Introduction [Revised version May 2011]

Using the Google-China feud as a case study, this paper argues that compliance with the jurisdictional requirements under an investment treaty, i.e., that the dispute arises directly out of the investment, and that the substantive right allegedly being violated is one provided for in the treaty, should not necessarily bring a claim with free speech implications under the investment treaty protection, and only those business / economic interests-driven free speech claims should qualify for investment treaty protection (except where the treaty expressly provides for the protection ...