Emerging trends in international Internet defamation suits from the US, Canada, Australia and the UK, and international efforts in the European Union, American Law Institute, International Bar Association and the Hague Convention to harmonize the laws in international Internet defamation are evaluated to see emerging areas of commonality that might be useful in harmonizing the laws in the phenomenon of global Internet defamation liability. This study proposes the utilization of existing commonalities in laws, as well as emerging standards from the efforts to harmonize laws by the EU and current international judicial dispositions, as parameters for an international agreement on Internet torts.
Bartlett, P. (2003) `Gutnick Shows Need for New International Jurisdictional Principles', Communications Lawyer4(20): 16-18.
2.
Brand, R. (2002) `Community Competence for Matters of Judicial Cooperation at the Hague Conference on Private International Law: A View from the United States', Journal of Law and Commerce21(191): 191-208.
3.
Clayton, K. (2002) `The Draft Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Judgments and the Internet: A New Jurisdictional Framework' , John Marshall Law Review36(223): 223-48.
4.
Garnett, R. (2003) `Dow Jones & Company Inc. v. Gutnick: An Adequate Response to Transnational Internet Defamation?', Melbourne Journal of International Law4(196): 196-217.
5.
Kraus, K. and D. Polatsek (2003) `Enforcement of Foreign Media Judgments in the Aftermath of Gutnick v. Dow Jones', Communications Lawyer21(23): 1, 24-7.
6.
Mann, R.J. and J.K. Winn (2002) Electronic Commerce. New York : Aspen.
7.
Wimmer, K. (2002) `International Law and the Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Based on Internet Content'; at: www.ldrc.com/Cyberspace/International%20Internet%20Libel.pdf (accessed 2 March 2006).
8.
Winn, J.K. and B. Wright (2003) The Law of Electronic Commerce. New York: Aspen Law and Business.
