Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 124.djvu/2408

 124 STAT. 2382 PUBLIC LAW 111–223—AUG. 10, 2010 ‘‘(B) even if the defamation law applied in the foreign court’s adjudication did not provide as much protection for freedom of speech and press as the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States and the constitu- tion and law of the State, the party opposing recognition or enforcement of that foreign judgment would have been found liable for defamation by a domestic court applying the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States and the constitution and law of the State in which the domestic court is located. ‘‘(2) BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING APPLICATION OF DEFAMATION LAWS.—The party seeking recognition or enforcement of the foreign judgment shall bear the burden of making the showings required under subparagraph (A) or (B). ‘‘(b) JURISDICTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal or State law, a domestic court shall not recognize or enforce a foreign judgment for defamation unless the domestic court determines that the exercise of personal jurisdic- tion by the foreign court comported with the due process requirements that are imposed on domestic courts by the Con- stitution of the United States. ‘‘(2) BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION.— The party seeking recognition or enforcement of the foreign judgment shall bear the burden of making the showing that the foreign court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction comported with the due process requirements that are imposed on domestic courts by the Constitution of the United States. ‘‘(c) JUDGMENT AGAINST PROVIDER OF INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SERVICE.— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal or State law, a domestic court shall not recognize or enforce a foreign judgment for defamation against the pro- vider of an interactive computer service, as defined in section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230) unless the domestic court determines that the judgment would be consistent with section 230 if the information that is the subject of such judgment had been provided in the United States. ‘‘(2) BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING CONSISTENCY OF JUDG- MENT.—The party seeking recognition or enforcement of the foreign judgment shall bear the burden of establishing that the judgment is consistent with section 230. ‘‘(d) APPEARANCES NOT A BAR.—An appearance by a party in a foreign court rendering a foreign judgment to which this section applies shall not deprive such party of the right to oppose the recognition or enforcement of the judgment under this section, or represent a waiver of any jurisdictional claims. ‘‘(e) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to— ‘‘(1) affect the enforceability of any foreign judgment other than a foreign judgment for defamation; or ‘‘(2) limit the applicability of section 230 of the Communica- tions Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230) to causes of action for defama- tion.