Advertisement

ERA Forum

, Volume 16, Issue 3, pp 331–347 | Cite as

Cybercrime jurisdiction: past, present and future

  • Cristos VelascoEmail author
Article

Abstract

This article describes activities and policies which have been put into place to date in order to deal with aspects related to cross-border access to computer data and cybercrime jurisdiction. It includes an analysis of the European instruments that address the issue of cybercrime jurisdiction; a perspective on the role of Internet Service Providers in facilitating cooperation to law enforcement for the adjudication of jurisdiction to prosecute cases in national courts. The article addresses some of the current international discussions and possible future scenarios and ends with a personal view and assessment of alternative approaches for asserting jurisdiction for the prosecution of internet-related crime.

Keywords

Cybercrime Jurisdiction Cross-Border Access International Cooperation Extraterritoriality Mutual Legal Assistance 

References

  1. 1.
    Bergman, K.M.: The deep web: surfacing hidden value. Journal of Electronic Publishing 7(1) (2001) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brenner, W., Koops, S.u.B.-J.: Approaches to cybercrime jurisdiction. Journal of High Technology Law IV(1), 1–46 (2004) Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Garnett, R., Down, J., Company Inc vs. Gutnick: An adequate response to transnational internet defamation? Melbourne Journal of International Law 4, 1–21 (2003) Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goldsmith, J., Wu, T.: Who Controls the Internet? Illusions of a Borderless World. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2006) Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Reily D, O.: International criminal justice cooperation with multi-national ISP’s. Discussion paper prepared under the Cybercrime@IPA Project from the European Union and the Council of Europe, 1–40 (May 28, 2013) Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Putnam, T.L., Elliot, D.: International Responses to Cybercrime. In: Sofaer, A.D., Goodman, S.E. (eds.) Transnational Dimension of Cybercrime and Terrorism, vol. 490. Hoover Institution Press, Stanford (2001) Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Reidenberg, J.: The Yahoo Case and the International Democratization of the Internet, Fordham University School of Law. Research Paper No. 11, pp. 1–19 (2001) Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Seitz, N., Search, T.: A new perspective in law enforcement? International Journal of Communications Law & Policy/Yale Journal of Law and Technology 9, 1–18 (2004). Special Issue on Cybercrime Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Svantesson, D.: After Microsoft v. U.S.—Law Enforcement in the Cloud. First Part published on December 31, 2014 at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/after-microsoft-v-us-law-enforcement-cloud-1-2-svantesson and Second Part published on January 5, 2015 at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/after-microsoft-v-us-law-enforcement-cloud-2-dan-jerker-b-svantesson
  10. 10.
    Sy, G.: E-Commerce Act. Republic Act no. 8792 Implementing Rules and Regulations Legislative Highlights “I Love You Virus Case” (2001) Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    The Journal of Electronic Publishing http://www.journalofelectronicpublishing.org/
  12. 12.
    Velasco, C.: La jurisdicción y competencia sobre delitos cometidos a través de sistemas de cómputo e Internet, Tirant lo blanch, Valencia (2012) Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ERA 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ciberdelincuencia.orgMannheimGermany

Personalised recommendations