website markets sells and ships out of its file sunglasses into the state of california earning consumers in california by creating market confusion in california if you profit from those sales in sarah where you have it online counterfeiters selling goods into florida and they want a circuit held that it says does not supplant the traditional minimum contact test for purposeful them in a pleasurable in contract and court cases only a very small amount of the sales were being made in new hampshire but the court the u s supreme court said that because the possibles activities in new hampshire was just a matter of ongoing selling its magazine into the state of new hampshire that personal jurisdiction existed it doesn't matter it's five percent of the state and i'm going to get to that as far as the focusing on which i think the court's nd or when i think whether it matters it's five percent like it should in this case and the defense can get around this now just because they're selling their goods through a highly interactive website or marketplace which is really just the same as a is a brick and mortar store downtown  look at just like an inverse hustler the systematic ongoing contact with the state their marketing in selling and shipping their goods into the state of california this is not a one off situation were by the plaintiff no no no no we're we're looking at really their own affidavit that says that they consider you know in their website that shows that there is systematically sell good option but i think this is a very important issue that california companies want to defend their marks and consumers from fusion the marketplace need a ruling from the court this in line now if we're seeing the sales of split off their products or what created the necessary contacts for purposeful direction and express aiming and the under specific jurisdiction the contacts that are alleged to create jurisdiction have to be related to the underlying themes or only looking up a sales of spiral to products not the sales of other products the other products are on the way there in the record an that and only five percent of all the other products are sold to california that means ninety five percent are sales and for most states i believe the case that amy was referring to was marriage photo not case there are very specific california contacts that supported including a mobile website service and it advertised specifically to californians or jobs and products that i believe rental housing or something like that and so there gosper declares in their gratian they don't do anything to target and even if they did do some advertising california under in the media that wouldn't be enough because if they did the same kind of advertising to everywhere also have your ship in germany and they don't treat the germans and you different than the americans they try to grow their business equally around the world if your we don't even have that because there's nothing to target software which again is controlling law and also not a schwarzenegger any other decision this court said that you cannot look at minimum contacts in connection with this type of situation even the court maverick's that you were not