RE: 'Everybody wants to rule the Web' Globe and Mail article

[Mark Perkins <MarkP@spc.int>]

Jim

I tend to agree with your view of the jurisdictional approach of the "onward
transfer" provisions of the E.C. Directive.  However, Michael is (as usual)
right over the big picture.  In fact, the Article 29 Working Party charged
with interpreting the Directive produced a report in November that proposes
asserting jurisdiction over websites outside the E.C. that employ cookies. 

MP>>Do you have a reference for the report? What enforcement mechanisms do
they forsee? 

As for blocking obligations under Australia's content regulation laws, you
are correct that such measures are not assertions of jurisdiction over
foreign websites per se.  However, in practice, they are a much more
aggressive assertion of government power to cut off the audience of these
sites than any effort to prosecute a random site or two.

MP>>I think this is an important distinction. I may not agree with the
Australian governments stance, but given this is within their juristiction
(just as it is within the Burmese government's to ban modems/fax machines
without license). 

Mark Perkins
Librarian
Secretariat of the Pacific Community Library
BP D5, 98848 Noumea Cedex
New Caledonia, South Pacific
Tel: 00 687 262000  Fax: 00 687 263818
email: markp@spc.int
web: http://www.spc.int/library/
* APPLe: To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe" to apple-request@apnic.net *