Opinion ID: 148585
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The District Court's Analysis of the Situs of Injury

Text: The district court recognized a division of authority as to the situs of injury for purposes of section 302(a)(3)(ii) in intellectual property infringement cases. The court was persuaded by decisions that suggested or concluded that the situs of injury is where the infringing conduct occurred (in this case, Oregon or Arizona) rather than where the plaintiff is located and the copyrights are owned (in this case, New York). Penguin, 2009 WL 1069158, at -4, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34032, at . New York has long held that the residence or domicile of the injured party within a State is not a sufficient predicate for jurisdiction, which must be based upon a more direct injury within the State and a closer expectation of consequences within the State than the indirect financial loss resulting from the fact that the injured person resides or is domiciled there. Id., 2009 WL 1069158, at -3, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34032, at -8 (quoting Fantis Foods, Inc. v. Standard Importing Co., Inc., 49 N.Y.2d 317, 326, 402 N.E.2d 122, 125-26, 425 N.Y.S.2d 783, 786-87 (1980)). The principal factual question addressed in the course of the district court's analysis was where the plaintiff lost business. Id., 2009 WL 1069158, at  n. 5, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34032, at -10 n. 5 (citing Am. Eutectic Welding Alloys Sales Co. v. Dytron Alloys Corp., 439 F.2d 428, 433 (2d Cir.1971)). The court analyzed this case as a run-of-the-mine copyright infringement action: It did not explicitly consider the impact, if any, of the means by which the alleged infringement was committed  by use of an online library delivered through the Internet. Because Penguin pleaded infringement only by American Buddha, and not by any individual who downloaded material from American Buddha's site, the court reasoned that business was lost through the copying of the copyrighted works by American Buddha and not through their placement on the Internet. Id., 2009 WL 1069158, at , 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34032, at . The business was therefore lost where the books were uploaded  Oregon or Arizona  not where they were downloaded and used, which could have been anywhere that the Internet is available, including New York. Id.