英语论文网

论文题目：没有确定，按内容设置题目
论文语种：英文
您的研究方向：法律
是否有数据处理要求：否
您的国家：澳大利亚
您的学校背景：一般大学，deakin uni
要求字数：最多 2500 words (不还注脚，参考书）
论文用途：硕士课程论文 Master Assignment
是否需要盲审（博士或硕士生有这个需要）：否
补充要求和说明：论文参考文献格式为havard，作业为case study, 应该是report.
reference至少15个以上，其中必须要有学术书籍的引用至少5个以上。
法律的文章必须要有注脚和引用。对注脚和引用是有规定的，“The citation and referencing must comply with the
Australian Guide to Legal Citation 2nd ed, available from
https://mulr.law.unimelb.edu.au/go/aglc. If the source is
not directly covered in the AGLC, you should use your ‘best
estimate’ as to how to reference it, by having regard to the
referencing style used by the AGLC and similar sources.”
详细的作业要求在附件里，老师如果再给资料或者建议的话，我会马上发给你们的。

Introduction
Dow Jones & Company Inc v Gutnick refers to an Internet Defamation. On October 28th in 2000, Dow Jones & Company Inc (“Dow Jones”) published an article 澳大利亚法律硕士课程论文named Unholy Gains, in which many references involved with Mr. Guntnick, a business man of Victoria, who announced that part of the article slandered him. The focus of this case is whether this case should be prosecuted in Australia.

Body
1. Facts of the Case
2. Judgments of courts
3. Discussion
3.1 The United Sates jurisdiction and the Australian jurisdiction
3.2 Dilemma of traditional jurisdiction rules in Internet defamation cases
3.2.1 “The plaintiff for the defendants' convenience”
3.2.2 “The most significance relationship”
Conclusion

Bibliography
Cases:
Dow Jones & Co Inc v Gutnick, (2001) VSCA 249
Dow Jones &Company Inc v Gutnick, (2002) 210 CLR 575.
Gutnick v Dow Jones & Co Inc, (2001) VSC 305
Gutnick, (2002) 194 ALR (2002) 194 ALR 433, 483.
International Shoe Co v Washington, 326 US 310, 316 (1945) (Stone CJ)
MGM, 243 F Supp 2d 1073, 1083 (CD Cal, 2003) (Wilson J)
Ziegler v Indian River County,64 F 3d 470, 473 (9th Cir, 1995) (Farris J)

Journals:
Albert A. Ehrenzweig. (1963). The "Most Significant Relationship" in the Conflicts
Law of Torts. Law and Reason versus the Restatement Second, Law and
Contemporary Problems, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp. 700-705.

Joel R. Reidenberg. (2005). Technology and Internet Jurisdiction, University of
Pennsylvania Law Review Vol. 153, No. 6, pp. 1951-1974.

Laurel E. Miller. (1991). Forum Non Conveniens and State Control of Foreign
Plaintiff Access to U.S. Courts in International Tort Actions, The University of
Chicago Law Review Vol. 58, No. 4, pp. 1369-1392.

Megan M. Sunkel. (2003). Examining the Lack of Standards for Ruling on Subpoenas
Seeking to Reveal the Identity of Anonymous Internet Users in Claims of
Online Defamation, North California Law Review, Vol.81, p.1189

Michael Hadley. (1998).The Gertz Doctrine and Internet Defamation, Virginia Law https://www.51lunwen.org/australiaessay/
Review Vol. 84, No. 3, pp. 477-508.

Thomas Schultz. (2008). Carving up the Internet: Jurisdiction, Legal Orders, and the
Private/Public International Law Interface, European Journal of International
Law Vol.19, No.4, pp. 799-839.