DOS.

 

[T.Lex]

I work with lawyers who are still using MS-DOS.

Hey now! I'm a lawyer that gets kinda nostalgic about using using the DOS text editor to tweak my config.sys and autoexec.bat.

But, to the original point, lots of judges and other smart people don't know and don't care how it works.

Having said that, the federal court pilot projects using digital-only filing and hyperlinking are exciting. Also, keep in mind that things like citations get very awkward in the internet age. I read awhile back about a group looking at trying to archive the pages that are cited in federal opinions, so they can know what the site said at the time the judge read it. I think it was a 7th Circuit project. That would be interesting.

 

[Scutter01]

But, to the original point, lots of judges and other smart people don't know and don't care how it works.

And that's perfectly fine, unless your specific job is to make a legal ruling about how it works or if your job 100% depends on it. And then I care very much if you don't know anything about it. If your job requires you to know how to operate a lathe for 26 hours per week, you can't go to your boss and say "Well, I'm a millwright. I'm not a lathe guru like you and I can't be bothered to learn it. Just show me which button to push when I need to turn it on." You don't need to know how an engine works to drive a car, but people would think you were a moron if you called a tow truck every time you ran low on gas.

 

[T.Lex]

You don't need to know how an engine works to drive a car, but people would think you were a moron if you called a tow truck every time you ran low on gas.

Hey - leave my mother-in-law out of this! (Just kidding - God love her, she's a great lady. Just... never mind.)

Specific to the judge in the OP, isn't it probably true that the esteemed magistrate signed whatever order was prepared by the prevailing side? In that case, the one seeking the protective order probably drafted it to be as thorough and all-encompassing as possible, regardless of the technological constraints. From that perspective, the lawyer can waive the court order around yelling "Contempt of court" to try to get sites to comply.

Zealous advocacy and all that.

 

[jbombelli]

A judge can issue an order requiring me to flap my arms and fly to the moon. That doesn't mean it's going to happen.

 

[aaron580]

WOW! Lets censor the internet! Because that totally worked the last time it was tried!

 

[Bennettjh]

I'm picturing an old, irritable judge yelling at a computer saying, "get that s**t off there!"