Internet jurisdiction law

With the booming expansion of the Internet, the litigation of court cases related to the internet has one basic problem: under which jurisdiction does this case fall? Such cases can expand to serious litigation and an adequate location for jurisprudence is imperative to an eventual success. But determining the authority when the victim is in one country, the culprit in another and the server on which the transaction took place in a third country, the case clearly requires regulation as to where the wronged party can state a claim. Therefore an Internet jurisdiction law may be required to regulate such instances.

There is something called general personal jurisdiction, where a company which is actively engaged in doing business on the Internet can be sued, with jurisdiction being on that location where the headquarters are located or where it was incorporated.

The United States more or less take over jurisdiction in any case where there are any of the parties or the finances from the case even remotely touched the United States. The European Union has a more serious approach, where there is a Internet jurisdiction law applicable to all member countries which regulates the jurisdiction. The world court in the Hague not only fights war crimes but can be used in international law suits where authority cannot easily be determined, if only to determine the jurisdiction. But the United States, due to the isolative and borderline imperialistic policy they employ, have not signed to the international treaty, therefore cases involving European and American parties often are being argued pertaining jurisdiction, nevertheless common procedure seems to be that the country whose citizen is deemed to be tried for a crime perpetrated on the Internet, will be prosecuted there where he has been located at the time of apprehension, if it is either the victims country or the country of the culprit’s origin. An extradition from the country of which the accused holds the citizenship from to any country claiming jurisdiction simply does not happen. Such cases are being handled by the local court where the indicted was living at the moment of arrest.

But such jurisdiction problems happen not only related to the Internet crimes, but also to regular cases where the culprit fled the country and went to his home country before he could be charged. Although there are regulations in existence which regulate the authority, different countries have different law understanding and customs, therefore it will happen that jurisdiction will be disputed in many cases, but until now an impasse has never been reached.