Abstract
The development of cyberspace law poses a challenge to the traditional borders of law. The increase of activities and business deals on the internet have awakened the interest of lawyers, civil servants, businessmen and scholars regarding the manner on how to determine internet jurisdiction. The goal of this paper is to establish the criteria for determining jurisdiction that are being used by courts when they have to resolve cases on internet. The paper analyses academic literature and selected cases in US, Europe, Colombia and the world with qualitative and inductive method, using primary and secondary sources and documentary review and direct observation techniques. The conclusions are that: 1) Differences between common or civil law systems seem to be disappearing when new rules emerge to establish jurisdiction on the internet; 2) An alternative use of both new online and traditional offline rules are observed in resolving cases by the courts especially in US; 3) International cases suggest that courts have applied traditional rules rather than online rules like the Zippo test, Calder tests, or the mere accessibility among others; 4) European (Germany, Netherlands) and the Colombian cases show that they prefer use offline criteria, although we can find some online rules..
This journal is registered under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License. Thus, this work may be reproduced, distributed, and publicly shared in digital format, as long as the names of the authors and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana are acknowledged. Others are allowed to quote, adapt, transform, auto-archive, republish, and create based on this material, for any purpose (even commercial ones), provided the authorship is duly acknowledged, a link to the original work is provided, and it is specified if changes have been made. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana does not hold the rights of published works and the authors are solely responsible for the contents of their works; they keep the moral, intellectual, privacy, and publicity rights.
Approving the intervention of the work (review, copy-editing, translation, layout) and the following outreach, are granted through an use license and not through an assignment of rights. This means the journal and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana cannot be held responsible for any ethical malpractice by the authors. As a consequence of the protection granted by the use license, the journal is not required to publish recantations or modify information already published, unless the errata stems from the editorial management process. Publishing contents in this journal does not generate royalties for contributors.