Judge Rules that Kazaa can be Sued

scubacuda writes "According to this News.com article, U.S. District Judge Stephen Wilson said a lawsuit against Sharman Networks (the makers of Kazaa) could proceed, since Kazaa software had been downloaded and used by millions of Californians. (The Australia-/Vanuatu-based company had filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing it was not bound by U.S. laws since it did not have substantial contacts with California.)"

Comments

Re:The Good, The Bad, The Ugly

[rmohr02]

Use Direct Connect--it's a little more complicated, but worth it. http://dcplusplus.sourceforge.net/.

Not only that, but. . .

[kfg]

a EULA is a contract, not a law. Illegal terms cannot be rendered legal merely by contract.

EULA's are written *generically* to attempt to claim every term of contract that *might* be legal anywere.

Haven't you ever seen the term on generic legal documents "Void where prohibited"?

Just because it's in the EULA doesn't inherently mean it binds you, although the writers would like to *believe* that it does. Since most people do, it works.

Don't be afraid to dissent or even disregard terms of your EULA where you have the legal right to do so.

KFG

Don't we already have something like this?

[Exiler]

It's this little thing called Gnutella, works like a charm

Re:Great...

[BlueWonder]

Just don't turn up. After all, if I receive a letter from Uzbekistan telling me I'm due in their courts (I'm British), there's no reason I have to accept their judgement.

If the Hague treaty becomes ratified, the UK would be required to enforce a Uzbekistan court rule against you.

Re:Fair play, yeah, right.

[floppy ears]

If and when Kazaa gets an appeal, it'll go straight to the Cal Supreme Court who will knock it down again on jurisdictional issues.

This is incorrect. The Kazaa case is being heard in Federal District Court in Los Angeles. The first appeal would be to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

This court is generally considered to be liberal, but in fact there are a large number of conservative justices on the 9th Circuit. Decisions in the 9th Circuit often depend on exactly which 3 judges (out of 25 or so) get chosen to hear the appeal.

After the 9th Circuit makes its ruling, the losing party is allowed to petition the US Supreme Court (not the California Supreme Court) to take the case. The US Supreme Court does not have to take the appeal from the 9th Circuit if they do not want to. It takes a vote of 4 justices (out of 9) to "grant cert", which means that the case is taken by the US Supreme Court.

Of course, this part of the case will never get that far. You may not like the law, but it's pretty clear that Kazaa does have "substantial contacts" with California. Judge Wilson applied the facts correctly on this issue.

The real question is whether Kazaa will win or lose on the merits of the case, not just this jurisdictional issue. It's not open and shut. Judge Wilson has a good reputation as being a fair judge. He won't automatically rule for the bad guys.