In the Internet context, the effects test can be used to examine the exact nature of a defendant's Internet activities to determine whether its out of state actions were directed at parties or entities within the forum state. This is referred to in the language of "Calder v. Jones" as "purposeful direction," which requires (a) an intentional action, that was (b) expressly aimed at the forum state, with (c) knowledge that the brunt of the injury would be felt in the forum state. If a court finds that a defendant's actions meets the standard of purposeful direction, then personal jurisdiction may be asserted based on Internet activities which do not meet the requisite level of interactivity or minimum contacts needed for other tests of personal jurisdiction in Internet cases.