Cases

• Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz 471 U.S. 462 (1985) A substantial amount of business is transacted solely by mail and wire communications across state lines, thus obviating the need for physical presence within a State in which business is conducted. So long as a commercial actor's efforts are "purposefully directed" toward residents of another State, we have consistently rejected the notion that an absence of physical contacts can defeat personal jurisdiction there.
• Ford Motor Co. v. Texas Dep't of Transp. 106 F. Supp.2d 905 (W.D. Texas, July 21, 2000) Automobile manufacturer's plan to sell cars directly to consumers via the Web would have made it a de facto dealer, and Texas law prohibiting auto manufacturers from acting in the capacity of dealers does not violate the Commerce Clause.
• Ford Motor Co. v. Texas Dep't Of Transp., Motor Vehicle Div. No. 0-50750 (5th Cir. August 27, 2001) A Texas statute forbidding motor vehicle manufacturers from selling products over the Internet does not discriminate against interstate commerce where all manufacturers are treated equally, whether based in Texas or not.
• Quill Corp. v. Heitkamp 504 U.S. 298 (1992) State's enforcement of the use tax placed an unconstitutional burden on interstate commerce). However, the Court also ruled that "to the extent that this Court's decisions have indicated that the (Due Process) Clause requires a physical presence in a State (as a nexus for taxation), they are overruled."
• Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co., Inc. v. Spitzer Nos. 00 Civ. 7274 (LAP), 00 Civ. 7750 (LAP) S.D.N.Y. June 8, 2001) A statute forbidding sales of cigarettes over the Internet discriminates against interstate commerce by attempting to isolate New York from the national cigarette market, and defendants did not show that the statute advances legitimate state interests.
• Starmedia Network, Inc. v. Star Media, Inc. 2001 WL 417118 (S.D.N.Y. April 23, 2001) Where a company engaging in interstate commerce does not take online orders or sell any products directly over the Internet, but does provide customers with access to certain confidential information through a password system, and does support an exchange of information through electronic mail, there are sufficient minimum contacts for specific jurisdiction.

 

Statutes

• 15 U.S.C. §1693 et. seq Electronic Fund Transfers.
• 18 U.S.C. § 1084 Transmission of wagering information; penalties.
• 25 U.S.C. § 2701-2721 Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
• Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 12 U.S.C. §§3401-3422 Access to banking and investment records.

Cases

• Ass'n Of Communications Ent. v. Fed. Communications Comm'n No. 00-1144 (D.D.Cir. June 26, 2001) The discounted resale obligations of 47 USC 251(c)(4) do not apply to incumbent local exchange carriers who provide DSL only to ISPs and not to end-users directly.

• Bell Atl. Maryland, Inc. v. MCI Worldcom, Inc. Nos. 99-2459, 99-2616 (4th Cir. February 14, 2001) A state commission's consent to federal appellate review is not tantamount to consent to be a party to federal court litigation for Eleventh Amendment purposes, and the State commission's decision allowing reciprocal compensation for local telephone calls to Internet service providers does not violate the federal understanding of the 1996 Telecommunications Act allowing for ex Parte Young liability.
• Bellsouth Telecomm., Inc. v. N. Carolina Utilities Comm'n Nos. 99-1845, 99-1847, 99-1970 (4th Cir. February 14, 2001) A state commission's consent to federal appellate review is not tantamount to consent to be a party to federal court litigation for Eleventh Amendment purposes, and the State commission's decision allowing reciprocal compensation for local telephone calls to Internet service providers does not violate the federal understanding of the 1996 Telecommunications Act allowing for ex Parte Young liability.
• Global Naps, Inc. v. Fed. Communications Comm'n No. 00-1136 (D.C. Cir. April 27, 2001) The FCC did not deprive plaintiff of due process, did not exceed its authority by invalidating plaintiff's tariff for Internet-bound traffic under 47 CFR 61.74(a) ab initio from the date it was published, and reasonably declared plaintiff's tariff unlawful.
• Hendrickson v. eBay, Inc. __ F. Supp. ___ (C.D.Cal. September 4, 2001). Internet auction service not liable in copyright for bootleg videotape.
• Mediaone Group, Inc. v. GTE Intelligent Network, Inc., No. 00-1680 (4th Cir. July 11, 2001) Virginia county's open access provision requiring plaintiff to provide any requesting ISP with access to its broadband cable modem platform is preempted and superseded by federal law under the federal Communications Act, 47 USC 541(b) 3) D).
• Sec. & Exchange Comm'n v. SG LTD. No. 01-1176; 01-1332 (1st Cir. September 13, 2001) Virtual shares in an enterprise existing only in cyberspace, part of a fantasy investment game created for the personal entertainment of Internet users, may fall within the purview of the federal securities laws.
• State v. Heckel Washington State Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of the state's spam statute.