Yahoo! Inc. v. La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et l'Antisemitisme

Last updated
Yahoo! Inc. v. La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et l'Antisemitisme
Seal of the United States Courts, Ninth Judicial Circuit.svg
Court United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Full case nameYahoo! Inc. v. La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et l'Antisemitisme, et al
ArguedMarch 24, 2005
DecidedJanuary 12, 2006
Citation(s) 433 F.3d 1199 (9th Cir. 2006)
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting Mary M. Schroeder, Warren J. Ferguson, Diarmuid O'Scannlain, Michael Daly Hawkins, A. Wallace Tashima, William A. Fletcher, Raymond C. Fisher, Ronald M. Gould, Richard A. Paez, Richard R. Clifton, Carlos Bea
Case opinions
Per curiam
MajorityFletcher, joined by Schroeder, Gould (entire opinion); Hawkins, Fisher, Paez, Clifton, Bea (Parts I and II)
ConcurrenceFerguson, joined by O'Scannlain, Tashima
Concur/dissentFisher, joined by Hawkins, Paez, Clifton, Bea

Yahoo! Inc. v. La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et l'antisemitisme, 433 F.3d 1199 (9th Cir. 2006), was an Internet jurisdiction case of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, on whether American courts must help enforce penalties against American-operated websites that had been enacted by other nations. [1]

Contents

Background

Selling or displaying Nazi artifacts is illegal in France, but some French users of auction and retail sites hosted at the international yahoo.com site were buying and selling such items. French anti-discrimination groups led by La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et l'antisemitisme (League Against Racism and Antisemitism, or LICRA) filed suit in French court, claiming that Yahoo! was violating French law by allowing French Internet users to buy the Nazi antiques on websites hosted outside of the country. [1] [2]

Yahoo! claimed that as an American company, it was not subjected to French law. Regardless, the French court determined that the company had violated French law and charged the company a penalty of 100,000 Francs (about $13,300) per day until all listings for Nazi artifacts were taken down or made inaccessible for French users. While the local operators of yahoo.fr added warnings for users and worked to take down some listings for Nazi memorabilia, Yahoo! resisted taking similar measures for its general sites that are accessible around the world. Yahoo! also refused to pay the penalty, again citing a lack of jurisdiction for the French court that instituted the penalty. [1]

Believing that Yahoo!'s refusal to pay the fine was a violation of the Hague Convention, which requires international cooperation to settle war crimes (with the Nazis as the criminals), LICRA contacted the United States Marshals Service and suggested that the Marshals should enforce the ruling of the French court, by collecting the daily fine from Yahoo! and ordering the company to take down the offending material from all its sites on the World Wide Web. The Marshals declined to take action but informed Yahoo! of the request. [1]

Yahoo! filed suit in the district court for the Northern District of California against LICRA, arguing that the organization's demands were moot because the French courts did not have jurisdiction to charge the penalty, and that the French court's order to take down offending material was untenable under Yahoo!'s free speech rights as an American company. More specifically, Yahoo! requested declaratory relief on whether the French court order was enforceable against them as an American company. LICRA argued that the American court did not have jurisdiction over them, so they should retain the ability to utilize the U.S. Marshals to enforce an international legal order. [3]

The district court determined that it did have personal jurisdiction over LICRA because it was requesting law enforcement actions in that court's territory. Then the district court ruled against LICRA's motion to dismiss the suit, effectively agreeing with Yahoo! that it should not be subjected to a French court ruling. [3] LICRA appealed this decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Opinion

The question before the Ninth Circuit was whether it and other American courts have jurisdiction over LICRA as a French organization requesting law enforcement action in the United States. Applying the Calder Test on determining personal jurisdiction in international legal disputes, the circuit court ruled that LICRA's request would not require significant actions by Yahoo! because the French court order was unenforceable in the United States. Therefore the circuit court held that it, and the lower court, did not have jurisdiction in the dispute. [1]

This overturned Yahoo's victory at the district court, but this was also a loss for LICRA because the circuit court ruled that the dispute was not adjudicable in the United States at all. As an international dispute with unclear procedures on how to enforce or acknowledge the French court order, the case was not ripe for adjudication in American courts. [1]

The circuit court noted that this ruling was focused purely on jurisdiction, for both the French court in its order for Yahoo! to take down material and pay a fine, and LICRA's attempts to enforce that order. The circuit court avoided any discussion of the morality of buying and selling Nazi memorabilia or France's motivations in suppressing that type of business activity. [1] Also, Yahoo! had the ability to refuse certain auctions on a case-by-case basis and to refuse shipping to certain locations, and the circuit court found that those were sufficient for addressing the controversy in France. [1]

