Statement of Minnesota AG On Internet Jurisdiction
WARNING TO ALL INTERNET USERS AND PROVIDERS
THIS MEMORANDUM SETS FORTH THE ENFORCEMENT POSITION OF THE
MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN
ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES ON THE INTERNET.
PERSONS OUTSIDE OF MINNESOTA WHO TRANSMIT INFORMATION VIA THE
INTERNET KNOWING THAT INFORMATION WILL BE DISSEMINATED IN
MINNESOTA ARE SUBJECT TO JURISDICTION IN MINNESOTA COURTS FOR
VIOLATIONS OF STATE CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LAWS.
The following discussion sets out the legal basis for this
conclusion.
Minnesota's general criminal jurisdiction statute provides as
follows:
A person may be convicted and sentenced under the
law of this State if the person:
(1) Commits an offense in whole or in part within
this state; or
(2) Being without the state, causes, aids or abets
another to commit a crime within the state; or
(3) Being without the state, intentionally causes a
result within the state prohibited by the criminal laws
of this state.
It is not a defense that the defendant's conduct is
also a criminal offense under the laws of another state
or of the United States or of another country.
Minnesota Statute Section 609.025 (1994).
This statute has been interpreted by the Minnesota Supreme
Court. In State v. Rossbach, 288 N.W.2d 714 (Minn. 1980), the
defendant appealed his conviction for aggravated assault. The
defendant, standing inside the border of an Indian Reservation, had
fired a rifle across the boundary line at a person outside the
border. The defendant claimed that Minnesota courts did not have
jurisdiction because his act took place off of Minnesota lands.
Applying Minnesota Statute { 609.025 and the common law, the
Minnesota Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the
intentional impact within Minnesota land created
jurisdiction. Id. at 715-16.
The Minnesota Court of Appeals reached a similar result in
State v. Brown, 486 N.W.2d 816 (Minn. Ct. App. 1992). In Brown, the
court implicitly found that Minnesota courts had criminal
jurisdiction over individuals in Iowa who mailed unlicensed
gambling equipment to Minnesota residents. Id. at 817-18.
Minnesota courts have applied similar jurisdictional
principles in civil cases. In State v. Red Lake DFL Committee, 303
N.W.2d 54 (Minn. 1981), the Minnesota Supreme Court held that state
courts had jurisdiction over a committee of the Red Lake Indian
Tribe which had purchased space for political
advertisements in a newspaper circulated in the state. At issue was
whether the committee had to register under state ethical
practices laws.
The committee argued that it had done nothing outside of the
reservation, since the transaction with the newspaper took place
inside the reservation, and the committee did not assist in the
circulation of the newspaper. In holding that the committee was
required to register under state ethical practices law, the
Supreme Court responded to this argument as follows:
Defendants say nothing they did occurred outside the
reservation, but they choose to ignore that what they
did caused something to occur beyond the reservation
boundaries, namely, the dissemination of a political
message, which is the activity here sought to be
regulated.
Id. at 56 (emphasis added).
The above principles of Minnesota law apply equally to
activities on the Internet. Individuals and organizations
outside of Minnesota who disseminate information in Minnesota via the
Internet and thereby cause a result to occur in Minnesota are subject
to state criminal and civil laws.
An Example Of Illegal Activity On The Internet - Gambling
Gambling appears to be an especially prominent aspect of
criminal activity on the Internet. There are a number of
services outside of Minnesota that offer Minnesota residents the
opportunity to place bets on sporting events, purchase lottery
tickets, and participate in simulated casino games. These
services are illegal in Minnesota.
Lotteries
A lottery is defined as "a plan which provides for the
distribution of money, property or other reward or benefit to
persons selected by chance from among participants some or all of whom
have given a consideration for the chance of being
selected." Minnesota Statute Section 609.75, Subdivision 1(a)
(1994).
