amazon.com

MEMORANDUM

Sandy Routt appeals from the district court’s dismissal of her first amended complaint against Amazon.com (“Amazon”). We review de novo the district court’s decision to grant a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Henry A. v. Willden, 678 F.3d 991, 998 (9th Cir.2012). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Routt alleges that certain “Amazon Associates” (“Associates”), participants in Amazon’s affiliate-marketing program (the “Associate Program”), used her copyrighted photographs on their websites without her permission. Routt sued Amazon for copyright infringement and for false designation of origin under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125 (a), on the theory that Amazon should be held liable for the conduct of its Associates. The district court dismissed Routt’s first amended complaint after concluding that she had not alleged facts sufficient to establish that Amazon could be directly, contributorily, or vicariously liable for its Associates’ conduct. In this appeal, Routt challenges only the district court’s vicarious liability analysis.

I

“To state a claim for vicarious copyright infringement,, a…