Auto Channel, Inc. v. Speedvision Network, LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• declining to exercise jurisdiction over a company that licensed programming to Primestar, HBO Direct, and DirectTV which may, in turn, have sold programming to subscribers in the forum
• finding there was “scant evidence” that defendants did business in Kentucky when neither defendant had “any business operations whatsoever within Kentucky”
• finding there was “scant evidence” that defendants did business in Kentucky when neither defendant had “any business operations whatsoever within Kentucky”
• “[T]he statutorily required relationship between Plaintiffs’ tort claims and Defendants’ minimal contacts to Kentucky is so attenuated as to be de minimus.”
• “the fact that Internet users in Kentucky can view advertisements on web pages … falls far short of demonstrating that Defendants advertise in Kentucky”
• “Even if there were facts sufficient to support the inference that Defendants conducted or solicited business in Kentucky . . . Plaintiffs must show that their injuries ‘arose out of’ these activities, as required by K.R.S. 454.210(a)(4).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).