@ccueil / actualité / jurisprudence / chroniques / internautes / professionnels / universitaires

Heading: doctrine
Key words: regulation, jurisdiction, freedom, speech
Reference: "An international discussion of the implications of the Yahoo! Inc. nazi memorabilia dispute", Interviews organized by Lionel Thoumyre, Juriscom.net, January/February 2001

Version française


An international discussion of the implications of the Yahoo! Inc. nazi memorabilia dispute

Interviews organized by Lionel Thoumyre with the collaboration of Stéphane Desrochers


The Yahoo! Case: a brief overview

On November 20, 2000, the first vice president of the Tribunal de grande instance de Paris, Mr. Jean-Jacques Gomez, ordered an American company, Yahoo! Inc. to comply with the injunction handed down on May 22 of the same year. The language of the injunction enjoined Yahoo! Inc. to ‘’take all measures to dissuade and make impossible any access via "yahoo.com" to the auction service for Nazi merchandise as well as to any other site or service that may be construed as an apologiy for Nazism or contesting the reality of Nazi crimes.’’

This decision constitutes the third and final chapter of a proceeding instituted by three French-based antiracism groups. Between the rulings on May 22 and on November 20, a panel of experts was commissioned to prepare a report discussing possible filtering measures for safeguarding the French public from the illicit content. Based on this report, which details several techniques that enable visitor-identification by country of origin, and which purports to be 70% to 90% efficient, the French judge affirmed the terms of the conviction. This condemnation stimulates the debate concerning conflict of jurisdiction and freedom of expression in cyberspace and can bring about a new paradigm of regulation. On December 21, 2000, Yahoo! Inc., formally asked an American judge to clarify these issues of law.

The fact that Yahoo! Inc. has decided as of February 10, 2001 to eliminate the sale of hate related items from its auction site and as a result, conform to the French court ruling, does not necessarily bring this legal debate to a close. In recognition of the global impact the Yahoo! case will have on how foreign legal systems will respond to illegal information entering their jurisdictions, Juriscom.net has taken the initiative to invite some of today's most recognized professors of technology law, to address the numerous legal implications that follow from this case.

For more details on the Yahoo! Case, see Richard Salis : "A Look at how U.S Based Yahoo! was Condemned by French Law"

 

Contributions to the debate

> Michael GEIST, Law professor - University of Ottawa
« We are beginning to see courts moving toward an “effects based” analysis for Internet jurisdiction »

> Joel R. REIDENBERG, Professor of Law - Fordham University (New York)
« Companies will have to comply with the laws where they target business »

> Pierre TRUDEL, Professor of Law - University of Montreal
« Les mesures de censure sont une mauvaise façon de réguler les conflits engendrés par la circulation de l’information »

> Yves POULLET, doyen de la faculté de droit, directeur du des Facultés universitaires notre dame de la Paix de Namur
« C'est à l'aune de ses propres principes constitutionnels et du respect dû à la liberté d'expression dans un pays démocratique que l'État ou le juge interviendra de manière exceptionnelle »

Forthcoming: contribution of Madame Isabelle de Lamberterie, director of research of the CNRS (France).

 

Juriscom.net est une revue juridique créée et éditée par Lionel Thoumyre
Copyright © 1997-2001 Juriscom.net / Copyright © 2000 LexUM