Document Type

Article

Publication Date

1997

Center/Program

Kernochan Center for Law, Media and the Arts

Abstract

Extraterritorial application of U.S. law, as Professor Curtis Bradley demonstrates, is highly suspect, if not illegitimate, unless clearly authorized by Congress. The apparently “extraterritorial” character of much recent copyright litigation has led some U.S. courts to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction or on grounds of forum non conveniens when the cases present offshore points of attachment. As copyright commerce becomes increasingly international, some of these dismissals may be unwarranted. They also may be incorrect in their refusal to apply U.S. law or retain U.S. jurisdiction over the parties: the decisions may be too quick to perceive "extra"-territoriality in claims that in fact allege multiterritorial infringements. "Multi"-territorial copyright claims involve acts or parties located in more than one country, but do not necessarily require application of a single law – the forum's – to resolve the entire claim. This Comment will attempt to distinguish multiterritorial claims from classic extraterritorial claims.

Comments

Copyright is owned by the Virginia Law Review Association and the article is used by permission of the Virginia Law Review Association.

Share

COinS