Yahoo! argued that the French order would restrain the rights of
its customers to practice freedom of speech, rights which are
contained in the First Amendment to the US Constitution.
In the US District Court for the Northern District of
California, Judge Jeremy Fogel yesterday upheld the arguments
presented by Yahoo! and said that the matter was neither a question
of morality, nor of exploring the reaches of French sovereignty.
Instead, Judge Fogel observed, the relevant issue was whether or
not the French order was consistent with US law. He found that it
was not.
Judge Fogel found the US right to freedom of speech embodied in
the First Amendment to be the dominant legal consideration. Legal
newspaper The Recorder quotes Fogel as adding: “It is preferable to
permit the non-violent expression of offensive viewpoints rather
than impose viewpoint-based governmental regulation upon speech.
The government and people of France have made a different judgement
based upon their experience.”
The US case was raised in response to the French decision in the
case brought by French anti-Nazism groups, the Union of Jewish
Students and the International Anti-Racism and Anti-Semitism
league. The groups had argued that a French law against the
incitement of racial hatred meant that Yahoo! should block French
internet users from both its French and US auction sites. Yahoo!’s
French site did not host the offending auctions, but the company
argued its right to host them in its US site. The French court
disagreed.
Yahoo! removed the auctions from its US site, instead of
blocking access to them by French users, although the company
maintained that this was a policy decision based on morality and
had nothing to do with the French court’s decision. To prove its
point, Yahoo! raised the action in the US court to argue that
French law cannot penetrate US jurisdiction and override US rights
of free speech.
Legal representatives for Yahoo! told news agency Reuters: “this
really does mean foreign courts cannot impose their laws on a web
site just because it’s accessible in their countries.” However, the
case may not be over yet. A lawyer for the French anti-hate groups
told The Recorder, “We are actually pleased. We wanted to take this
to the appellate court as soon as possible.”
