The War on Porn Regular Updates about the Assault on The Adult Industry
Related Articles
KANSAS CITY, Kan. — A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit accusing adult website SuperPorn of violating Kansas’ age-verification law, ruling that the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case. The decision, issued Monday, follows similar rulings in two related lawsuits that were thrown out earlier this year.
The legal challenge was one of four cases brought by the National Center on Sexual Exploitation, a conservative anti-pornography organization. Acting on behalf of a 14-year-old Kansas resident and the teen’s mother, the group alleged that the minor was able to access content on several adult websites without any age-verification process being completed.
In February, Judge Holly Teeter of the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas dismissed two of those lawsuits on jurisdictional grounds. A third case was filed against Multi Media LLC, the company behind Chaturbate. After the court granted the company’s request to compel arbitration, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case, bringing that matter to a close.
The final lawsuit targeted Pump Lab SL, which operates SuperPorn.com. The plaintiff presented several arguments in an effort to establish that the Kansas court had jurisdiction over the company. Judge Teeter, however, rejected those arguments in Monday’s ruling.
“Defendant admits that its website was accessible in Kansas but argues that it did not intentionally direct its activities at Kansas,” the ruling states. “Defendant contends it merely operates a website that is universally accessible. Plaintiff disagrees and argues that the ubiquity of Defendant’s website and the ability to access the website anywhere does not insulate Defendant from the exercise of jurisdiction in Kansas. Plaintiff highlights Defendant’s use of CDNs, Defendant’s use of ‘cookies,’ Defendant’s knowledge of user location, and the revenue Defendant generates from advertising. But still missing is intentional conduct targeting Kansas and the substantial harmful effects from which Plaintiff’s claims arise or relate to. The Court finds that it lacks specific personal jurisdiction over Defendant.”
The ruling also addressed the broader challenge courts face when applying traditional jurisdictional principles to online activity. It acknowledged “the tension inherent in a doctrine premised on geographic limitations and the peculiarly nonterritorial quality of the internet,” before concluding, “The Court has made its best effort to navigate this developing area of the law.”
Industry attorney Corey Silverstein, commenting on the decision in a legal analysis, said, “This decision reflects an increasingly important trend in internet-jurisdiction cases: courts are distinguishing between technologies that make a website universally accessible and conduct that intentionally targets a specific forum.”
Meanwhile, the state of Kansas is pursuing a separate lawsuit against SARJ LLC, alleging that several of its adult websites — including MetArt, SexArt and VivThomas — failed to implement age-verification measures required under the same state law at issue in the NCOSE-backed cases. SARJ has argued that the jurisdictional reasoning that led to the dismissal of the earlier lawsuits should apply to its case as well. Whether the court will reach the same conclusion in an enforcement action brought directly by the state remains an open question.
