UMG Recordings, Incorporated v. Tofig Kurbanov
963 F.3d 344
4th Cir.2020Background
- Plaintiffs: twelve major U.S. record companies sued defendant Tofig Kurbanov for copyright infringement based on two stream-ripping websites (flvto.biz and 2conv.com). Defendant is a Russian citizen who operates the sites from Russia.
- The websites convert online videos to downloadable audio; they are free, require users to accept Terms of Use (which designate Russia for jurisdiction), and collect IP/geolocation data for targeted advertising.
- Revenue is ad‑based: Kurbanov sells ad space to advertising brokers (mostly Ukraine; at least two U.S.-based brokers), enabling geo-targeted ads. The sites drew large global traffic, including substantial visits from the U.S. and hundreds of thousands of visits from Virginia.
- Connections to the U.S./Virginia included U.S. domain registrars, top-level domain administrators headquartered in Virginia, a U.S. DMCA agent registration, and prior hosting on Amazon Web Services with servers in Virginia.
- The district court dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction; the Fourth Circuit reversed, holding plaintiffs made a prima facie showing that Kurbanov purposefully availed himself of conducting business in Virginia and that the claims arise from those contacts, and remanded for the required reasonableness analysis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Virginia courts have specific personal jurisdiction under Rule 4(k)(1) | Kurbanov purposefully availed by running interactive sites that attracted substantial Virginia users, collected/sold user data, enabled geo-targeted advertising, used U.S. brokers/registrars/servers, and registered a U.S. DMCA agent | Mere accessibility of a website is insufficient; all operations are in Russia, Terms of Use select Russia, no direct relationships with Virginia users or advertisers, and no purposeful targeting of Virginia | Reversed dismissal: court held sufficient purposeful availment given volume/nature of interactions, ad-based commercial model, U.S. contacts and data targeting evidence |
| Whether plaintiffs’ copyright claims arise out of Kurbanov’s forum-directed activities | The alleged infringement flowed from Virginia users' use of the sites and Kurbanov’s commercial exploitation of those users (data/ad sales) | Plaintiff relies on general traffic numbers and peripheral U.S. ties that are not the genesis of the dispute | Held that the claims do arise out of Kurbanov’s Virginia‑directed activities—Virginia user base and data/ads formed a central part of the claims |
| Whether the exercise of jurisdiction is constitutionally reasonable | N/A — plaintiffs requested jurisdictional discovery and reasonableness analysis | District court did not perform the reasonableness analysis | The Fourth Circuit remanded for the district court to conduct the constitutionality/reasonableness inquiry and any jurisdictional discovery as appropriate |
Key Cases Cited
- Int’l Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (established minimum contacts standard for personal jurisdiction)
- Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462 (purposeful availment and fair warning principles)
- Walden v. Fiore, 571 U.S. 277 (focus on defendant’s contacts with the forum itself)
- Bristol‑Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, 137 S. Ct. 1773 (specific jurisdiction requires affiliation between forum and underlying controversy)
- Consulting Eng’rs Corp. v. Geometric Ltd., 561 F.3d 273 (Fourth Circuit three‑prong specific jurisdiction framework)
- ALS Scan, Inc. v. Digital Serv. Consultants, Inc., 293 F.3d 707 (adopted Zippo sliding scale for web activity)
- Zippo Mfg. Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, Inc., 952 F. Supp. 1119 (website interactivity sliding scale)
- Mavrix Photo, Inc. v. Brand Techs., Inc., 647 F.3d 1218 (targeted online advertising can indicate purposeful direction at forum)
- ESAB Group, Inc. v. Centricut, Inc., 126 F.3d 617 (contacts may be surrogate for presence when substantial)