Who Had Jurisdiction For This Matter?

The appropriate court for this lawsuit depends upon several factors. Three important considerations include the following: Personal jurisdiction which allows courts to have jurisdiction over both the plaintiff and defendant in a case. Specific to corporations, personal jurisdiction only applies in the state in which the company does business, is incorporated and has it principle office. In Margolin’s suit, personal jurisdiction would not apply because although the company does business in the state of New York, both Novelty Now and Funny Faces are not incorporated or have principle offices in this state.

The globalization of crime has become a renowned problem for the law worldwide; as societies become more interconnected, an act in one country can have repercussions in another which is across another continent. This is primarily down to technological developments, as nowadays communication between countries is simple compared to decades ago. Alongside this transport is also a major problem, as it means that illegal activities can take place in more than one country as goods are transferred between the two, allowing the criminal world to reach all corners of the world.

When considering the facts of the Margolin’s lawsuit with the rules of jurisdiction, first one must understand when personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction would be applicable. As stated in the textbook, “Personal Jurisdiction is a court 's power to render a decision affecting the rights of the specific persons before the court. Generally, a court 's power to exercise in personam jurisdiction extends only over a specific geographic region.” (Kubasek, pg.42, 2009). Before a court can decide to implement control over a person, they require a minimum contact within the district in which the court is over. In this case, the minimum contact was established over the internet when Margolin inputted information over the internet that completed the business transaction. Since the contact is through the internet, and not within boundaries of the state of California or Florida, the court can exercise personal jurisdiction Margolin’s lawsuit over Funny Face and Novelty Now (Kubasek, 2009).

The first problem is with the judicial system, the article talks about all the different branches and how the go on in dealing with crime cases, and how it is specialized to a certain kind of crime. How if they want to do a investigation on a cyber crime then they will have to get a jurisdiction. The one problem is to get jurisdiction they have to found out where the crime took places and it states “A law enforcement agency or court has jurisdiction only over crimes that take place in the geographic location where that agency or court has authority.” Since laws are different in

In the wake of the highly controversial and newly-proposed rule clarifying the Environmental Protection Agency’s and Army Corps of Engineers’ interpretations of the phrase “waters of the United States,” the Supreme Court was recently asked to determine whether or not Jurisdictional Determinations issued by the Corps constitute “final agency action” under the Administrative Procedure Act. Such a distinction is important, because if considered “final agency action”, such determinations would be subject to judicial review. Under the Clean Water Act’s “arguably unconstitutionally vague” definition of “waters of the United States,” the exact scope of jurisdiction is murky at best. The indefinite scope of jurisdiction that CWA imparts has been criticized as expanding the Corps’ and EPA’s jurisdiction so vastly, it caused Justice Scalia to speculate that “[a]ny piece of land that is wet at least part of the year is in danger of being classified by [Federal] employees as wetlands covered by the Act . .

The internet has brought upon a new revolution of global interconnection where contacting someone on the other side of the world is just a click away, but with this international phenomenon comes an increased susceptibility with unfamiliar technology. Internet crime is compiled of all non-physical crime with the aid of a computer. Although broad in definition internet crimes are largely composed of acts such as cyber fraud, ‘phishing’ (username and password hacking), cyber stalking and hacking. Internet crime does not pose an overwhelming issue in society in terms of its

State and local law enforcement agencies face several challenges including the lack of resources, expertise, training, and funding to solve cyber crime. Of these problems, are the growing concerns of the local and state officials about the threats made relating to the protection of computer infrastructures at the federal level. Local officers are not having the capacity or understanding of computer crimes necessary to properly investigate offenses such as computer and electric crimes and fraud and theft crimes by digital technology. (Taylor, 2011) Having education and appropriate training is crucial in the investigation process to gain an upper hand in fighting digital crime. In addition, state and local law enforcement expressed concerns about resource constraints and apprehension regarding expertise and jurisdictional

Security and privacy concerns present challenges for law enforcement combating deep web criminal activity. Crimes committed on or with the Internet are relatively new. Those crimes include illicit trade in drugs, weapons, wildlife, stolen goods, or people; illegal gambling; sex trafficking; child pornography; terrorism and anarchy; corporate and sovereign espionage; and financial crimes. Police agencies have been fighting an uphill battle always one step behind an ever evolving digital landscape and the criminals who exploit it. The novelty of the Internet begets jurisdictional and legal issues law enforcement must address while remaining ethical and holding to the code of law. Due to the anonymous nature of deep web criminal activity and the means for uncovering perpetrators, privacy concerns of citizens legally using the same software or websites are now a hot topic.

According to Mikko Hypponen criminals can be not only in this town where you live but also in the other end of the world. Because internet is without outskirts. Actually PC infections written by experienced scammers who in this way to get money. The biggest goal is to get the identification from the most secure websites. From the text is the author of a lot of travel. It turned out that the Brazilian city of São Paulo stood out among the best sources of saving money trojans in the reality. The author gives you to compare two important things the blow inflicted by hackers and the fall of life. The author says that law enforcement and force work gradual. They don’t follow with the sharp increase in internet wrongdoing, and chastisement are very

Increasingly, criminals have utilized the internet to commit or launder crimes remotely and through international networks. Consequently, the process to obtain the electronic evidence needed to investigate or prosecute criminals has progressively become more complex. The practice of transborder searches of computers and servers located in other countries has been exploited to effectuate countries’ own domestic laws. Transborder searches are a measure a country performs independently to access data housed in a different county without asking permission of that state. The legal and moral acceptability of transborder searches has developed into a controversial topic when paired with the principle of territoriality. In regards to international

The agencies employed by governments to police the web in order to protect the vulnerable have seen an increase in child pornography and online fraud. The speed at which information can be distributed and the number of people that can be reached attracts those that are intent on causing harm. The term “cybercrime” is becoming more widely used. The financial gains that can be made and the anonymity the internet can provide, make the virtual world of cyberspace a haven for criminals. Although the internet has huge benefits for information gathering and social networking, in the wrong hands it can cause harm to the vulnerable and criminals are able to vanish into the underground with the use of false identities that are hard to track online.

Two of the common known attacks on computing systems are the deployment of computer viruses and malware.

To understand the business of malware, one must understand how malware has evolved in the past twenty-five years. Malware, which includes all kinds of malicious software, was originally created to show the weaknesses of computers. The first type of malware, created in 1986, was a virus called “Brain.A. Brain.A was developed in Pakistan, by two brothers - Basit and Amjad. They wanted to prove that PC is not secure platform, so they created virus that was replicating using floppy disks” (Milošević). Even today malware is still used to check the security of machines.

In accordance with many decades of cyber evolution, a cybercrime is shown in different ranges of crimes, which depend on the spread of technology and law. From the introduction of computer in the 1960s to the rise of personal computer in 1980s, cybercrime began to appear. The crimes can vary from piracy of software to patent-related crimes. This caused a surge in the introduction of relevant legislation in many countries and international organizations involved. In late 1990s, when Internet and transnational crimes were born, the international community cooperated in many instances such as the passing of the UN General Assembly Resolution 45/121 in 1990 and the manual for the prevention and control of computer-related crimes issued in 1994. Despite all the

Many types of computer virus has been spreading in computers since 1960. The first a computer virus discovered in 1970 and called The Creeper virus on Arpanet browser (anon, 2013)