[sib]

>> It seems obvious that it is harmful for a user who requests and is granted privacy to then have their private messages delivered to NYT.

This ruling is about preservation of evidence, not (yet) about delivering that information to one of the parties.

If judges couldn't compel parties to preserve evidence in active cases, you could see pretty easily that parties would aggressively destroy evidence that might be harmful to them at trial.

There's a whole later process (and probably arguments in front of the judge) about which evidence is actually delivered, whether it goes to the NYT or just to their lawyers, how much of it is redacted or anonymized, etc.