国际私法英文案例4.doc

1. Activities-Based Jurisdiction What does it mean for someone to purposefully avail herself of another forum via Internet contacts when Internet contacts can automatically appear in every state in the nation (not to mention every nation in the world)? If mere knowledge that the contacts may appear in another state constitutes purposeful availment, then every content provider can be exposed to in personam jurisdiction in every state where these contacts give rise to a cause of action. If something more than mere knowledge is needed, what is that something more? Cybersell, Inc. v. Cybersell, Inc. l30 F. 3d 4l4 (9th Cir. 1997) RYMER, Circuit Judge: We are asked to hold that the allegedly infringing use of a service mark in a home page on the World Wide Web suffices for personal jurisdiction in the state where the holder of the mark has its principal place of business. Cybersell, Inc. [Cybersell AZ], an Arizona corporation that advertises for commercial services over the Internet, c1aims that Cybersell, lnc. [Cybersell FL], a Florida corporation that offers web page construction services over the Internet, infringed its federally registered mark and should be amenable to suit in Arizona because cyberspace is without borders and a web site which advertises a product or service is necessarily intended for use on a world wide basis. The district court disagreed, and so do we. Instead, applying our normal minimum contacts analysis, we conclude that it would not comport with traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice for Arizona to exercise personal jurisdiction over an allegedly infringing Florida web site advertiser who has no contacts with Arizona other than maintaining a home page that is accessible to Arizonans, and everyone else, over the Internet. We therefore affirm. II [The court notes that the Arizona long-arm statute permits personal jurisdiction over parties to the maximum extent permitted by the U.S. Constitution.] We use a three-part test to det