After reading the article “Personal Jurisdiction and the Marketing of Goods and
ID: 461034 • Letter: A
Question
After reading the article “Personal Jurisdiction and the Marketing of Goods and Services on the Internet” BB.2.Dickerson-Cohen.final_[1](2).pdf listed in the “Additional Resources” section, please prepare a three to four page written summary double-spaced with standard one-inch margins using the following guidelines and the grading rubric. Each journal review paper should contain the following information: • Article Citation • Article Summary (bulleted list): The student must list five to ten key points from the article. • Special Insights: These might include questions raised but not answered by the article or particular applications to the student’s personal/professional life.
Explanation / Answer
Dickerson, Thomas A.; Chambers, Cheryl E.; and Cohen, Jeffrey A. (2012) "Personal Jurisdiction and the Marketing of Goods and Services on the Internet," Hofstra Law Review: Vol. 41: Iss. 1, Article 3.
The article makes discussion regarding personal jurisdiction and the legal aspects of marketing goods and services on the Internet as per September 2012. It focuses on the legal cases which involve the copyright infringement, patent and trademark infringement and the defective or misrepresented goods. It has been claimed by the defamation and the laws related to the sale of travel services on the internet examined are presented including consumer rights related to Internet travel companies like Expedia Inc, Orbitz and Travelocity.
• Consumer Use of the Internet in order to make travel arrangements has increased in the recent years
• The reliability of information, hidden fees, insecure credit card transactions and travel shopping on the web are points which make consumers cautious
• Retailers keep developing creative ways for the sale of travel services through internet
• The limit to which an Internet Web site gives personal jurisdiction in the forum wherein the consumer’s computer is located has been administered by the court.
• If an informational website is made accessible to the general public by the foreign company but cannot be used for making reservations then courts will make it unreasonable to apply personal jurisdiction.
• The Interactivity of the lowest level of travel website which involves e-mail communications which let travellers to request information but not make reservations would not be sufficient for jurisdiction.
• There is permission given by the website for a user to submit an email to the hotel requesting reservations information.
• No reservation is confirmed on the website.
• The middle level of Interactivity involves the ability to gain information, communication by email and make hotel reservations led to cases finding a sufficient basis for jurisdiction.
• There will be a sufficient basis for jurisdiction with the highest level of travel website interactivity which involves the purchase of travel services on the website along with the other business contacts with the forum.
There has been analysis provided on Personal Jurisdiction and the Marketing of Goods and Services on the Internet. There has not been any insight provided on the recommendations for the courts to decide what kind of business contacts could justify the assertion of personal jurisdiction.