4 ms·
You’re misunderstanding the question - he’s asking how Shopify could avoid jurisdiction, not avoid this suit. Jurisdiction is a threshold question before you ge
by clucas 1y ago
You’re misunderstanding the question - he’s asking how Shopify could avoid jurisdiction, not avoid this suit. Jurisdiction is a threshold question before you get to the merits… maybe Shopify did the bad thing, maybe they didn’t, but before we decide that, we need to determine if California law even applies to Shopify.
The author seems to think that there should be some way for Shopify to avoid jurisdiction while still offering services in California, but I don’t really understand why he thinks so.
- otterley 1y agoAs a former student of the author, I don't think he's saying they should be able to avoid jurisdiction. I think he was musing on whether it would even be possible under this new Ninth Circuit framework/test. He concludes it's unlikely, and hence for Shopify (or any other company putting cookies in browsers) to have any chance of avoiding it, they're going to have to appeal to SCOTUS.
- xbar 1y agoNot at all. I think he rightly concludes that jurisdiction is completely avoidable by geoblocking California. It is baffling to hear the author ask the question “did Shopify ‘expressly aim an intentional act at California?” And subsequently conclude that Shopify’s entire business model is in doubt if it doesn’t do business in California.
- adgjlsfhk1 1y agoI think the one plausible argument for Shopify is that the California law is unconstitutional since this might be interstate commerce.
- otterley 1y agoThat’s possible, but they haven’t even gotten there yet because they’re still arguing over the jurisdictional question.
- otterley 1y agoThey’re not going to geo block California customers. It makes no business sense.