How to
SEO advice
Categories: Bad reviews, Internet. Tags: , , breaches Alfie Patten court order?

April 1, 2009 One Comment is the latest company seeming to breach a court order by publishing results of the DNA test of alleged 13-year-old dad Alfie Patten.

itv-com-logoThe court order came after the Mirror published the results last week. But Seems to be breaching it with its enhanced web-search results (which are automatically supplied by Google), as this screenshot, taken on March 31, reveals.

Screenshot from the search page breaching reporting restrictions on Alfie Patten's DNA test breaching reporting restrictions on Alfie Patten's DNA test

It shows part of the results page if you do a search for Alfie Patten at - I've blacked out the words that reveal the results of the test.

What the court order says

The court order binds "all companies (whether acting by their directors, employees or agents or in any other way) who know that the order has been made" (and ITV will know as it's a member of the injunction alert service).

It refers to "results of a DNA test ... which, for the avoidance of doubt, is not to be published ... after the date of this order".

Automatic results from Google

ITV search box: enhanced by Google

ITV search box: enhanced by Google doesn't cover the DNA test anywhere on its site. But when you do a search at, you get a panel with internet-wide results - supplied automatically by Google but part of the ITV page - as well as the results for

These results include foreign news sites NOT bound by the court order - and you can clearly see the results of the test in the headlines and URLs.

The news comes after the revelation that Google News is publishing the results, Walt Disney and Brand Republic were also doing so, and that the reporting restrictions didn't cover bloggers (or else they did but they weren't allowed to know this).

Yet another nail in the coffin of the current process of reporting restrictions?

You might also like
  1. Are Brand Republic and Walt Disney in breach of Alfie Patten court order?
  2. Alfie Patten: what have we learned about reporting restrictions?
  3. Super injunctions and Twitter: Alfie Patten, John Terry, [redacted] and [redacted]
  4. Do blogs make reporting restrictions pointless?
  5. Twitter and super injunctions: no one need pack their toothbrush

Share this post

Follow me on Facebook or Twitter

One Comment »

Leave a comment!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.