Nearly every business has a website. Businesses frequently believe that the more developed and interactive their websites are, the better. But is that really the case? Businesses are often unaware that merely operating an interactive website may provide a basis for courts to exercise jurisdiction over them, even in states where they otherwise do little or no business. Under U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit precedent, an "active" website is often sufficient to confer personal jurisdiction over a business while a "passive" website is not. As a practical matter, businesses may often find it difficult to be able to tell the difference between the two. Even more confusing is the fact that precedent does not always draw clear distinctions between the two.

View the full article at wlf.org.