Commitments And Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2015
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments And Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Litigation From time-to-time, j2 Global and its affiliates are involved in litigation and other disputes or regulatory inquiries that arise in the ordinary course of business. Any claims or regulatory actions against j2 Global and its affiliates, whether meritorious or not, could be time consuming and costly, and could divert significant operational resources. The outcomes of such matters are subject to inherent uncertainties, carrying the potential for unfavorable rulings that could include monetary damages and injunctive relief. On January 7, 2011, the Department of Revenue for the State of Washington (“Washington Department of Revenue”) issued assessments to a j2 Global affiliate for business and occupation tax and retail sales tax for the period of January 1, 2004 through September 30, 2010. On November 16, 2012, the Washington Department of Revenue denied the j2 Global affiliate’s petition for correction. The j2 Global affiliate paid the assessments and, on June 21, 2013, filed a complaint against the Washington Department of Revenue in the Superior Court of Washington for Thurston County (No. 13-2-01338-7). In that suit, the j2 Global affiliate is seeking a refund of the entire amount paid and a declaration that the Washington Department of Revenue improperly imposed the taxes. Discovery is ongoing. On February 17, 2011, Emmanuel Pantelakis (“Pantelakis”) filed suit against a j2 Global affiliate in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (No. 11-50673), alleging that the j2 Global affiliate breached a contract relating to Pantelakis’s use of the Campaigner® service. The j2 Global affiliate filed a responsive pleading on March 23, 2011 and responses to undertakings on July 16, 2012. On November 6, 2012, Pantelakis filed a second amended statement of claim, reframing his lawsuit as a negligence action. The j2 Global affiliate filed an amended statement of defense on April 8, 2013. Discovery is ongoing. On January 17, 2013, the Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Revenue (“Commissioner”) issued a notice of assessment to a j2 Global affiliate for sales and use tax for the period of July 1, 2003 through December 31, 2011. On July 22, 2014, the Commissioner denied the j2 Global affiliate’s application for abatement. On September 18, 2014, the j2 Global affiliate petitioned the Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board for abatement of the tax asserted in the notice of assessment (No. C325426). Discovery is ongoing. On January 18, 2013, Paldo Sign and Display Co. (“Paldo”) filed an amended complaint adding two j2 Global affiliates and a former employee as additional defendants in an existing purported class action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (“Northern District of Illinois”) (No. 1:13-cv-01896). The amended complaint alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act (“ICFA”), and common law conversion, arising from an indirect customer’s alleged use of the j2 Global affiliates’ systems to send unsolicited facsimile transmissions. On August 23, 2013, a second plaintiff, Sabon, Inc. (“Sabon”), was added. The j2 Global affiliates filed a motion to dismiss the ICFA and conversion claims, which was granted. The Northern District of Illinois also dismissed the former employee for lack of personal jurisdiction. Discovery is ongoing. On August 28, 2013, Phyllis A. Huster (“Huster”) filed suit in the Northern District of Illinois (No. 1:13-cv-06143) against two j2 Global affiliates and three other parties for correction of inventorship for nine j2 Global patents. Huster seeks, among other things, a declaration that she was an inventor of the patents-in-suit, an order directing the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office to substitute or add her as an inventor, and payment of at least half of defendants’ earnings from licensing the patents-in-suit. On September 19, 2014, the Northern District of Illinois granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss for improper venue and transferred the case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (No. 1:14-cv-03304). Huster filed an amended complaint on February 11, 2015, which she corrected on February 12, 2015. The corrected amended complaint added claims of fraudulent concealment, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, breach of contract, breach of a private duty, conversion, and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Huster also filed a motion to disqualify various law firms from continuing to represent the defendants. In addition, defendants filed several motions to dismiss on March 12, 2015, including three by j2 Global affiliates. These motions remain pending. On October 16, 2013, a j2 Global affiliate entered an appearance as a plaintiff in a multi-district litigation pending in the Northern District of Illinois (No. 1:12-cv-06286). In this litigation, Unified Messaging Solutions, LLC (“UMS”), a company with rights to assert certain patents owned by the j2 Global affiliate, has asserted five j2 Global patents against a number of defendants. While claims against some defendants have been settled, other defendants have filed counterclaims for, among other things, non-infringement, unenforceability, and invalidity of the patents-in-suit. On December 20, 2013, the Northern District of Illinois issued a claim construction opinion and, on June 13, 2014, entered a final judgment of non-infringement for the remaining defendants based on that claim construction. UMS and the j2 Global