Website owners brought a class action against Google for displaying related items of interest including competitors’ ads and uncomplimentary customer reviews along with copies of the owner’s website page in response to a browser user’s request to open that website page.  This decision holds that the website owners have an insufficient property interest in the copy of the webpage Google displayed to allege an actionable claim for trespass to chattels.  The webpage copy displayed on the user’s device is not “capable of precise definition” because there is no single way to display a website copy.  The copy also was not capable of being exclusively controlled or possessed by the website owner.  Users, not website owners, control how the copy is used or deleted from their devices.  Website owners have no “legitimate claim to exclusivity” over website copies because they do not control how their websites are displayed on different devices or web browsers.  Plaintiffs’ state law implied-in-law contract and unjust enrichment claims were preempted by the Copyright Act which extends protections to creative works like websites similar to those afforded by the common law claims that plaintiffs alleged.