As I read it, the key part is part 2 of the order, in particular page 4, line 28 to page 5 line 1: "... providers of computer and network resources through whi

As I read it, the key part is part 2 of the order, in particular page 4, line 28 to page 5 line 1: "... providers of computer and network resources through which video transits [shall be required to suspend all services with respect to Defendants' Infringing Websites]." Not even the Court's clarification saves this from being an Order that would bind every network operator connected to the Internet who was served notice [0]; an operator not explicitly listed in the TRO could get the Defendants back online by providing name service and hosting. Then, any "provider of computer and network resources through which video transits"[1] would then be (according to the TRO) obligated to ensure that the Defendants' audio and video signals were not transmitted through the provider's network between 2015-05-02 20:45-400 and 2015-05-03 06:00-400. Does that make sense? [0] Notice that the TRO permits notice service by email. AIUI, Plaintiffs could contract with their favorite mass emailing service to send notice to every major and minor network provider, worldwide. [1] An operator of almost any IP network on the planet obviously fits in this category.