| Abbreviations | p. XV |
| Cybercrime Jurisdiction - an Introduction | p. 1 |
| Substantive and Procedural Cybercrime Jurisdiction | p. 2 |
| Traditional Bases for Jurisdiction | p. 3 |
| Diverging Views | p. 6 |
| Aim and Structure of This Book | p. 7 |
| Bibliography | p. 7 |
| Jurisdiction in the Cybercrime Convention | p. 9 |
| Introductory Remarks | p. 9 |
| Jurisdiction Rules in the Cybercrime Convention | p. 10 |
| Territoriality principle | p. 10 |
| Ubiquitous nature of cybercrimes | p. 11 |
| Substantial link | p. 12 |
| Other Jurisdiction Principles | p. 12 |
| High seas and outer space | p. 13 |
| Nationality principle | p. 13 |
| Universality principle | p. 14 |
| Rights of the Defendant | p. 15 |
| International Law: a Matter of Pragmatism? | p. 15 |
| Extradition | p. 15 |
| International co-ordination | p. 16 |
| Positive Jurisdiction Conflicts and the Need for Flexibility | p. 17 |
| Obligation to Prosecute? | p. 18 |
| Jurisdiction Principles and Extraterritorial Criminal Investigations | p. 19 |
| Concluding Observations | p. 21 |
| Bibliography | p. 22 |
| International Co-operation as a Promise and a Threat | p. 23 |
| Questioning International Co-operation | p. 24 |
| Traversing a History of Jurisdiction | p. 25 |
| 'New bottles': Everything is different | p. 26 |
| 'Old wine': Nothing new | p. 27 |
| Reaching for Harmonization: International Co-operation in Criminal Matters | p. 29 |
| Co-operation as a response to terrorism | p. 29 |
| Case: Maher Arar and the international co-operation in intelligence | p. 30 |
| Harmonization and International Co-operation Involving Information Technology | p. 34 |
| Co-operation as a necessity for cybercrime | p. 34 |
| Case: Investigating Indymedia | p. 37 |
| Can International Co-operation Be Regulated? | p. 44 |
| Bibliography | p. 46 |
| Cybercrime and Jurisdiction in Australia | p. 47 |
| Introduction | p. 47 |
| National Cybercrime Legislation | p. 49 |
| Jurisdictional overview | p. 49 |
| Historical overview of computer-crime laws | p. 50 |
| Specific cybercrime provisions | p. 51 |
| Relevant case law | p. 56 |
| Legal Provisions on Jurisdiction for Cybercrimes | p. 60 |
| Commonwealth legislation | p. 61 |
| State and territory legislation | p. 64 |
| Co-operation Arrangements | p. 64 |
| Cross-Border Investigation | p. 65 |
| Conclusion | p. 68 |
| Bibliography | p. 68 |
| Cybercrime and Jurisdiction in Belgium and the Netherlands. Lotus in Cyberspace - Whose Sovereignty Is at Stake? | p. 71 |
| Introduction | p. 71 |
| 'Sovereignty','Jurisdiction', an 'Territoriality' | p. 72 |
| Cybercrime Legislation: Old and New | p. 76 |
| The strength of existing criminal-law instruments | p. 76 |
| Deconstruction of the threat analysis at the national level | p. 79 |
| Cross-border investigation powers | p. 80 |
| International Co-operation and the European Arrest Warrant | p. 84 |
| Today's possibilities | p. 84 |
| The 2002 framework decision on the European arrest warrant | p. 85 |
| Implications of the EAW for cybercrime | p. 87 |
| Illustration: the case of Holocaust denier Siegfried Verbeke | p. 88 |
| Enlarged Jurisdiction | p. 92 |
| Territoriality and Belgian and Dutch jurisdiction provisions | p. 92 |
| Two developments with regard to enlarged jurisdiction | p. 94 |
| Jurisdiction and the Flexibility of International Law | p. 97 |
| The Lotus case | p. 97 |
| Yerodia does not correct Lotus but proves my point | p. 99 |
| Extraterritorial Investigation? | p. 102 |
| Lotus and the legality of extraterritorial law enforcement | p. 102 |
| The legality of transborder access to stored computer data | p. 106 |
| Conclusion | p. 109 |
| Bibliography | p. 110 |
| Cybercrime and Jurisdiction in Brazil. From Extraterritorial to Ultraterritorial Jurisdiction? | p. 111 |
| Introduction | p. 111 |
| Cybercrime Legislation | p. 113 |