affiliate filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on June 27, 2014 (No. 14-1611). The appeal remains pending. On February 19, 2014, two j2 Global affiliates filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (“Central District of California”) (No. 2:14-cv-01283) against RPost Holdings, Inc. and two of its affiliates (collectively, “RPost”), alleging infringement of two j2 Global patents and seeking a declaration of non-infringement and invalidity of nine RPost patents that had been asserted against the j2 Global affiliates in a patent assertion letter from RPost. An amended complaint was filed on June 20, 2014, adding an additional j2 Global affiliate as a plaintiff. RPost filed an answer to the complaint on July 14, 2014, asserting counterclaims of infringement for the nine RPost patents against the Campaigner® service. On April 27, 2015, the Central District of California granted the j2 Global affiliates’ motion to stay the litigation pending the resolution of a separate lawsuit, which does not directly involve j2 Global or its affiliates but does address RPost’s ownership of and right to assert the RPost patents-in-suit. On October 26, 2015, the case was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice. On June 23, 2014, Andre Free-Vychine (“Free-Vychine”) filed a purported class action against a j2 Global affiliate in the Superior Court for the State of California, County of Los Angeles (“Los Angeles Superior Court”) (No. BC549422). The complaint alleges two California statutory violations relating to late fees levied in certain eVoice® accounts. Free-Vychine is seeking, among other things, damages and injunctive relief on behalf of himself and a purported nationwide class of similarly situated persons. On August 26, 2014, Law Enforcement Officers, Inc. (“LEO”) and IV Pit Stop, Inc. (“IV Pit Stop”) filed a separate purported class action against the same j2 Global affiliate in Los Angeles Superior Court (No. BC555721). The complaint alleges three California statutory violations, negligence, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and various other common law claims relating to late fees levied on any of the j2 Global affiliate’s customers, including those with eVoice® and Onebox® accounts. The plaintiffs are seeking, among other things, damages and injunctive relief on behalf of themselves and a purported nationwide class of similarly situated persons. On September 29, 2014, the Los Angeles Superior Court ordered both cases related and consolidated for discovery purposes. On March 13, 2015, a third amended complaint was filed in this action, which no longer included IV Pit Stop as a plaintiff but added Christopher Dancel (“Dancel”) as a plaintiff. On or around June 26, 2015, the case filed by Free-Vychine was dismissed pursuant to a settlement agreement. On October 7, 2015, the parties reached a tentative class-based settlement that remains subject to confirmatory discovery and court approval. j2 Global does not believe, based on current knowledge, that the foregoing legal proceedings or claims, including those where an unfavorable outcome is reasonably possible, after giving effect to existing reserves, are likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. However, depending on the amount and the timing, an unfavorable resolution of some or all of these matters could materially affect j2 Global’s consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows in a particular period. The Company has not accrued for a loss contingency relating to these legal proceedings because unfavorable outcomes are not considered by management to be probable. Non-Income Related Taxes As a provider of cloud services for business, the Company does not provide telecommunications services. Thus, it believes that its business and its users (by using our services) are generally not subject to various telecommunication taxes. Moreover, the Company generally does not believe that its business and its users (by using our services) are subject to other indirect taxes, such as sales and use tax. The current U.S. federal government moratorium on states and other local authorities imposing access or discriminatory taxes on the Internet, which is set to expire December 11, 2015, does not prohibit federal, state or local authorities from collecting taxes on our income or from collecting taxes that are due under existing tax rules. The Company is currently under audit for indirect taxes in several states and municipalities. On February 27, 2013, the Office of Finance for the City of Los Angeles (the "Los Angeles Office of Finance") issued assessments to a j2 Global affiliate for business and communications taxes for the period of January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2012. On September 11, 2014, the Los Angeles Office of Finance issued revised assessments to a j2 Global affiliate increasing such affiliate's liability to the City of Los Angeles. On April 30, 2015, the Los Angeles Office of Finance Board of Review denied the j2 Global affiliate's request to abate the assessments. The j2 Global affiliate paid the assessments and requested the abatement of penalties associated with the assessments. In addition, the j2 Global affiliate is currently working with the Office of the City Attorney of the City of Los Angeles to obtain a refund of the entire amount paid. For other jurisdictions, the Company currently has no reserves established for these matters, as the Company has determined that the liability is not probable and estimable. However, it is reasonably possible that such a liability could be incurred, which would result in additional expense, which could materially impact our financial results.