Generally, it is unlawful in Minnesota to sell or transfer a
chance to participate in a lottery. Minnesota Statute Section
609.755(2) (1994). It is also unlawful to disseminate
information in Minnesota about a lottery, except a lottery
conducted by an adjoining state, with intent to encourage
participation therein. Minnesota Statute Section 609.755(3). Acts
in Minnesota in furtherance of a lottery conducted outside of
Minnesota are included, notwithstanding its validity where
conducted. Minnesota Statute Section 609.75, Subdivision 1(c)
(1994). Violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor,
punishable by up to 90 days in jail, or a fine of up to $700, or
both. Minnesota Statute Section 609.755 (1994); 609.02,
Subdivision 3 (1994). It is a gross misdemeanor under Minnesota law
to conduct a lottery. Minnesota Statute Section 609.76,
Subdivision 1(3) (1994). A gross misdemeanor is punishable by up to
one year in jail, or a $3,000 fine, or both. Minnesota Statute
Section 609.02, Subdivision 4 (1994).
Sports Bookmaking
Sports bookmaking is defined as "the activity of
intentionally receiving, recording or forwarding within any
30-day period more than five bets, or offers to bet, that total more
than $2,500 on any one or more sporting events." Minnesota Statute
Section 609.75, Subdivision 7 (1994). Engaging in sports bookmaking
is a felony, which is punishable by more than one year imprisonment.
Minnesota Statutes Sections 609.76, Subdivision 2 (1994); 609.02,
Subdivision 2 (1994). Intentionally receiving, recording, or
forwarding bets or offers to bet in lesser amounts is a gross
misdemeanor. Minnesota Statute Section 609.76, Subdivision 1(7)
(1994).
Accomplice Liability
Minnesota's accomplice statute provides that one who
intentionally aids, advises, counsels, or conspires with another to
commit a crime is equally liable for that crime. Minnesota Statute
Section 609.05, Subdivision 1 (1994). Therefore, persons or
organizations who knowingly assist Internet gambling
organizations in any unlawful activity may themselves be held
liable for that unlawful activity. Thus, for example, Internet
access providers and credit card companies that continue to
provide services to gambling organizations after notice that the
activities of the organizations are illegal would be subject to
accomplice liability.
In addition to being illegal under Minnesota law, the
Internet gambling organizations appear to violate several
provisions of the federal law. All of the services appear to
violate 18 United States Code Section 1084, which prohibits the
foreign or interstate transmission of bets or wagers or
information on bets or wagers by use of a wire communication. In as
much as the Internet gambling organizations involve lotteries, they
would also appear to violate 18 United States Code Section 1301
(prohibiting the "importing or transporting" of lottery tickets;
18 United States Code Section 1302 (prohibiting the mailing of
lottery tickets); and 18 United States Code Section 1304
(prohibiting the "broadcasting" of lottery information). Sections
1084 and 1301 provide for felony-level penalties, while Sections 1302
and 1304 provide for misdemeanor penalties.
Placing A Bet Through Internet Gambling Organizations
Minnesota residents should be aware that it is unlawful to make
a bet through Internet gambling organizations. Minnesota law makes
it a misdemeanor to place a bet unless done pursuant to an exempted,
state-regulated activity, such as licensed charitable gambling
or the state lottery. Minnesota Statute Sections 609.75,
Subdivisions 2 - 3; 609.755(1) (1994). The Internet gambling
organizations are not exempted. Therefore, any person in Minnesota
who places a bet through one of these organizations is
committing a crime.
Minnesota residents should also be aware of forfeiture
provisions related to unlawful gambling activity. Minnesota
Statute Section 609.762, Subdivision 1 (1994) provides that the
following items are subject to forfeiture:
(a) Devices used or intended for use, including
those defined in section 349.30, subdivision 2, as a
gambling device, except as authorized in sections 349.11
to 349.23 and 349.40;
(b) All moneys, materials, and other property used
or intended for use as payment to participate in
gambling or a prize or receipt for gambling; and
(c) Books, records, and research products and
materials, including formulas, microfilm, tapes, and
data used or intended for use in gambling.
A "gambling device" is defined as "a contrivance which for a
consideration affords the player an opportunity to obtain
something of value, other than free plays, automatically from the
machine or otherwise, the award of which is determined
principally by chance." Minnesota Statute Section 609.75,
Subdivision 4 (1994).
Under this definition of "gambling device", a computer that is
used to play a game of chance for something of value would be subject
to forfeiture.
Gambling is just one example of illegal activity on the
Internet. However, the same jurisdictional principles apply with
equal force to any illegal activity.
Please direct any inquiries regarding this notice, or report
violations of Minnesota law to the Law Enforcement Section,
Minnesota Attorney General's Office, Suite 1400, NCL Tower, 445
Minnesota Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-2131, telephone (612)
296-7575..