No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 January 2017
1 see Dan Senor & Saul Singer, Start-Up Nation:The Story of Israel’s Economic Miracle (2009), available at www.startupnationbook.com.
2 see Ligue Contre le Racisme et l’Antisémitisme c. Yahoo! Inc. (LICRA v. Yahoo!), Tribunal de grande instance [ordinary court of original jurisdiction] Paris, May 22, 2000, Interim Order No. 00/05308 (Fr.), available at http://www.lapres.net/yahen.html (final ruling issued later that year); see also Yahoo!, Inc. v. La Ligue Contre le Racisme et l’Antisemitisme, 169 F.Supp.2d 1181 (N.D. Cal. 2001), rev’d en banc on other grounds, 433 F.3d 1199 (9th Cir. 2006); Reidenberg, Joel R., States and Internet Enforcement, 1 U. Ottawa L. & Tech. J. 213 (2004)Google Scholar.
3 Pub. L. No. 107-56, 115 Stat. 272 (2001).
4 Birnhack, Michael D. & Elkin-Koren, Niva, The Invisible Handshake: The Reemergence of the State in the Digital Environment, 8 Va. J.L. & Tech. 6 (2003)Google Scholar.
5 Cadie Thompson,Google Mulled Ditching US After NSA Scandal, CNBC, Nov. 22, 2013, at http://www.cnbc.com/id/101222237.
6 See, e.g., Anton Troianovski, Thomas Gryta & Sam Schechner, NSA Fallout Thwarts AT&T, Wall St. J., Oct. 30, 2013, at http://online.wsj.com/news/article_email/SB10001424052702304073204579167873091999730-lMyQjAxMTAzMDMwMDEzNDAyWj.
page 565 note 7 Appellate Body Report, United States—Measures Affecting the Cross-border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services, WT/DS285/AB/R (adopted Apr. 20, 2005) (reported by Joel Trachtman at 99 AJIL 861 (2005)).
8 UNCITRAL, Model Law on Electronic Signatures With Guide to Enactment 2001, UN Sales No. E.02.V.8 (2002), available at http://www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/electcom/ml-elecsig-e.pdf.
9 United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, Apr. 11, 1980, UN Doc. A/CONF.97/18, 19 ILM 668, 671 (1980) (entered into force Jan. 1, 1988).
10 I have applied glocalization in a different context, that of the conflict between copyright law (now more global than ever) and speech regulations (local norms). Birnhack, Michael D.,Global Copyright, Local Speech, 24 Cardozo Arts & Ent. L.J. 491 (2006)Google Scholar.
11 see Yu, Peter K., Are Developing Countries Playing a Better TRIPS Game?, 16 UCLA J. Int’l L. & Foreign Aff. 311 (2011)Google Scholar.
12 U.S. courts follow a three-prong test to define obscene material, which is not protected by the First Amendment. see Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973). The first prong is whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest. Id. at 30–31.