Commitments and Contingencies

Litigation

From time-to-time, j2 Global and its affiliates are involved in litigation and other disputes or regulatory inquiries that arise in the ordinary course of business. Any claims or regulatory actions against j2 Global and its affiliates, whether meritorious or not, could be time consuming and costly, and could divert significant operational resources. The outcomes of such matters are subject to inherent uncertainties, carrying the potential for unfavorable rulings that could include monetary damages and injunctive relief.

On January 7, 2011, the Department of Revenue for the State of Washington (“Washington Department of Revenue”) issued assessments to a j2 Global affiliate for business and occupation tax and retail sales tax for the period of January 1, 2004 through September 30, 2010. On November 16, 2012, the Washington Department of Revenue denied the j2 Global affiliate’s petition for correction. The j2 Global affiliate paid the assessments and, on June 21, 2013, filed a complaint against the Washington Department of Revenue in the Superior Court of Washington for Thurston County (No. 13-2-01338-7). In that suit, the j2 Global affiliate is seeking a refund of the entire amount paid and a declaration that the Washington Department of Revenue improperly imposed the taxes. Discovery is ongoing.

On February 17, 2011, Emmanuel Pantelakis (“Pantelakis”) filed suit against a j2 Global affiliate in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (No. 11-50673), alleging that the j2 Global affiliate breached a contract relating to Pantelakis’s use of the Campaigner® service. The j2 Global affiliate filed a responsive pleading on March 23, 2011 and responses to undertakings on July 16, 2012. On November 6, 2012, Pantelakis filed a second amended statement of claim, reframing his lawsuit as a negligence action. The j2 Global affiliate filed an amended statement of defense on April 8, 2013. Discovery is ongoing.

On January 17, 2013, the Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Revenue (“Commissioner”) issued a notice of assessment to a j2 Global affiliate for sales and use tax for the period of July 1, 2003 through December 31, 2011. On July 22, 2014, the Commissioner denied the j2 Global affiliate’s application for abatement. On September 18, 2014, the j2 Global affiliate petitioned the Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board for abatement of the tax asserted in the notice of assessment (No. C325426). Discovery is ongoing.

On January 18, 2013, Paldo Sign and Display Co. (“Paldo”) filed an amended complaint adding two j2 Global affiliates and a former employee as additional defendants in an existing purported class action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (“Northern District of Illinois”) (No. 1:13-cv-01896). The amended complaint alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act (“ICFA”), and common law conversion, arising from an indirect customer’s alleged use of the j2 Global affiliates’ systems to send unsolicited facsimile transmissions. On August 23, 2013, a second plaintiff, Sabon, Inc. (“Sabon”), was added. The j2 Global affiliates filed a motion to dismiss the ICFA and conversion claims, which was granted. The Northern District of Illinois also dismissed the former employee for lack of personal jurisdiction. Discovery is ongoing.