| Substantive law | p. 113 |
| Procedural law | p. 118 |
| Cross-Border Cyber-Investigation | p. 119 |
| Substantive Cybercrime Jurisdiction | p. 122 |
| Extraterritorial Jurisdiction and Jurisdiction Conflicts | p. 125 |
| Pitfalls of Extraterritorial Jurisdiction | p. 128 |
| Extraterritorial Jurisdiction in Brazil | p. 131 |
| Unconditional extraterritorial jurisdiction | p. 131 |
| Conditional extraterritorial jurisdiction | p. 133 |
| Ultraterritorial Jurisdiction | p. 134 |
| Conclusion | p. 138 |
| Bibliography | p. 139 |
| Cybercrime and Jurisdiction in Chile | p. 141 |
| Introduction | p. 141 |
| Brief Legislative History | p. 142 |
| Material provisions | p. 142 |
| Procedural provisions | p. 142 |
| Material Provisions on Relevant Cybercrimes | p. 143 |
| Provisions within the law | p. 143 |
| Relevant case law | p. 146 |
| Procedural Provisions Applicable to Cybercrime Investigations | p. 147 |
| Material Jurisdiction | p. 149 |
| Legal provisions on jurisdiction concerning cybercrimes | p. 149 |
| The reasonableness of claiming jurisdiction for cybercrimes | p. 152 |
| Procedural Jurisdiction | p. 154 |
| Conclusion | p. 154 |
| Bibliography | p. 155 |
| Cybercrime and Jurisdiction in Denmark | p. 157 |
| Introduction | p. 157 |
| Substantive Cybercrime Legislation | p. 157 |
| General issues | p. 157 |
| Provisions relating to cybercrimes | p. 159 |
| Procedural Provisions | p. 167 |
| Investigation powers | p. 167 |
| International co-operation | p. 169 |
| Co-operation with EU countries | p. 170 |
| Co-operation with the Nordic countries | p. 172 |
| Jurisdiction Concerning Cybercrime | p. 173 |
| Analysis and Opinion | p. 174 |
| What is a cybercrime? | p. 175 |
| Cybercrime jurisdiction and public international law | p. 177 |
| Cyber-investigation jurisdiction | p. 179 |
| Conflict in cybercrime jurisdiction | p. 180 |
| Conclusion | p. 181 |
| Bibliography | p. 181 |
| Cybercrime and Jurisdiction in Germany. The Present Situation and the Need for New Solutions | p. 183 |
| Introduction | p. 183 |
| The new challenges of cybercrime | p. 183 |
| The new responses of the international community | p. 183 |
| The situation in Germany | p. 184 |
| The need for new solutions in the field of jurisdiction | p. 186 |
| Traditional Approaches in German Criminal Law | p. 187 |
| The need for differentiation | p. 187 |
| The traditional approaches to action crimes and abstract endangerment offenses | p. 189 |
| New Solutions | p. 193 |
| The autonomous interpretation of the concept of result | p. 193 |
| Dissemination of illegal content: distinction between push and pull | p. 198 |
| The BGH decision in the Toben case | p. 201 |
| Results and Consequences | p. 204 |
| Result with respect to present law | p. 204 |
| Evaluation of the present legal situation | p. 205 |
| Basic principles for the future development of jurisdiction in cyberspace | p. 207 |
| Conclusions for legal policy | p. 208 |
| Bibliography | p. 209 |
| Cybercrime and Jurisdiction in India | p. 211 |
| Introducton | p. 211 |
| Indian Cybercrime Legislation | p. 212 |
| Substantive law | p. 213 |
| Procedural law | p. 214 |
| Cybercrime Jurisdiction | p. 217 |
| Legal provisions | p. 217 |
| Jurisprudence | p. 220 |
| Evidentiary Issues | p. 222 |
| Analysis and Opinion | p. 223 |
| Conclusion | p. 224 |
| Bibliography | p. 225 |
| Cybercrime and Jurisdiction in Italy | p. 227 |
| Substantive Cybercrime Law | p. 227 |
| The Constitution of 1948 | p. 227 |
| The first real informatic provisions | p. 228 |
| Copyright law | p. 228 |
| The Italian Computer Crimes Act of 1993 | p. 229 |
| The Data Protection Acts of 1996 and 2003 | p. 232 |
| Procedural Cybercrime Law | p. 233 |
| Network wiretapping | p. 233 |
| Search, seizure, and network searches | p. 233 |
| Data retention | p. 234 |
