The site initially went live a month earlier, when website operator Bardia Persa purchased the private material from Nabil and Nabila Haniss, who claim to have legally acquired it at a public auction. Hilton and her sister had kept their belongings in a storage facility, but when they failed to make payments, the establishment sold its contents.
Hilton sued Persa for invasion of privacy and copyright infringement, after several pieces of her writing were posted online along with her photos and medical records. The injunction disallowed the website to feature Hilton's personal information, and the site was taken offline.
However, in the wake of Hilton's recent legal drama, ParisExposed.com again went live, and several other websites, including TheSmokingGun.com, have posted links to it and its contents.
Adult industry lawyer Joel Obenberger told XBIZ that Persa could be charged with criminal contempt of court, and that it's generally not a good idea to violate a federal judge's injunction.
"The smart advice is, if you're going to violate a federal judge's injunction, go to the judge and tell him that you need it modified," Obenberger said. "Because he's going to get really mad if you go out before he had a chance to modify the order."
Obenberger said anyone found to have violated the court order could be fined or even jailed, which means other websites that have posted the private materials also could be found in contempt.
It is not yet clear whether Hilton will take action once again against Persa and ParisExposed.com. Requests for comment from Hilton's legal counsel, as well as Persa's attorney, were not answered at press time.
As for whether Hilton's claims will hold up in court, Obenberger said now that the public recently has taken a profound interest in Hilton, it might be tough for the very public figure to prove public disclosure of private facts.
"There's a diminished expectation of privacy for someone who's thrust herself in the public eye [as Hilton has]," Obenberger said.
As for copyright infringement, Obenberger said that when original works are sold, the copyright generally follows, and new owners have the right to freely reproduce them and license the works for publication.
Whether this applies to prescriptions, video and personal photos, however, Obenberger said he is not sure and will wait and see what happens if the case is brought to court.
