Account

Sign in to access your account and subscription

Personal Jurisdiction, the Internet and the Marx Brothers: Is There Life After <i>Zippo</i>?

Despite some suggestions to the contrary, the rise of the Internet as a business tool does not portend the end of limits on personal jurisdiction. The cyber-sky is not falling. Rather, the courts are finding that the Internet merely provides another vehicle (albeit an electronic one) through which a party may purposely avail itself of the privilege of conducting business in a foreign state and thus subject itself to jurisdiction in that state. In some recent cases, the federal courts have analyzed the characteristics of this relatively new and expanding technology under the Supreme Court's existing personal jurisdiction precedent. Instead of changing the personal jurisdiction standard, which is grounded in the Constitution, the courts have applied the existing personal jurisdiction standards to Internet activities.

19 minute readApril 01, 2004 at 11:20 AM
By
Benjamin I. Fink
Steven A. Wagner
Personal Jurisdiction, the Internet and the Marx Brothers: Is There Life After <i>Zippo</i>?

Despite some suggestions to the contrary, the rise of the Internet as a business tool does not portend the end of limits on personal jurisdiction. The cyber-sky is not falling.

This premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

Already have an account? Sign In Now

For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Continue Reading

Letter Agreement Between Landlord and Tenant Did Not Extinguish GuarantyTreble Damage Award Upheld; Landlord Failed to Establish Overcharge Was Not WillfulDenying Access to Landlord Constituted Breach Entitling Landlord to PossessionTenant Entitled to Yellowstone Injunction With Respect to Taxes and Sewer Charges

March 01, 2026

New York is one of the first states to adopt laws to regulate artificial intelligence use in advertising and to strengthen post-mortem publicity rights regarding AI-generated replicas and “synthetic performers.” Given the state’s role as a bellwether for consumer-protection and advertising regulation, these new laws, combined with the state’s broader AI legislative framework, represent a shift toward transparency, consent and accountability.

March 01, 2026

State app store age verification regimes do more than reallocate responsibility between platforms and developers. They create a new data supply chain for age knowledge, one that can move COPPA questions from “do we ask age?” to “what do we do when the platform tells us?” The teams that handle this best will treat platform age signals as sensitive compliance inputs: minimize them, tightly control where they flow, and design product behavior so that minors do not trigger unnecessary collection or disclosure.

March 01, 2026

The firms leading right now chose to ask what would become possible if they managed the entire revenue lifecycle — from invoice generation to cash receipt — in one place, and what AI could actually accomplish with complete data instead of partial feeds. That is the Power of One.

March 01, 2026

A recent decision from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY), United States v. Heppner, has generated outsized commentary suggesting that the use of generative AI tools may jeopardize attorney-client privilege. A closer reading shows something far less dramatic.

March 01, 2026