Jackson Estate is fighting for public arbitration over the integrity of the show in order to prove this.
Today's hearing was for a ruling on the stay.
Both sides then argued their positions.
He questioned how HBO could reasonably claim 'irreparable harm' when it has continued airing the show after the ruling.
Weitzman: "Well don't make any more bad law!"
Wu: "I like to create a trail of interesting bon mots for the Court of Appeal to consider."
He said: "They used footage from that concert in the documentary... The idea that this does not relate to the contract is prejudging the merits of the arbitration."
Freedman replied: "But how it arises and the substance of whether a 27yo contract is enforceable or not is not for Your Honour to decide."
He said: "It's only unusual because you've made suggestions for them to take. They did not file a SLAPP motion. Your Honour suggested they file a SLAPP. Now they want to take it to the Court of Appeal."
Wu then invited Daniel Petrocelli to speak for HBO. He argued the 'irreparable harm' was that 'first amendment interests are threatened in multiple ways'.
He then argued the contract was void: "When a contract is over and it's been over for 27 years, you can't invoke the arbitration provision in that contract."
Wu said although he'd let Petrocelli voice that argument, he was 'not concerned with the merits' at this stage.
I was sat quite far back in the courtroom and straining to hear at times, so some quotes may be inexact. I'm sure some helpful person will make an official transcript available soon enough.
Bit of a busman's holiday, but nice to be back in court.