• Share
  • Tweet
  • Share

A storage unit's worth of Paris Hilton's stuff has been thrown into the proverbial lockbox.

A federal judge issued a temporary injunction Friday barring the creator of parisexposed.com from marketing anything with the heiress' likeness and most of the items in the Website's possession, a move that pretty much slams the door on the business venture that is offering voyeurs a glimpse of Paris' passport for a $39.97 subscription fee.

U.S. District Court Judge George King ruled that Hilton "risks suffering irreparable harm to her reputation" if the items continue to be on display.

"The social value of this material is low, and the extent of the intrusion into plaintiff's privacy is high," King wrote in his five-page order. "On the other hand, plaintiff has unquestionably voluntarily attained the fame that she has."

Hilton sued Paris Exposed purveyor Bardia Persa on Monday, several days after Persa launched the site, touted it as a treasure trove for looky-loos interested in racy photos and videos, diaries, emails, medical records, credit card bills and various other items sold off from a North Hollywood storage locker the Simple Life star was renting in November 2005, while she and sister Nicky were in the process of moving.

While complaints started rolling in from would-be customers who forked over the monthly fee and then had trouble accessing the site (which, at this moment, is offline), Hilton's camp went after Persa for copyright infringement (she has since filed for a copyright on all the written materials found in the storage locker), invasion of privacy and violation of her right to publicity.

Hilton also requested a restraining order, so that's one down.

To be exact, Judge King's order prohibits the peddling of any items that contain the "Stars Are Blind" singer's Social Security number, medical records, phone numbers, addresses and banking and financial info, as well as "photographs, videos, and writings depicting Plaintiff in a sexual manner not previously exposed to public viewing."

(Paris Exposed had promised access to previously unseen sex tapes and a topless photo of Hilton was already posted in the site's preview section.)

The injunction also puts a stop to using her "name, voice, photograph, or likeness in connection with any Website, whether under the domain www.parisexposed.net or otherwise, in connection with the offer or sale of any good or service without Plaintiff's consent."

A hearing has been scheduled for Feb. 16 so Persa can present a case as to why this order shouldn't be made permanent.

"Given that the types of material described above are of the most intimate and private nature," King wrote, "plaintiff has shown she is likely to succeed in her suit against Bardia Persa, who she contends is operating the Website."

Persa did not respond to emails seeking comment, but the ruling elicited a cheer from Hilton's publicist, Elliot Mintz.

"I know what this has done personally and emotionally to Paris," Mintz told the Associated Press. "As far as I'm concerned, this is the most disturbing intrusion upon the privacy of a public figure that I've ever witnessed."

Meanwhile, clips from Paris Exposed that had been illicitly disseminated to blogs and video-sharing sites have also disappeared in the wake of the lawsuit.

According to Hilton's lawsuit, filed in Los Angeles, the entire cache of Hiltonabilia was sold at auction in November 2005 for $2,775 to Nabil and Nabila Haniss after someone—Hilton's camp blames the moving company hired to keep track of the goods—missed a monthly payment on the socialite's storage unit.

The Hanisses, who are also named in the suit, then scored a $10 million payday when they sold the items to Persa in a deal reportedly brokered by celebrity porn pusher David Hans Schmidt, who is not a defendant in the case.

Per her complaint, Hilton's reps attempted several times to buy the stuff back from the Hanisses for amounts "over and above" what they paid, but all offers were rejected.