A federal judge in New York has issued a temporary restraining order against FilmOn.com, which has riled up the U.S. TV industry for a couple of months. The four broadcast networks–News Corp.’s Fox, GE’s NBC, Disney’s ABC and CBS–had asked for the order on Nov. 9.

FilmOn argues that the U.S. copyright act allows it to redistribute broadcast programming; Ivi Inc., a Seattle-based company that offers a similar service, makes the same argument.

FilmOn offers a free service that’s supposed to work on conventional PCs, as well as on mobile devices like Apple’s iPad. As of Monday evening it wasn’t clear whether FilmOn had actually taken down the streams, or if the service was simply misfiring, as it has been prone to do.

UPDATE: Here’s FilmOn’s response, issued Tuesday morning:

FILMON.COM, INC. ISSUES RESPONSE REGARDING NEW YORK SOUTHERN DISTRICT COURT’S RULING ON CBS BROADCASTING, INC., ET AL v. FILMON.COM, INC., TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

Los Angeles, CA – November 23, 2010 –FilmOn.com Inc. CEO and Chairman, Alki David today issued the following statement regarding the ruling made by the New York Southern District Court, which issued a temporary restraining order, in effect pending the court’s decision on if it will issue a preliminary injunction.

“We respect the Court’s decision in this matter and have temporarily ceased retransmission of free network television on FilmOn. In the few weeks FilmOn provided free access to basic television on consumers’ mobile devices, it received more than 30 million individual users. We also garnered dozens of positive reviews about our free service’s quality and ease of use. We have, in essence, shown full proof of concept of the FilmOn delivery system–proving that millions of viewers will watch our superior television service online, all with commercials, adding millions of extra impressions that enhance network’s value to its viewers and advertisers.”

“FilmOn has succeeded in securing partnerships with several independent broadcast channels to be able to keep a compelling live offering online in the near future. Coupled with our own library of content and that of our partners, FilmOn will remain open for business. “

We do expect to bring the major networks back to our lineup in the near future, all in a legitimate and collaborative business model. We have already begun very positive discussions with TV networks affiliates and other content owners to provide our delivery service and measurement analytics to stream their live content online.

Scott Zarin, Zarin & Associates P.C., legal counsel for FilmOn added:

“In addressing FilmOn’s argument that it is exempt from copyright infringement liability as a cable system, the court indicated that it was not convinced–on the facts currently known to it–which this is the case. Although the court issued a Temporary Restraining Order, it is providing FilmOn with an opportunity to elaborate upon its ‘cable system’ argument more thoroughly in a hearing on the Networks’ request for a preliminary injunction.

“FilmOn will be drafting papers in opposition to the Networks’ motion for a preliminary injunction in the coming weeks, with which it expects to submit to the court the opinion of an expert on FilmOn’s technology in order to demonstrate that FilmOn is indeed a cable system. If FilmOn successfully opposes the Networks’ motion for a preliminary injunction, the court’s Temporary Restraining Order–which by law can only remain in effect for a short duration–will be dissolved.”

To recap: Real wants to sell a $30 piece of software called RealDVD that lets you rip and store DVDs on your computer. Real’s software adds its own set of locks to the ripped file to prevent DVD owners from passing along their files to someone else, but that isn’t nearly enough to placate Hollywood.

Real and the studios have been in court since last fall, when U.S. District Court Judge Marilyn Hall Patel issued a restraining order preventing Real from selling the software. Yesterday, Patel (whom you may recall from the old Napster days, when she essentially shut that service down) turned the restraining order into an injunction, along with a sharply worded ruling that basically described Real as a group of willfully obtuse doofuses.

Now Hollywood is dancing, and Real says it needs to “determine our course of action.” I have a suggestion for Real: Move on.

I know there’s a legitimate use for software that lets you rip DVDs you own–and more importantly, software that lets you circumvent the locks the studios put on their discs. But why not let the many other smaller companies fighting this fight, fight this fight?

Best-case scenario is that you end up with software that’s useful for a relatively small group of people: The ones who buy DVDs and want to watch them multiple times. Worst case is the one you have now: An expensive legal battle and the prospect of a product you’ll never be able to sell.

I’ve been puzzling about Real’s plan for this software from the get-go. Why release a product that is destined for a court battle?

A few people familiar with the company’s thinking have tried to explain that this fits into CEO Rob Glaser’s vision for Real’s future, which involves creating software that maintains a connected home entertainment hub. But that seems like a roundabout way to get there.

I have another theory: Glaser is a smart, pugnacious guy with a fondness for big public fights.

He spent some time in the earlier part of this decade jousting with Steve Jobs about Apple’s (AAPL) walled-garden approach to iTunes music, and lost that one. But he did get Microsoft (MSFT) to hand over $760 million to settle an antitrust case in 2005, and he still has a chunk of that cash in the bank.

Or maybe there’s an entirely different impulse behind RealDVD. But whatever it is, I’d love to hear it. Here’s a clip of Rob Glaser explaining the software’s features, but not the rationale behind it, to BoomTown’s Kara Swisher: