All the recent publicity regarding super injunctions appears to prove one thing - super injunctions are a complete waste of time and money, and only serve to focus even greater interest in the stories the litigants are attempting to gag. (Okay, that's two things...)
Most experts concede that super injunctions are an absolute waste of time, and even moreso in the age of mass social networking on a global scale.
One case involved, being the recent sensation involving a prominent Premier League footballer whose super injunction achieved absolutely nothing, other than to arouse public interest in his identity, to a far greater degree than had he simply come clean in the first place.
Everybody wanted to know the identity of the person involved, making what would in all probability have been a one-day red top sensation into a marathon media feeding frenzy.
And now, everybody does know. The information is a mouse click or two away. A spectacular own goal? Probably.
So, the super injunction appears to have achieved the polar opposite of the desired effect, because that perceived air of mystery, achieved nothing other than to arouse curiosity, even among people who wouldn't normally have been remotely interested.
It's virtually impossible for public figures to maintain any degree of secrecy, and almost impossible to prosecute individuals accused of disseminating such information for public consumption, via the internet.
Skoob News's legal adviser, Alfred Tupper, told us:
"These people are being badly advised. But then they are being advised by lawyers, who encourage them to pay other lawyers vast sums of money in order to impose gagging orders that just don't work. They should really be advised to take it on the chin, and save themselves a suitcase full of money and aggravation. Most things of this nature tend to blow over quite quickly, whereas super injunctions only serve to prolong the agony. It all comes out sooner or later. It's a pity that some people are way too fucking stupid to realise that."
More as we get it.