Jurisdiction

Creating a social networking site is an international affair. By creating something online, it becomes available to many across various borders, thus making you enter different jurisdictions with different laws. Jurisdiction is the “[t]he authority given by law to a court to try cases and rule on legal matters within a particular geographic area and/or over certain types of legal cases” (Law.com). Canadian jurisdiction principles state that a case “refers to the law where the harm takes place,” but because the internet allows people from around the world to connect, and in a sense allows information into peoples homes, one could be tried under various jurisdictions (Wensley, 2008). Creating awareness within your corporation and social networking site about these different laws and areas, the providers of the site could reduce any chance of legal troubles. Certain cases pertain to certain geographic areas and as a result must be tried under that area’s judicial law. With the ability to communicate with others around the world, users again must be reminded of what actions are accepted and which are not. Having the new social networking site available to different cultures would be beneficial, but it is important to not only review various laws of potentially entered markets, the creator and provider should also consider assigning teams for each jurisdiction to avoid any legal issues. Within this case, Yahoo! had offered an auction of Nazi-centric memorabilia on their site, Yahoo.com. A French Judged ordered that Yahoo! block the auction from the French population stating that it was offensive (Geist, 2001). The Yahoo! owners quickly refuted this claim, stating that the .Com site is centred and directed towards the U.S population and should only follow U.S jurisdiction laws, rather than French Jurisdiction laws. Yahoo! claimed that it runs several Websites that are country specific, the French site being Yahoo.fr which abides by all French laws, including jurisdiction laws. When creating a new social networking site, it is important for the creator to understand the differences and limitations another country may have. When entering an international market, the providers and creator should study previous cases that have been affected by the differing laws, and mainly focus on being tried within different jurisdictions. A company, such as the proposed social networking site should create different servers to accommodate different cultures and or laws. Yahoo! for example has done this by creating different Yahoo! sites for different countries and jurisdictions, Yahoo.ca, Yahoo.com, Yahoo.fr, are all examples of diverse servers to accommodate different people. Facebook, a social networking site, has accommodated several different countries demands that will not only abide by certain laws but make users feel more comfortable when registering. Facebook has created homepages and servers with specific information and has made their service available in different languages. Such additions to the social networking site proposed will make for a more fluid integration with the international market. Applying certain culture or country specific features will allow users to freely function within the site, unaffected by another jurisdictions rules or laws. Accommodating the international market will make your business widely recognized for being open and considerate of other cultures as well as limiting any jurisdiction cases that would be brought against you. Within the European Union, if any sort of business is undertaken with a citizen of the EU, they hold the right to “bring suit against you in their own country,” this is an important aspect to look at when creating the social networking site as members of various countries may join and create widgets, if posts, information and even user made widgets offend and or cause an issue with a citizen of the EU, the company may be tried under that countries laws (Wensely, 2009). There are several ways that a company and or service could have a jurisdiction claim filed against them, one must study such laws closely avoiding any chance of encountering a case such as iCraveTV v. Twenty century Fox films. Within this case, a Canadian company which allowed users to watch live streamed television from their website was accused of evading U.S jurisdiction laws with a tiny loophole. ICraveTV believed that because their service was “only” available to Canadian users, it was free from U.S jurisdiction laws (Geist, 2001). iCraveTV had a three step account setup for their service, the first was to have a Canadian Postal Code (which was prominently posted on the homepage of the site), the second step required the user to click a “Yes, I am Canadian” button or a “No, I am not Canadian” button, the third and final step before registering to become a user of this service was the agreement and reaffirmation of being Canadian. iCraveTV had attempted to avert any jurisdiction laws that would potentially harm them, however after court orders reviewed the means of registration; they deemed that users could create accounts on false information and that iCraveTV had in fact infringed upon U.S jurisdiction laws (Geist, 2001). Reviewing laws of the market a company could potentially enter is crucial in its success as different jurisdictions follow different sets of rules and/or have different beliefs. Within the Yahoo! case, the French population was offended by material posted on the popular Yahoo.com site, thus the creators, were forced to remove the content from their site and review any potential materials that are deemed offensive in other parts of the world. Jurisdiction laws differ among various countries and the understanding of such laws could limit and or eliminate any future risk of damage against the proposed social networking site. Being cautious of variations between nations may mean adding or removing some context within the site but the extra effort will benefit the creators in the long run, having moderators and specific guidelines as to what is acceptable to post on the site, by moderating, the providers and creators may reduce any legal issues around the world and under different jurisdictions. Geist, M (2001) Is There a There There? Toward Greater Certainty for Internet Jurisdiction. University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law [ [] ] (Accessed on: March 31st, 2009) Wensley, A (2009) Issues of Jurisdiction, CCT 206. University of Toronto. 