Impact

The ruling has been cited as an important early precedent in efforts by governments to regulate the Internet at the international level, when trying to maintain democratic or cultural norms. [4] The continuing confusion over the ability of one nation to regulate the users and designers of a foreign website, which by definition is accessible around the world via the World Wide Web, was widely discussed by regulators and experts due to the outcome of this case. [5] [6]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International Court of Justice</span> Primary judicial organ of the United Nations

The International Court of Justice, sometimes known as the World Court, is one of the six principal organs of the United Nations (UN). It settles disputes between states in accordance with international law and gives advisory opinions on international legal issues. The ICJ is the only international court that adjudicates general disputes between countries, with its rulings and opinions serving as primary sources of international law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Child Online Protection Act</span>

The Child Online Protection Act (COPA) was a law in the United States of America, passed in 1998 with the declared purpose of restricting access by minors to any material defined as harmful to such minors on the Internet. The law, however, never took effect, as three separate rounds of litigation led to a permanent injunction against the law in 2009.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International League Against Racism and Anti-Semitism</span>

The International League Against Racism and Anti-Semitism—or Ligue internationale contre le racisme et l'antisémitisme (LICRA) in French—was established in 1927, and is opposed to intolerance, xenophobia and exclusion.

"La France" is a 2001 song by the French hip hop band Sniper. It addresses perceived injustices committed against minorities by the French political system and the opinion that even though there is a large number of people of African and Arab origins in France, they are poorly represented in politics. The song's chorus displays the message in a rather strong way:

La France est une garce et on s'est fait trahir Le système, voilà ce qui nous pousse à les haïr La haine, c'est ce qui rend nos propos vulgaires On nique la France sous une tendance de musique populaire On est d'accord et on se moque des répressions On se fout de la République et de la liberté d'expression Faudrait changer les lois et pouvoir voir Bientôt à l'Elysée des arabes et des noirs au pouvoir
<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nazi memorabilia</span> Items of Nazi origin that are collected by museums and private individuals

Nazi memorabilia or Third Reich collectibles are items produced during the height of Nazism in Germany, particularly the years between 1933 and 1945. Nazi memorabilia includes a variety of objects from the material culture of Nazi Germany, especially those featuring swastikas and other Nazi symbolism and imagery or connected to Nazi propaganda. Examples are military and paramilitary uniforms, insignia, coins and banknotes, medals, flags, daggers, guns, posters, contemporary photos, books, publications, and ephemera.

Ligue contre le racisme et l'antisémitisme et Union des étudiants juifs de France c. Yahoo! Inc. et Société Yahoo! France is a French court case decided by the Tribunal de grande instance of Paris in 2000. The case concerned the sale of memorabilia from the Nazi period by Internet auction and the application of national laws to the Internet. Some observers have claimed that the judgement creates a universal competence for French courts to decide Internet cases.

The Mouvement contre le racisme et pour l'amitié entre les peuples is an anti-racist French NGO founded in 1949.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">E. Randol Schoenberg</span> American lawyer

Eric Randol Schoenberg is an American lawyer and genealogist, based in Los Angeles, California, specializing in legal cases related to the recovery of looted or stolen artworks, particularly those by the Nazi regime during the Holocaust.

Personal jurisdiction in Internet cases refers to a growing set of judicial precedents in American courts where personal jurisdiction has been asserted upon defendants based solely on their Internet activities. Personal jurisdiction in American civil procedure law is premised on the notion that a defendant should not be subject to the decisions of a foreign or out of state court, without having "purposely availed" himself of the benefits that the forum state has to offer. Generally, the doctrine is grounded on two main principles: courts should protect defendants from the undue burden of facing litigation in an unlimited number of possibly remote jurisdictions, and courts should prevent states from infringing on the sovereignty of other states by limiting the circumstances under which defendants can be "haled" into court.

Questions over personal jurisdiction over foreign defendants in the United States arise when foreign nationals commit crimes against Americans, or when a person from or in a different country is sued in U.S. courts, or when events took place in another country. Such cases arise when crimes are committed on the high seas or on international flights, when crimes are alleged to be committed by or against Americans in foreign countries, or when crimes are committed by foreigners against Americans. The Internet also allows computer crime to cross international boundaries.

