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.”