A Massachusetts state court recently held that when a company has a website which directs consumers to in-state retailers that sell the company’s products, it is sufficient for the court to take personal jurisdiction. In this specific case, the defendant, Salomon S.A., is a French company that sells ski products. Although Salomon has not visited Massachusetts to market, promote, or solicit sales of its products, the company does maintain a website which allows the user to search for nearby retailers. The court held that by providing this feature, the website is no longer a passive instrument that only presents information about the products, and instead is explicitly soliciting business from Massachusetts residents.
It might be difficult understand how providing information on where to purchase a product crosses the line from being a passive information provider to an active solicitor. After all, information on where to purchase is still just information.
What is enlightening about this decision is the fact that Salomon’s website lists 56 retailers in the state that sell the company’s products. However, this seems to be more of a statement on the actions of the company rather than the content of the website. The fact that the company’s products are sold at more than 50 different retailers in the state would make it difficult for any judge to rule that the court has no personal jurisdiction over the company. Thus, when analyzing whether a website is sufficient to provide personal jurisdiction, it is important to remember that the website itself is just another tool at the company’s disposal, and it is the actions of the company in the forum state that is the central issue.