At least one of the regular posters on Yahoo quoted Talhia as saying it was a court imposed gag order. If indeed there is still a judicial gag order in force, I interpret that as good for Star.
If the proceeding are over and Star got little or nothing, then why would there be a need for a gag order? On the other hand, if the RJR and Star have agreed to terms that are conditional on the outcome of some other negotiation, then there would be a need to keep everything under wraps until those negotiations are concluded.
For example, Star and RJR agree to settle the cases, but the final terms may be "X" or they may be "Y"; conditional on the responses of the other BigTs to an invitation to sign on to a "global resolution". The cases can be dismissed immediately, but the final terms will be subject to other conditions which are yet to be determined.
I'm sure there are other possible scenarios, but I can't think of one that would be negative for Star that reveals a reason for the court to impose a gag order.
Another thought... The conditions included in the dismissal document seem designed to head off speculation that RJR "lost" the negotiations. There are 4 stipulations and all are not "required" for the purposes of this document. #2 says that it "is not an acknowledgement of liability" and #4 is specific to RJR in saying that RJR reserves the right to "rely on final judgement" etc. It would seem that both of these could be included in the "final" settlement document rather than the dismissal.
I would think including them is primarily protective PR for RJR. Only the one who is worried about the perception of having "lost" would be interesting in such wordsmithing.
