Jurisdiction Of The Internet

Jurisdiction Of The Internet

The defendant had sold only one CD through its site to a customer in Oregonwho was later revealed to have contacts with plaintiff's counsel, to the court's evident displeasure. The court appeared unwilling to enforce a clause in the clickwrap agreement requiring that bay gazette green post any disputes be resolved by arbitration in California.
Under the “effects doctrine,” it was obvious to the defendant that the harm flowing from his conduct would be “felt” where the plaintiff companies had their principal place of business, and he was therefore deemed to have made himself amenable to suit there.
The court held that it could be subjected to suit high risk pregnancy symptom in Massachusetts by the plaintiff, a toy and game manufacturer based there which sought to challenge the defendant’s registration of an allegedly infringing domain name.

The court held that it could be subjected to suit in the District of Columbia by the plaintiff, a D. The defendant’s publication of a version of his magazine on the Internet, with a mailto link and free e-mail subscription option (compare Drudge), was insufficient “contact” with Illinois to create jurisdiction. The court held that the defendant could not be subjected to suit in Arizona by the plaintiff, an Internet marketing firm based there, where there was no evidence that the defendant had ever transacted business with any Arizona resident. The court rejected the defendant’s arguments that entities of plaintiffs’ size do not “feel effects” in one place as individual parties do, and that plaintiffs’ injuries occurred “in air national guard bases cyberspace.
The defendants, non-Indian halfway house in florida brewers of an alcoholic beverage called “The Original Crazy Horse Malt Liquor,” were sued by the estate of the 19th-century Oglala Sioux leader for defamation, infringement of the right of publicity, and infliction of emotional distress.
The court held that the defendant could not be subjected to suit in Indiana by the plaintiffs, who alleged inter alia that the defendant had infringed and diluted their trademark. The defendant’s maintenance of a website with a “mailto” link, and a major contract (unrelated to the dispute with Hasbro) with Massachusetts-based Digital Equipment Corporation were sufficient “contacts” with Massachusetts to make the defendant amenable to suit there.
1997) The defendant was a California-based operator of an Internet news service. The court held that the defendant could be subjected to suit in Illinois.
The court held that the defendant could be subjected to suit in Washington, D. . The court held that the defendant could not be subjected to suit in New York by the plaintiff, which owned an identically named club there, given an unusually restrictive New York long-arm statute which required that a defendant be physically present in the state when committing the alleged tortious acts from which the suit arose. Rejecting an argued analogy to the Panavision/Toeppen case, the court held that the defendant here was not alleged to be a “cyber-pirate,” but mixed wrestling school girl pin apparently had a history of good-faith use of the name, and there was minimal evidence of any contact with California or its residents. The court held that the defendant could not be subjected to suit in California by sony usb flash drive the plaintiff, a non-profit organization based there which claimed rights to the name. 1997) The defendant was a Colorado-based computer consulting company. The defendant had advertised on the Internet, and had required the plaintiff, in Texas, to enter into a clickwrap agreement before playing. The parent company, however, could not be made a defendant, since its only contact with California was in maintaining an "essentially passive" website; nor could the president, since his actions were all done in his capacity as an officer of the subsidiary. 1997) The defendant was an Italian hotel chain and the operator of a non-interactive website advertising the chain.
26, 1998 The defendant was an Ohio-based marketer of telephone advertising played while a caller is on hold. 1996) The defendant was a California-based Internet advertising service. The defendant maintained a website with a “mailto” link, and had also approved the placement of an advertisement in the Washington Post directed to D. To read the Court's opinion click here.

The court focused on (1) the interactivity of the site, which had a mailto link enabling browsers to e-mail Drudge with information and subscriptions, and which published new editions of Drudge’s report directly to e-mail subscribers; (2) the site’s preoccupation with political gossip involving Washington; and (3) Drudge’s occasional visits to Washington, and his solicitation and receipt of information and $250 in financial contributions from D.
1998) The defendant was the California-based operator of a gambling website. The court held that the defendant could not be subjected to suit in New Jersey by the plaintiff, who had been injured while staying in one of defendant’s hotels, reasoning that the use of such a website was no different than advertising in a national magazine, by itself insufficient to create nationwide jurisdiction. The defendant had (1) maintained an (apparently passive) Internet site; (2) advertised in a magazine read in Texas; (3) attended a trade show there; and (4) received orders from Texas customers. 1997) The defendant was the operator of a Missouri jazz club and a non-interactive website advertising the club.

The court held that he could be subjected to suit in California for infringement of trademarks held by the plaintiffs, companies based there. 12, 1998 The defendants were a Virginia-based manufacturer of "stereolithography" or "rapid-prototyping" equipment, its president, and its parent company, also based in Virginia. The court held that the defendant could not be subjected to suit in Oregon by the plaintiff, which owned similarly named music stores in Portland, also sold products on an Internet site, and claimed that the defendant had infringed its trademark.
Telephone Audio Productions, Inc. Millenium Music, LP, United States District Court for the District of Oregon, Civil Action Number 98-1058-AA, January 4, 1999 The defendant was the operator of a chain of South Carolina retail music stores, which had begun to sell a small number of products on an Internet site.

Although the defendant’s service had not yet become available, its website, inviting users to subscribe to the service via a “mailto” link, had resulted in 131 “hits” from Missouri users other than the plaintiff, constituting sufficient contact lost city of atlantis with Missouri to permit suit there. The court held that the defendant could be subjected to suit in Texas by the plaintiff, who alleged that the defendant had fraudulently refused to pay his winnings.