Black v. Breeden involved defamation over the internet. According to this case, which of the following is true?

Question 10 options:

	Since the article was read, and the damage to Black's reputation was done in America, the Court held the United States was the appropriate place to sue.
	Since the plaintiff lived in the United States, and his reputation was damaged there, the Court held the United States was the appropriate place to sue.
	Black established a real and substantial connection, and that his reputation was damaged within Ontario, even though the article was published on a U.S. website, the Court held Black was able to pursue a defamation action in Ontario.
	The key to a court assuming jurisdiction is the number and strength of the connecting factors between the cause of the action and the where the defendant resides.
	The key to a court assuming jurisdiction is the connecting factors between where the plaintiff and the defendant reside.

12) Which of the following is not a common internet or computer-related offence?

Question 12 options:

	distribution of pornography
	gambling
	computer piracy
	hate literature and other human rights violations
	trespass

14) When a judgment is obtained against a foreign service provider, which of the following statements is true?

Question 14 options:

	If the service provider has no assets in the foreign jurisdiction or if there is no treaty in place to allow for enforcement, enforcement continues to be a substantial threat.
	If the service provider has assets in the foreign jurisdiction or there are treaties in place to allow for enforcement, enforcement continues to be a substantial threat, but generally only if the conduct complained of is actionable in both jurisdictions.
	Since the service provider resides in a foreign jurisdiction, there is no threat of enforcement.
	Since the judgment is obtained in a different jurisdiction, the business or individual may be extradited to face criminal charges.
	If the service provider has assets in the foreign jurisdiction or there are treaties in place to allow for enforcement, enforcement continues to be a substantial threat, no matter if the conduct complained of is actionable in only one jurisdiction.