Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd.

Good Law

243 F. Supp. 2d 1073·2003 WL 186657·65 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1545·2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 800

United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJanuary 9, 2003CIV.01-08541 SVW, CIV.01-09923 SVWCalifornia11,287 words

Opinion

Wilson, J.

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT SHARMAN NETWORKS LTD.’S AND DEFENDANT LEF INTERACTIVE’S MOTIONS TO DISMISS

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiffs bring these actions for copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. §§ 501 , et seq. The Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 . Defendant Shar-man Networks Ltd. moves to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, lack of subject matter jurisdiction, improper venue, and forum non conveniens. See Fed. Rules Civ. P. Rules 12(b)(1), (2), and (3). Defendant LEF Interactive Pty Ltd. moves to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction only.

For the reasons set forth below, both Motions are DENIED.

II. FACTUAL/PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. The Parties

These two related cases arise from the free exchange of copyrighted music, movies and other digital media over the Internet. When the actions were originally filed, Defendants Grokster, Ltd. (“Grok-ster”), Streamcast Networks, Inc. (formerly known as MusicCity.com, Inc.) (“Streamcast” or “MusicCity”), and Kazaa BV (formerly known as Consumer Empowerment BV) (“Kazaa BV”), distributed software that enabled users to exchange digital media via the same peer-to-peer transfer network. In the Metro-Goldwyris-Mayer.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.