At the opposite end are situations where a defendant has simply posted information on an Internet Web site which is accessible to users in foreign jurisdictions. A passive Web site that does little more than make information available to those who are interested in it is not grounds for the exercise of personal jurisdiction. The middle ground is occupied by interactive Web sites where a user can exchange information with the host computer. If the website is passive, the risk of being successfully sued in a jurisdiction where your company is not doing business is low in the United States. Similarly, the risks of international jurisdiction may be reduced by preventing sales from a website to a nation where your company does not wish to do business and by placing conspicuous notices to that effect at your site.
More difficult problems exist for content providers on the internet.
Digitized content flows through the internet wherever the internet can be accessed. Website purveyors have taken to requiring visitors to their sites to agree to the jurisdiction of a particular court before being allowed to view or use their websites. The plaintiffs had never physically signed an agreement in the Rudder case. Otherwise, a prospective customer would not be allowed to access and use the services Microsoft was offering. There is no guarantee that all such agreements would be enforceable, or even desirable.