CONFLITTI DI GIURISDIZIONE E BILANCIAMENTO DEI DIRITTI NEI CASI DI DIFFAMAZIONE INTERNAZIONALE A MEZZO INTERNET

This paper examines, from the perspective of EU law, the issue of conflicts of jurisdiction in internet defamation cases. Due to the ubiquitous nature of internet, damages to reputation may, in principle, occur in every State where the defamatory content is accessible. Given the absence of a uniform applicable law, there is the risk of forum shopping (known as libel tourism).This has a chilling effect on the authors’ freedom of speech. They may prefer to limit the circulation of a book (or article) rather than being exposed to the risk of a multiplicity of claims in several States. It is therefore necessary to identify a rule for assuming jurisdiction that operates a balance between the authors’ freedom of speech and the victims’ right to reputation. Starting from article 7 no. 2 and recital 16 of EU Regulation No. 1215/2012, this article, first of all, analyses the rules governing jurisdiction in internet defamation cases under EU law. Recital 16 seems to authorize judges to assume jurisdiction on the basis of a concrete evaluation of the case at hand without selecting any general criteria. In order to identify the parameters on which such a concrete evaluation should be based, the article analyses the jurisdictional rules that have been used in English law and US law in internet defamation cases. The best solution could be to attribute jurisdiction only to the State or States where the author has expressly targeted his work.