THE US LITIGATION:

The Supreme Court chooses not to review the Yahoo case

New Yahoo decisions raises old questions

On February 10, 2005 the Court of Appeals of the Ninth Circuit (California) reopened the appeal of LICRA and the other associations against the judgment of the Federal Circuit Court for Northern California which had declared itself competent over the associations and declared the French judgments inapplicable in the United States for breach of the constitutinoal protection of free speech.

On August 23, 2004, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals had reversed the Northern District Court's judgment. The Appeals Court had ruled that the case was not ripe for judgment in that the holders of the French court judgment had not made sufficient efforts to enforce its terms in California such as might justify exercise of personal jurisdiction over them by the California courts.

ftp files of the judgments of February 10, 2005 and August 23, 2004 upon request.

Bizarrely, the United States Court of Appeals seems to have been convinced by the French parties that the French court orders cannot be enforced against Yahoo ! Inc.'s assets in France. The orders available, which can be consulted from the links below, do not seem to contain any such constraint.

  A loss for Yahoo ! Inc. But hardly a victory for the French Associations. The Court of Appeals did not take a position on the constitutional question and there was no reason to suppose that its opinion would have differed on the matter from that of the District Court if the claim had been brought in accordance with the applicable procedures.

  The rehearing of the appeal would seem to foretell the adoption of a broader approach in the judgment which is expected imminently.
 

THE FRENCH LITIGATION:

Upon noticing the continued presence of revisionist and anti-semitic material on sale or otherwise observable on the yahoo.com site, French associations dedicated to combatting anti-semitism and racism brought fresh actions against Yahoo Inc. and its then President, Timothy Koogle, for a range of infractions under French criminal laws such as apology of war crimes. The defendants unsuccessfully challenged the jurisdiction of the French court but were acquitted of the criminal charges because the conduct reproached of them did not correspond to the elements required to prove guilt of the crimes for which they were charged. On appeal, the judgment was confimed in that the defendans were judged to be subject to the court's jurisdiction and French law was applied to them, but they were found not guilty of the charges.

ftp files of the judgments of February 26, 2005 and March 17, 2004 upon request.
 

Affaires Yahoo! (I et II) et Al Manar: l'approche universaliste confirmée deux fois

ftp files of the judgments of the Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit of February 10, 2005 and August 23, 2004: upon request.
ftp file of the judgment of the Federal District Court for Northern California on the substance upon request.

OTHER FRENCH CASES

Rejection of the Yahoo universalist test in favour of a "targeting" test - Revirement de la jurisprudence
Cass. Comm., 7 déc. 2010, numéro 09-16811, LVM c eBay Inc. et eBay International Ag
Cass. Comm., 7 déc. 2010, numéro 09-14545, Dior et al. c eBay Inc. Et eBay International Ag
Cass. Comm., 23 nov. 2010, numéro 07-19543, Axa c Google Inc.
Cass. Comm., 13 juillet 2010, numéro 06-20230, Louis Vuitton c Google Inc.
Cour d'Appel de Paris, 4ème ch., 26 avril 2006, Normalu

Affirmation of the Yahoo universalist test
Cas. Civ 2�me, 6 nov. 2008, numéro 07-17.455, zeturf
Cass. Crim., 15 janv. 2008, numéro 07-86.944, Laboratoires Théa
Cass. Com., 20 mars 2007, numéro 04-19.679, HSM
Cass. 1�re civ., 9 déc. 2003, numéro 01-03.225, Roederer
TGI Lille, 22 mars 2001, Association Webvisio.com c. SA Mediavet
UEJF c. Multimania

NEWS STORIES ABOUT THE YAHOO CASE

News stories in the United States
Yahoo: Auctions immune from French laws
Court to Yahoo: Use Nazi Filter
Watchdog group urges Yahoo to end racist auctions
Yahoo présente au tribunal ses solutions pour empêcher l'accès aux sites au contenu illicite
France Gags Yahoo on Nazi Bids

Nazism on the net in Germany

Nebraska Neo-Nazi Irks German Pol

German Hate Law: No Denying It

Germany's Kampf Furor Renews

ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL ARTICLES
ABOUT THE YAHOO CASE

Commentaire de l'affaire Yahoo! Valérie Sédallian janvier 2001

Commentaire de l'affaire Yahoo!, Valérie Sédallian - octobre 2000

L'Internet au gré du droit - è propos de l'affaire Yahoo!

Rubrique juridique :Loi applicable et juridictions compétentes pour les sites Internet

The Yahoo! case, by Richard Salis, November 10, 2000

 

ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL ARTICLES ABOUT INTERNET REGULATION

ABA Project on Internet Jurisdiction

Loi applicable et juridictions compétentes pour les sites Internet

Rubrique juridique :Loi applicable et juridictions compétentes pour les sites Internet

INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS AND CONSTITUTIONS

Freedom of speech

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1956

The European Convention on Human Rights

Déclaration des Droits de l'homme et du Citoyen de 1789

U.S. Constitution - First Amendment

Jurisdiction

EC Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, Brussels 1968

JURISDICTION

US cases on jurisdiction

9th Circuit declines jurisdiction over UK site

Single e-Bay sales insufficient to establish jurisdiction

Ontario Court of Appeal reverses Bangoura jurisdiction decision

FindLaw: CyberSpace Law Center: Jurisdiction

California long arm statute case

Spera v. AOL

Jones vs GNC Franchising

Hardin Roller vs Universal Printing

Taittinger v. Edelman - subpoena over foreigner present on territory

Cambridge Literrary properties, Ltd. v. Goebel Porzellanfabrik  - intellectual property jurisdiction

