I wouldn't read too much into Kickstarter being named. It's a standard legal ploy to sue everybody who passed within twenty feet of the party they're primarily after. Usually they're hoping to cut a deal to get somebody to speak against the defendant or reveal inside information about the defendant during the deposition stage.Just the usual BS lawyer tactics folks. Nothing to see here. Move along....
Kickstarter's big problem IMO is that they leave themselves open for this because they charge a percentage
rather than a flat fee for a listing on their site. That makes what they do look more like a partnering
arrangement with a client than it does selling
a their service to a customer.
That's the opening the attorneys saw to go after them. They'll argue Kickstarter's revenue is dependent on the success of the projects they host - which makes their arrangement more of a partnership since there's some risk to Kickstarter using that formula. And the degree of "at risk" has long been a factor taken into consideration when determining whether or not somebody is actually "in business" with someone else.
And seriously, why should one Kickstarter project cost more to list than another? Kickstarter's costs should be mostly fixed and predictable by now. They could
charge a flat fee and still make money.