The Case of Yahoo and the French Government over the rights of Yahoo.com
to auction Nazi memorabilia is heating up into a debate on the fundamental
aspects of Jurisdiction over Cyber space.
The essence of the dispute is that according to French law, it is an
offense to promote Nazi memorabilia. Yahoo auction site however allows
auction of such items and the site is accessible to French men even in
France. French Court says this should stop. Is this order binding on Yahoo
a Company in USA?. If the Court in USA now reviews the judgment of French
Court and rules that it has no jurisdiction on Yahoo, will it create a
Confrontationist attitude in the judiciary in all International disputes?
are issues to be discussed.
The larger issues are,
Does the Cyber Space accessed by French people from within
the borders of France has a boundary within which the French Government
has the ultimate right to rule?
Will this Cyber Space extend to all French nationals including those
outside France and all Non French Citizens within France?
Or Does this Cyber Space belong to the "Human Kind" in general?
Is it like the jurisdiction over the Air Space and Sea beyond
the borders? or like Outer Space?
Can there be isolated islands of jurisdiction within another jurisdiction
like Embassy premises or Ships in high seas?
Obviously, there will be different opinions. Countries like China and Burma
prefer to have their own regulated Cyber Space so that they can impose
Censorship over the Cyber Space accessible to their residents.
International community cannot do any thing to prevent individual countries
trying to set rules of Internet access for their Citizens especially from
their soil. If we however allow them to dictate the terms of access elsewhere,
it could be a serious threat to "Free Speech".
Even if the American Court rules in favour of Yahoo, it will still be
an unpleasant precedence which could be dubbed as a show of authority
by USA over France.
The solution to this has to be looked at both in the short term and
the long term.
In the short term, we must look at a solution once suggested by naavi.org
(See article
"How to Counter Rogue Sites", here). This is aimed at allowing freedom
of speech but giving an opportunity for the opposing view to be tagged
along with the disputed message. Obviously, an independent body should
assess if a particular speech warrants this kind of conditional publication.
If this method is accepted between different countries, all "Hate Speech"
sites can be brought under this category.
In the long run however, Cyber Space has to be regulated through
Cyber Democracy of the Netizens, By the Netizens and For the Netizens.
Under this model, there should be an international Cyber body of regulation
like the UNO where only Netizens are allowed to vote and netizens are allowed
to legislate. The participating community would use Digital identities
that create Citizenship over the Cyber Space. All disputes that originate
and terminate on the Cyber Space should be handled by this authority with
punishments including "Banishment from Cyber Space" and "Confiscation of
Cyber Properties". Any dispute with the Meta World Governments should then
be resolved through a "Treaty" between the "Cyber Space Organisation"
and the respective Government. If any Government wants to run its own colonies
and not subject itself to the Cyber Democracy, such countries should be
isolated from the benefits of Cyber technology with appropriate "sanctions".
This approach will be a prelude to "Universal Cooperation" for a Common
Law of the Cyber Space.
Naavi
June 19, 2001
Related Articles : (From Computerworld.com)
U.S.
judge to decide Yahoo's challenge of French court order
Yahoo
told to block Nazi goods from French
Yahoo
asks U.S. court to block French ruling on Nazi memorabilia
Comments and Suggestions can be sent
to Naavi
