Internet Libel: The Consequences of a Non-rule Approach to Personal Jurisdiction

Abstract:     
If a person in one state posts on the Internet a libelous statement about a person living in another state the question often arises as to whether the person with the injured reputation can sue in his home state or must bring suit in the courts of another state, presumably the home state of person who posted the offending statement. Courts have reached inconsistent results on this question in an effort to apply the U.S. Supreme Court's minimum contacts jurisprudence. This article examines the approaches of the lower courts and argues that they have mostly ignored the most relevant Supreme Court precedents, 1985 cases in Keeton v. Hustler and Calder v. Jones. The article also compares the approach of the U.S. courts to the E.U. courts interpreting the Brussels Convention and Regulation.

Keywords: Internet, libel, minimum contacts, jurisdiction, Keeton v. Hustler, Calder v. Jones

JEL Classifications: K00, K10, K19, K41

Accepted Paper Series