Amazon. Com Intern., Inc. v. Am. Dynasty Surplus Lines Insurance Company

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that because “Amazon’s website exists for the purpose of promoting products for sale to the public____ [the underlying] complaint thus implicitly alleged that Amazon used its product in the course of advertising” (emphasis added)
• applying Washington law to conclude that a patented website music-preview technology is an advertising technique that could constitute an advertising idea
• “[T]he advertising activities must cause the injury, not merely expose it; an injury that could have occurred independent and irrespective of any advertising is not an advertising injury.”
• patented technology used to market music for sale on Internet Web site

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).