Hola,

Acabo de llegir aquest article sobre la exig�ncia de les autoritats del 
Qu�bec (confirmades ja per una resoluci� judicial) perque les empreses 
ubicades all� tinguin obligat�riament la seva web en versi� francesa, i no 
nom�s en angl�s que es l'idioma majoritari, per molt que la seva web sigui 
accesible a fora del territori quebequ�s. El raonament �s que s'ha 
d'aplicar a Internet les mateixes normes que al m�n f�sic.

Desseguida m'he plantejat la seg�ent q�esti�: tenint en compte la 
legislaci� catalana (Llei de Normalitzaci� Ling��stica i dem�s), seria 
aplicable el mateix principi? Podria l'administraci� catalana obligar a 
complir la mateixa legislaci� per a Internet que per al m�n f�sic a les 
empreses privades que estiguin radicades a Catalunya, tot i que no 
s'adrecin exclusivament a l'ambit catal� (i, evidentment, amb m�s ra� a les 
que nom�s es dirigeixin a la poblaci� de Catalunya)?

Desconec, i ho lamento, quins s�n els extrems concrets en que la Llei de 
Normalitzaci� Ling��stica obliga a les empreses privades del m�n f�sic a 
introdu�r obligat�riament el catal� a les seves comunicacions i signes 
externs. Per�, s'hauria d'aplicar el mateix principi a Internet?

Coneix alg� quina �s la postura de la Generalitat al respecte?

Salutacions

JMG






Quebec firm's language law challenge tests e-jurisdiction

By MICHAEL GEIST

Thursday, February 21, 2002 � Print Edition, Page B25

Although a small minority may still view the Internet as a "wild west" 
where traditional law does not

apply, most Canadians accept that laws such as the Criminal Code, consumer 
protection statutes and privacy protections apply equally offline and on-line.

To that list we must now include another piece of legislation: Quebec's 
French language law.

The application of this law to the Internet has long been the source of 
controversy, as Quebec-based Web site owners have regularly faced demands 
that they either remove their English-only site from the Web or create a 
French-language version.

For example, MicroBytes-Logiciels Inc., a Montreal-based software 
developer, altered its site after receiving such a demand in 1997. In 1999, 
photographer Mike Calomiris faced a similar demand and vowed to fight. His 
first court appearance has just been scheduled for March 26.

Last year, Muriel and Stanley Reid, a Quebec couple selling maple syrup 
from an English-only Web site, were fined by the Office de la Langue 
Fran�aise for failing to translate their site. A decision on the case is 
expected later this month.

While those cases all generated headlines, they have yet to make it through 
Canada's courts.

One case has, however. Last November, a Quebec court issued the first 
ruling on French language laws in cyberspace -- an important decision that 
has been surprisingly overlooked by Canadian media.

When Simon Sunatori, owner and CEO of Hull-based Hyperinfo Canada Inc., was 
asked in 1999 by the OLF to translate http://www.hyperinfo.ca into French, 
his first reaction was to try to comply by translating portions of the 
site. The authorities were unimpressed, however, reiterating that the site 
had to be fully translated. When Mr. Sunatori refused to comply, they took 
the matter to court.

Mr. Sunatori represented himself, and raised several interesting arguments. 
He first argued that his customers resided primarily in the United States, 
and that his site should therefore qualify for an exemption for products 
that are not widely available in Quebec. The court rejected that argument, 
noting that the exemption applied to labelling requirements and not to 
commercial publicity relating to a product, such as a Web site.

He then argued that he should be entitled to rely on technical and legal 
measures designed to minimize the availability of the site to Quebec 
residents. By placing a disclaimer that "the products and services on this 
Web site are not available to the residents of Quebec due to 'la Charte de 
la Langue Fran�aise,' " as well as blocking visitors coming from dot-qc 
addresses, Mr. Sunatori argued that few Quebec residents would view the 
site. The court dismissed these measures, ruling that the blocking 
technologies were imperfect and that a site owner could not use a 
disclaimer to avoid complying with language provisions.

Mr. Sunatori's most important submission focused on the very application of 
Quebec's language laws to the Internet. Citing the Internet's borderless 
qualities, he argued that it was unfair for the Quebec government to saddle 
businesses with constraints that are not faced by competitors located 
outside the province.

In rejecting that argument and finding Hyperinfo liable under the language 
legislation, the court acknowledged that information on the Web typically 
moves freely between jurisdictions, but it was not persuaded that this 
alone alters the sovereign right of governments to regulate on-line 
activity, particularly where the activity occurs within their physical borders.

Although many Canadians may instinctively criticize both the language 
authorities' insistence that their laws apply to the Web as well as the 
court's decision upholding that claim, I believe the judge dealt with this 
issue fairly in view of the current state of the law.

As he correctly noted, the Supreme Court of Canada, in common with most 
courts around the world, has adopted a jurisdictional principle that allows 
for the application of local law where the activity or the effects of the 
activity occur within local territory. In recent years that approach has 
been used to apply Canadian securities laws to Web sites maintained by 
Canadians on offshore servers, and to protect Canadian consumers from 
fraudulent Web sites located outside the country.

Most recently, it was used by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal to apply 
Canada's antihate human rights legislation to a U.S.-based Web site 
maintained by a Canadian resident.

The application of Quebec's language laws to provincial Web sites is hardly 
any different. Quebec must have the right to apply its laws to firms 
located within the province, since to rule otherwise is to call into 
question the right of all governments to apply their laws to the on-line 
environment.

While the Quebec language laws may infuriate those who disagree with 
government-mandated speech, their complaint should be with the law itself, 
not with its application on-line. After all, an Internet without the broad 
range of laws we depend upon is a far more troubling proposition.
Michael Geist is a law professor at the University of Ottawa Law School and 
director of e-commerce law at the law firm Goodmans LLP. His Web site is 
http://www.lawbytes.com.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-------------------------L'INTERNAUTA-------------------------------
Per enviar missatges a la llista: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Altes, baixes i informaci� de la llista: <http://www.internauta.net>
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Respondre per correu electrònic a