A good defendant can be hard to find. This is especially true in the Internet age where wrongdoers hide behind international boundaries, proxy servers in remote locations, and vague online identities. In an era where defendants are able to communicate without revealing their physical location, plaintiffs can be left guessing when trying to effect traditional service of process.
Courts in other common law nations have recognized this shift, and have adjusted to the changing technological realities of international transactions by authorizing service through email, social media, and even text messages. Courts in the United States, while open to service by email in certain situations, have been hesitant to embrace other forms of service such as Facebook, Twitter, and other electronic means of communication. However, a recent decision in the Southern District of New York, FTC v. PCCare247, Inc.,1 suggests that this attitude may be shifting toward a more progressive view of these novel means of service.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]