Furthering a story that began in 2000, the US Court of Appeals has ruled that US District Court judge operated outside the realm of his jurisdiction by attempting to rule on a case with international ramifications. The issue in question stems from a suit filed (and won) by two French groups in 2000 to stop the sale of Nazi memorabilia through Yahoo France’s online auction site.
Because of this ruling, Yahoo agreed to stop the sale of such items through their French portal. However, Yahoo continues to allow Nazi paraphernalia to be sold on their United States-based auction house, which can be accessed by the French and other locations by typing the direct URL.
According to TheInquirer.net, Yahoo filed a suit in 2002, asking that the District Court to make the French ruling invalid because it violates Yahoo’s First Amendment rights. Presiding Judge Jeremy Fogel ruled in Yahoo’s favor. However, to quote The Inquirer’s Nick Farrell, “the appeal court remembered that the US didn’t actually have control of the French and rescinded the order.”
According to a quote that appeared in Jennifer Laycock’s article, Ninth Circuit Judge Warren Ferguson said, “The district court should have abstained from hearing the case. Yahoo cannot expect both to benefit from the fact that its content may be viewed around the world and to be shielded from the resulting costs.”
The question becomes “who is right?” Should Yahoo follow the laws and beliefs of the French? Or should France respect the laws that govern the American-based portal? But, like Nick said in his article, one has to wonder why doesn’t Yahoo just pull the Nazi-related items.
Chris Richardson is a search engine writer and editor for murdok. Visit murdok for the latest search news.
