853 F. Supp. 2d 326
E.D.N.Y2012Background
- Defendants pro se moved to dismiss the copyright case on lack of personal jurisdiction or improper venue.
- Plaintiff, a New York corporation, is the author or exclusive distributor of two spoof films and maintains global distribution contacts.
- Lauter, via Pan Global Entertainment, claimed German distribution rights he did not possess, leading to a fraudulent license with Silverline.
- Lauter obtained the films from Amazon.de and provided them to Silverline, which broadcasted them in Germany.
- Robbins, Lauter’s associate, attempted to obtain a license by representing as plaintiff’s agent with limited authority, and the arrangement was not ratified by Troma.
- Plaintiff learned nearly a year later that the films were fraudulently licensed and sued Lauter and Robbins for copyright infringement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether New York CPLR 302(a)(3)(ii) grants jurisdiction | Lauter and Robbins caused injury in New York via international activity with effects felt here | No relevant New York-based injury; actions occurred abroad with no New York targets | Lack of personal jurisdiction (no injury within the state) |
| Whether Penguin Group created a New York-specific rule for copyright injury | Penguin Group extends injury within New York due to internet-enabled availability | Penguin is internet-specific and not controlling for this offline sales scheme | Penguin Group does not apply to this offline, non-internet licensing context |
| Whether venue is proper in this district | If jurisdiction exists, venue could be proper | Without jurisdiction, venue is improper | No venue in this district; 28 U.S.C. § 1400(a) applied |
| Whether the action should be dismissed or transferred to California | Plaintiff to decide; transfer would be proper if jurisdiction exists | Transfer to Central District of California is proper venue and subject to jurisdiction | Action should be transferred if plaintiff opts; otherwise dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Fantis Foods v. Standard Importing Co., 49 N.Y.2d 317 (New York 1980) (injury must be more direct than indirect financial loss to New York plaintiff)
- Sybron Corp. v. Wetzel, 46 N.Y.2d 197 (New York 1978) (showing injury within the state requires more than mere presence; diversion of sales can suffice)
- American Eutectic Welding Alloys Sales Co. v. Dytron Alloys Corp., 439 F.2d 428 (2d Cir. 1971) (injury within the state can arise from out-of-state acts affecting New York sales)
- Penguin Group (USA), Inc. v. American Buddha, 16 N.Y.3d 295 (New York 2011) (internet context; special rule for copyright injuries when internet makes works available; expands jurisdiction)