Internet Jurisdiction- Another Challenge

01 September 2008 Internet, IT & e-Discovery Blog Blog
Authors: Peter Vogel

On a recent trip to Prague and London the reality of the impact of the Internet on our lives was reinforced. On every corner there’s an Internet café, WIFI, cell (mobile) phone store, or McDonald’s, and it is clear that the Internet now pervades world-wide communications. But a report concerning a recent decision by the European Court of Human Rights should also remind Internet users that geographic boundaries mean far less today than ever before since European Court of Human Rights decided that a UK hacker named Gary McKinnon should be expedited to the US because of accusations that he broke into computers belonging to NASA and the US military. One critical point is that he has never been in the US.


The 2000 injunction in France restraining Yahoo!’s US website from selling Nazi memorabilia because it is illegal in France is still in place. This is very old news, but the US courts claimed that even the First Amendment protects free speech in the US, the US courts do not have jurisdiction over the French plaintiffs and their lawsuit in France.  


Another interesting ruling about jurisdiction that should get everyone’s attention was a Pennsylvania Court that ruled that open forums held by Avatars in SecondLife where Pennsylvania residents attended meant that jurisdiction in Pennsylvania rather than California where SecondLife is headquartered.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.


Related Services