Search results

Enforcing discovery against companies located in foreign nations is not a new phenomenon. The U.S. Supreme Court took up the conflict between U.S. discovery rules and foreign non-disclosure law in a 1958 case. Despite more than fifty years to reach a settled jurisprudence regarding how to enforce U.S. law against foreign domiciled companies, there has yet to be a clear articulation of a standard applicable in all cases. Currently, there are two main sets of rules under which U.S. courts may enforce discovery laws against foreign companies, and if necessary impose sanctions for non-compliance: the Hague Convention and the U.S. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The trend of authority favors the use of the U.S. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but there remain some circumstances under which the Hague Convention is favored.

Empirical studies have shown that government Internet filtering is increasing worldwide. Internet Service Providers have progressively begun to take on filtering responsibility in a quasi-governmental capacity. As filtering has increased, some have begun to question whether Internet filtering might violate WTO commitments under the General Agreement on Trade in Services ("GATS Agreement"). This paper will provide technical background on how Internet filtering is accomplished in practice, and explain the GATS Agreement that was held to govern Internet filtering in the U.S.-Gambling Services decision. This paper will further survey the current range of U.S. filtering actions and detail why tort remedies are a better legal remedy than WTO law for companies affected by U.S. Internet filtering actions.

Empirical studies have shown that government Internet filtering is increasing worldwide. Internet Service Providers have progressively begun to take on filtering responsibility in a quasi-governmental capacity. As filtering has increased, some have begun to question whether Internet filtering might violate WTO commitments under the General Agreement on Trade in Services ("GATS Agreement"). This paper will provide technical background on how Internet filtering is accomplished in practice, and explain the GATS Agreement that was held to govern Internet filtering in the U.S.-Gambling Services decision. This paper will further survey the current range of U.S. filtering actions and detail why tort remedies are a better legal remedy than WTO law for companies affected by U.S. Internet filtering actions.