| Jurisdiction: The Applicability of Italian Criminal Law | p. 234 |
| The Locus Commissi Delicti Issue | p. 234 |
| The obligatory nature of Italian criminal law | p. 235 |
| The principle of territoriality | p. 235 |
| Applicability of the principle of territoriality | p. 236 |
| Applicability of the principle of defense | p. 237 |
| A Typical Case: An Attack from 'Outside' | p. 237 |
| Conclusion | p. 238 |
| Bibliography | p. 239 |
| Cybercrime and Jurisdiction in Japan | p. 241 |
| Introduction | p. 241 |
| Cybercrime Legislation | p. 243 |
| Substantive law | p. 243 |
| Procedural law | p. 246 |
| Japan and the Cybercrime Convention | p. 247 |
| Jurisdiction in Cybercrime Cases | p. 250 |
| Jurisdictional provisions | p. 250 |
| Case law on cross-border cybercrime | p. 251 |
| Cyber-investigation and international co-operation | p. 252 |
| Conclusion | p. 254 |
| Bibliography | p. 254 |
| Cybercrime and Jurisdiction in the Republic of Korea | p. 257 |
| Introduction | p. 257 |
| Substantive Cybercrime Legislation | p. 258 |
| The Criminal Act | p. 258 |
| The Information and Communications Network Act | p. 260 |
| Criminal Jurisdiction over Cybercrime | p. 262 |
| Principles of criminal jurisdiction | p. 262 |
| Application of the principles of criminal jurisdiction | p. 264 |
| Evidence and International Mutual Assistance Concerning Cybercrime | p. 268 |
| Investigation of evidence | p. 269 |
| Search and seizure | p. 269 |
| Admissibility of evidence | p. 270 |
| International mutual assistance | p. 270 |
| Conclusion | p. 271 |
| Bibliography | p. 272 |
| Cybercrime and Jurisdiction in New Zealand | p. 273 |
| Introduction | p. 273 |
| National Cybercrime Legislation | p. 274 |
| Brief history | p. 274 |
| Provisions on various cybercrimes | p. 274 |
| Investigation powers | p. 278 |
| Jurisdiction for Cybercrimes | p. 280 |
| Provisions in law | p. 280 |
| Case law | p. 283 |
| Policy Considerations | p. 285 |
| Claiming jurisdiction for cybercrimes | p. 285 |
| Dealing with cyber-investigation jurisdiction | p. 288 |
| Positive and negative jurisdiction conflicts | p. 289 |
| Conclusion | p. 290 |
| Bibliography | p. 290 |
| Cybercrime and Jurisdiction in the United Kingdom | p. 293 |
| Introduction | p. 293 |
| Material Jurisdiction | p. 294 |
| Statutory rules | p. 295 |
| Extraterritorial criminal law | p. 299 |
| Procedural Jurisdiction | p. 301 |
| Investigating cybercrime | p. 302 |
| Moving evidence | p. 305 |
| Moving people | p. 308 |
| Concluding Remarks | p. 311 |
| Bibliography | p. 311 |
| Cybercrime and Jurisdiction in the United States | p. 313 |
| Introduction | p. 313 |
| Cybercrime Substantive Laws | p. 314 |
| Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 | p. 314 |
| Other relevant laws | p. 315 |
| Cybercrime Procedural Laws | p. 317 |
| United States Determination of Jurisdiction | p. 319 |
| United States Determination of Venue, Once Jurisdiction is Established | p. 320 |
| Jurisdictional Issues with Cybercrime Investigations | p. 321 |
| Ivanov-Gorshkov, McKinnon, and Zezev cases | p. 322 |
| Procedures for searching computers internationality and providing assistance | p. 324 |
| Conclusion | p. 325 |
| Bibliography | p. 325 |
| The Next Step: Prioritizing Jurisdiction | p. 327 |
| Jurisdictional Conflicts | p. 327 |
| Prioritizing Jurisdictional Claims: Lack of Guidance | p. 329 |
| Factors in Prioritizing Jurisdictional Claims | p. 330 |
| Place of commission of the crime | p. 331 |
| Custody of the perpetrator | p. 333 |
| Harm | p. 337 |
| Nationality | p. 338 |
| Strength of the case against the perpetrator | p. 343 |
| Punishment | p. 344 |
| Fairness and convenience | p. 346 |
| Conclusion | p. 346 |
| Bibliography | p. 349 |
| About the editors and authors | p. 351 |
| Table of Contents provided by Ingram. All Rights Reserved. |
