Supreme Cmdr Posted December 10, 2002 Report Posted December 10, 2002 Well, it had to happen at some point. Who were they kidding, that this could go on checked forever and that the Net, now a haven for misfits, would continue to be, virtually lawless. I can't wait for the US govt. to take over the Net and declare it a terrorist zone.
d8alus Posted December 10, 2002 Report Posted December 10, 2002 quote: Media organisations fear the ruling could unleash a flood of litigation around the world and will force them to review the content of their internet sites. Accountability?! Dear God, the horror! I will say this, tho. The law of the land of the offender not the offendee should be the one used.
DraconisRex Posted December 10, 2002 Report Posted December 10, 2002 quote:Originally posted by Kiran: quote: Media organisations fear the ruling could unleash a flood of litigation around the world and will force them to review the content of their internet sites. Accountability?! Dear God, the horror! I will say this, tho. The law of the land of the offender not the offendee should be the one used.Personally, I think the whole case is bunk, since it should be reviewed and approached by the UN (yeah, I think we should exit the UN, but we still need a world court.) The case should play out like this: Although the defendant has business within a given country, if a website of that business is located in a different country, then the case would fall into International jurisdiction. Just like boats -- if I'm more than 2 miles off the coastline, I'm in International waters. I can blast my transmitter with as much power as I want, and, if I were off the New York coast, you can bet they'd hear it.... The Internet is in International jurisdiction, unless the actual website is located in the same country as the plantiff. We'll see how this plays out....
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now