Alas Scan, Incorporated,v.Digital Service Consultants - copyright

Gorman David J. v Ameritrade Hold Corpus - securities trading

Darrell J. Bird, v. Marshall Parsons,- electronic commerce

US internet jurisdiction cases

Itoba v. Lep

Robinson v. TCI/US West Cable

Blumenthal vs AOL - defamation

Other country cases on jurisdiction

British jurisdiction case: Menashe Business Mercantile Ltd. & Anor v William Hill Organization Ltd. [2002] EWCA Civ 1702 (28 November 2002)

Bonnier Media Limited v. Greg Lloyd Smith+Kestrel Trading Corporation, 01 July 2002, Lord Drummond Young

News reports about cases on jurisdiction involving the internet

Bacardi case

Web Activity Gives Plaintiff Chance for Jurisdictional Discovery

B.C. Judgment re online securities regulation - Zhu v. Merill Lynch HSBC

Which State's Law Will Apply in Ramsey Libel Case?

Federal court case of jurisdiction over an Italian company in product liability

DVD Case - DVD CCA v. Pavlovich

Enforcing laws in a borderless Web - Tech News - CNET.com

Does Mexican Suit Fit In N.Y.?

AOL - internet jurisdiction case

Courts Use Target-Audience Location to Establish Jurisdiction

On jurisdiction

US judgment on choice of jurisdiction in adhesion contract

US judgment re jurisdiction over Chinese company in contract dispute

Lords give boost to 'libel tourists'

Articles on jurisdiction

ABA Project on Internet Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction in cyberspace

Souveraineté nationale - impact de l'Internet

Cyber John Does

Cyberspace Law Bibliography

EFF defends nameless Netizens

Data havens

Principality of Sealand

HavenCo: Come to Data

A Data Sanctuary is Born

Lobbies

ISP LIABILITY

French case law

Cour de Cassation - 8 décembre 1998

 

News reports on ISP liability

Internet Use Liability

Supreme Court Upholds ISP Ruling

CompuServe manager convicted

Articles and comments

Responsabilités sur le Web : une histoire de la réglementation des réseaux électroniques - Lionel Thoumyre

FREEDOM OF SPEECH

Regulating expressions of hate
How to Halt Nazi Sales in France?
Yahoo contre les racistes
German soldier suspended in Hitler Web address case

Protecting children

Yahoo! vows crackdown on pedophiles

PRIVACY

New Jersey Court Upholds Anonymity On Net Bulletin Board

Experts See Online Speech Case as Bellwether

Online ad companies hit with privacy suits

Release of Online Privacy Report - 5/22/00

LOBBIES

French lobby groups' positions on the Yahoo case
Association des Fournisseurs d'Accès et de Services Internet

Links to US lobbies

Global Internet Liberty Campaign Home Page

Electronic Privacy Information Center

CODE AND INTERNATIONAL REGULATION

Internet et PME - 1.1.6 Une distinction à opérer entre réseau de transport et règles de circulation: "la tuyauterie"(le réseau Internet) et les "protocoles" (les technologies Internet)

If code is free, why not me?

FindLaw's Writ - Sprigman: "Lockware"

MPAA v. 2600 - Brief of Amici Curiae in Support of Appellants and Reversal of the Judgment Below

CYBER-CRIME

Web ressources on international criminal law

ONLINE GAMBLING

Lawmakers debate Net bets, Webcasting

House Passes Bill to Combat Internet Gambling in the U.S.

Wired News: Online Gaming Illegal (Wink Wink)

 

Retour au début de la page
 
 

DANIEL ARTHUR LAPRES

Cabinet d'avocats

contacts

 

 

 

 

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1956

 

 

Article 18

 

1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.

 

2. No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.

 

3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.

 

4. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.

 

Article 19

 

1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.

 

2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.

 

3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:

 

(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others;

 

(b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.

 

Article 20

 

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.

 

2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

 

 
 

The European Convention on Human Rights

 

Article 9

 

1.Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.

 

2.Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

 

 

Article 10

 

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. this right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information an ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.

 

2.The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or the rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

 

 

 

U.S. Constitution - First Amendment

 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment or religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, of abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the righ of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

 

 

 

 
 

Déclaration des Droits de l'homme et du Citoyen de 1789

 

Art. 4. -

La liberté consiste à pouvoir faire tout ce qui ne nuit pas à autrui : ainsi, l'exercice des droits naturels de chaque homme n'a de bornes que celles qui assurent aux autres Membres de la Société la jouissance de ces mêmes droits. Ces bornes ne peuvent être déterminées que par la Loi.

 

Art. 5. -

La Loi n'a le droit de défendre que les actions nuisibles à la Société. Tout ce qui n'est pas défendu par la Loi ne peut être empêché, et nul ne peut être contraint à faire ce qu'elle n'ordonne pas.

 

Art. 10. -

Nul ne doit être inquiété pour ses opinions, même religieuses, pourvu que leurmanifestation ne trouble pas l'ordre public établi par la Loi.

 

Art. 11. -

La libre communication des pensées et des opinions est un des droits les plus précieux del'Homme : tout Citoyen peut donc parler, écrire, imprimer librement, sauf à répondre à l'abus de cette liberté dans les cas déterminés par la Loi.

 

 
 

Retour au début de la page
 
 

DANIEL ARTHUR LAPRES

Cabinet d'avocats

contacts