Yes, it's true. We are all plaintiffs now. Or nearly all of us, thanks to a pair of March 28 orders certifying two classes in the consolidated antitrust litigation against the makers of liquid crystal display screens.

For more than 40 years, California was out of synch with the U.S. Supreme Court, permitting defendants in state antitrust actions to argue that direct purchasers suffered no harm because they passed price increases on to consumers. With a ruling Monday that eliminates the pass-through defense, California's now in step with the federal courts.

Three of the firms represent foreign companies that are defendants in a civil antitrust class action over LCD products. The court ruled that the Department of Justice can subpoena client documents that originated overseas, and which the DOJ has been unable to obtain for a grand jury probe.

With so much manufacturing moving overseas, AU Optronics's appeal of the company's criminal price-fixing conviction could have broad implications for a crucial question: Can alleged cartels thwart U.S. antitrust enforcement efforts if much of their alleged conduct took place abroad?