<i>Bragg v. Linden Research, Inc.</i> 2007 United States civil action

Bragg v. Linden Research, Inc., 487 F. Supp. 2d 593, was a ruling at the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The case resulted in an important early ruling on the enforceability of an online End User License Agreement (EULA) under American contract law, though it did not ultimately gain influence as a precedent. The ruling also clarified the matter of personal jurisdiction for a dispute involving a user of a website that originates in a different region.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Yvonne Jospa</span>

Yvonne Jospa was a cofounder and leading organizer of the Comité de Défense des Juifs in September 1942 with her husband Hertz Jospa, which saved over 3,000 Jewish children from deportation and death. Yvonne Jaspar was her pseudonym in the Belgian Resistance.

Racist rhetoric is distributed through computer-mediated means and includes some or all of the following characteristics: ideas of racial uniqueness, racist attitudes towards specific social categories, racist stereotypes, hate-speech, nationalism and common destiny, racial supremacy, superiority and separation, conceptions of racial otherness, and anti-establishment world-view. Racism online can have the same effects as offensive remarks made face-to-face.

There is medium internet censorship in France, including limited filtering of child pornography, laws against websites that promote terrorism or racial hatred, and attempts to protect copyright. The "Freedom on the Net" report by Freedom House has consistently listed France as a country with Internet freedom. Its global ranking was 6 in 2013 and 12 in 2017. A sharp decline in its score, second only to Libya was noted in 2015 and attributed to "problematic policies adopted in the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attack, such as restrictions on content that could be seen as 'apology for terrorism,' prosecutions of users, and significantly increased surveillance."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fatima Besnaci-Lancou</span> French writer

Fatma Besnaci, known as Fatima Besnaci-Lancou, her pen name, is a French writer known for her work on Memories of harkis in France. Harkis were Algerian auxiliaries who fought for France during Algerian War.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bernard Lecache</span> French journalist

Bernard Lecache was a French journalist. In 1927, he founded the League Against Pogroms, which the following year, became the International League Against Anti-Semitism, and in 1979, became the International League against Racism and Anti-Semitism. He was the president from 1927 to 1968.

<i>Mavrix Photo, Inc. v. Brand Technologies, Inc.</i> Case in American intellectual property law

Mavrix Photo, Inc. v. Brand Technologies, Inc., 647 F.3d 1218, is a case in American intellectual property law involving personal jurisdiction in the context of internet contacts.

The Clean IT Project is an online project initiated by the European Union, aiming to reduce or discourage online terrorism and further illegal activities via the internet. They aim to create a document that commits the internet industry to help governments discover content that incites acts of terrorism. The main facilitators that undertook this project were the Netherlands, Germany, United Kingdom, Belgium, and Spain. There are many more supporting EU members such as Hungary, Romania, and recently, Italy, but the main countries that have started the project are the 5 listed above.

<i>Quenelle</i> (gesture)

The quenelle is a gesture created and popularized by French comedian Dieudonné M'bala M'bala. He first used it in 2005 in his sketch entitled "1905" about French secularism, and has used it since in a wide variety of contexts. The quenelle became popular, with many photos posted to the Internet showing individuals posing while performing quenelles at mundane places.

Microsoft Corp. v. United States, known on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court as United States v. Microsoft Corp., 584 U.S. ___, 138 S. Ct. 1186 (2018), was a data privacy case involving the extraterritoriality of law enforcement seeking electronic data under the 1986 Stored Communications Act, Title II of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA), in light of modern computing and Internet technologies such as data centers and cloud storage.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Yahoo! Inc. v. La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et l'Antisemitisme, 433F.3d1199 (9th Cir.2006).
  2. "UEJF and Licra v Yahoo! Inc and Yahoo France" . Retrieved 2022-08-20.
  3. 1 2 Yahoo! Inc. v. La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et l'antisemitisme, 1 45 F.Supp.2d 1168 (N.D. Cal., 2001).
  4. Reidenberg, Joel R. (2001). "The Yahoo Case and the International Democratization of the Internet". Social Science Research Network. SSRN   267148.
  5. Post, David (2009). In Search of Jefferson's Moose: Notes on the State of Cyberspace. Oxford University Press. pp. 164–171. ISBN   978-0195342895.
  6. Goldsmith, Jack; Wu, Tim (2008). Who Controls the Internet?: Illusions of a Borderless World. Oxford University Press. pp. chapter 1. ISBN   978-0195340648.