RealDVD Antitrust Order
Given that a subsidiary of my current employer is a party to this suit, I'm not going to comment in any detail, other than to note the court's holdings that: 1) any injury Real allegedly suffered resulted from its decision to distribute a product in likely violation of the law; and 2) the studios had every right under the Noerr-Pennington doctrine to work together in their litigation against Real:
Real did not believe a license was required and indeed launched its product without having obtained any license. The distribution of its product has been disrupted only by the entry of a TRO, and later a preliminary injunction, by this court. Real’s injury resulted from that relief, which was necessitated by Real’s own possibly unlawful conduct. To the extent the Studios cooperated with one another and the DVD CCA to petition this court for relief, such cooperation unambiguously falls within the Noerr-Pennington exception to liability under the antitrust statutes. See generally Theme Promotions, Inc. v. News Am. Mktg. FSI, 546 F.3d 991, 1006 (9th Cir. 2008).Here is a Bloomberg story about today's decision.