Does the global reach of the Internet support a court’s assertion of authority over activities that occur in another jurisdiction? Discuss.

William Scott operated World Wide Tele-Sports, an Internet sports-betting service based on a Caribbean island. In 1998, the United States charged Scott with soliciting and accepting wagers from U.S. residents through illegal offshore Web sites. Unable to arrest Scott, who lived abroad, the government followed some of the proceeds from the enterprise to an account at the Royal Bank of Scotland International (RBSI) held by Soulbury Limited, a British corporation of which Scott was the majority shareholder. The United States filed a civil action in a federal district court, seeking the forfeiture of $6,976,934.65, plus interest, from RBSI’s account with a U.S. bank. Soulbury denied that the funds were linked to Scott and filed a claim for the funds. Meanwhile, in 2005, Scott was indicted on money-laundering charges related to the gambling violations. Under the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act, also known as the fugitive disentitlement statute, a court can dismiss a claim in a civil forfeiture case based on a defendant’s evasion of a separate criminal proceeding. The government filed a motion to dismiss Soulbury’s claim under the fugitive disentitlement statute. The court issued a summary judgment in the government’s favor. Soulbury appealed.