Court upholds ruling on Net jurisdiction
Under the Constitution, a Web site advertising a Florida company's services is not enough grounds to land its owners in court in Arizona, according to a federal appeals court ruling.
The decision, handed down by the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, adopts reasoning set out in a similar ruling by a separate federal appeals court in New York. Both courts ruled that despite their worldwide reach, noninteractive Internet sites are like print ads in a magazine: They do not establish the necessary contacts with another state to create legal jurisdiction.
But unlike the earlier appellate ruling, which hinged on New York law and involved trademark rights over a Manhattan jazz nightclub known as the Blue Note, today's decision is rooted in due process guarantees provided by the Constitution. Hence, today's decision will have a broader effect, two professors specializing in Internet law explained.
"This decision said, 'This is what the Constitution requires, that it violates due process for people to be hailed into court in Arizona when all they've done is put up a Web site in Florida,'" said Eugene Volokh, a law professor at the University of California at Los Angeles. The Blue Note case, by contrast, "was about New York law. It was relevant in New York but not even in Connecticut."
While jurisdictional laws vary from state to state, the Constitution offers a base level of protection that must be followed across the board. David Post, a law professor at Temple University and the codirector of the Cyberspace Law Institute, agreed with Volokh, saying the constitutional interpretation gives the decision significantly more weight.
The decision is at odds with a Minnesota state court ruling issued last December, holding that the state had jurisdiction over a Nevada Web site accused of false advertising. The state claimed that the site posted an ad on the Net implying that gambling is legal in Minnesota, when in fact it is not. (See related report)
Minnesota resides outside the Ninth Circuit's reach, so today's ruling isn't binding there. Still, Volokh said, the decision carries a great deal of persuasive weight because it comes from an appeals court, and lawyers for the Nevada site, Wager Net, are likely to cite the decision when appealing their case.