On August 28, 2013, Phyllis A. Huster (“Huster”) filed suit in the Northern District of Illinois (No. 1:13-cv-06143) against two j2 Global affiliates and three other parties for correction of inventorship for nine j2 Global patents. Huster seeks, among other things, a declaration that she was an inventor of the patents-in-suit, an order directing the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office to substitute or add her as an inventor, and payment of at least half of defendants’ earnings from licensing the patents-in-suit. On September 19, 2014, the Northern District of Illinois granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss for improper venue and transferred the case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (No. 1:14-cv-03304). Huster filed an amended complaint on February 11, 2015, which she corrected on February 12, 2015. The corrected amended complaint added claims of fraudulent concealment, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, breach of contract, breach of a private duty, conversion, and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Huster also filed a motion to disqualify various law firms from continuing to represent the defendants. In addition, defendants filed several motions to dismiss on March 12, 2015, including three by j2 Global affiliates. These motions remain pending.

On October 16, 2013, a j2 Global affiliate entered an appearance as a plaintiff in a multi-district litigation pending in the Northern District of Illinois (No. 1:12-cv-06286). In this litigation, Unified Messaging Solutions, LLC (“UMS”), a company with rights to assert certain patents owned by the j2 Global affiliate, has asserted five j2 Global patents against a number of defendants. While claims against some defendants have been settled, other defendants have filed counterclaims for, among other things, non-infringement, unenforceability, and invalidity of the patents-in-suit. On December 20, 2013, the Northern District of Illinois issued a claim construction opinion and, on June 13, 2014, entered a final judgment of non-infringement for the remaining defendants based on that claim construction. UMS and the j2 Global affiliate filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on June 27, 2014 (No. 14-1611). The appeal remains pending.

On February 19, 2014, two j2 Global affiliates filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (“Central District of California”) (No. 2:14-cv-01283) against RPost Holdings, Inc. and two of its affiliates (collectively, “RPost”), alleging infringement of two j2 Global patents and seeking a declaration of non-infringement and invalidity of nine RPost patents that had been asserted against the j2 Global affiliates in a patent assertion letter from RPost. An amended complaint was filed on June 20, 2014, adding an additional j2 Global affiliate as a plaintiff. RPost filed an answer to the complaint on July 14, 2014, asserting counterclaims of infringement for the nine RPost patents against the Campaigner® service. On April 27, 2015, the Central District of California granted the j2 Global affiliates’ motion to stay the litigation pending the resolution of a separate lawsuit, which does not directly involve j2 Global or its affiliates but does address RPost’s ownership of and right to assert the RPost patents-in-suit. On October 26, 2015, the case was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice.

On June 23, 2014, Andre Free-Vychine (“Free-Vychine”) filed a purported class action against a j2 Global affiliate in the Superior Court for the State of California, County of Los Angeles (“Los Angeles Superior Court”) (No. BC549422). The complaint alleges two California statutory violations relating to late fees levied in certain eVoice® accounts. Free-Vychine is seeking, among other things, damages and injunctive relief on behalf of himself and a purported nationwide class of similarly situated persons. On August 26, 2014, Law Enforcement Officers, Inc. (“LEO”) and IV Pit Stop, Inc. (“IV Pit Stop”) filed a separate purported class action against the same j2 Global affiliate in Los Angeles Superior Court (No. BC555721). The complaint alleges three California statutory violations, negligence, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and various other common law claims relating to late fees levied on any of the j2 Global affiliate’s customers, including those with eVoice® and Onebox® accounts. The plaintiffs are seeking, among other things, damages and injunctive relief on behalf of themselves and a purported nationwide class of similarly situated persons. On September 29, 2014, the Los Angeles Superior Court ordered both cases related and consolidated for discovery purposes. On March 13, 2015, a third amended complaint was filed in this action, which no longer included IV Pit Stop as a plaintiff but added Christopher Dancel (“Dancel”) as a plaintiff. On or around June 26, 2015, the case filed by Free-Vychine was dismissed pursuant to a settlement agreement. On October 7, 2015, the parties reached a tentative class-based settlement that remains subject to confirmatory discovery and court approval.

j2 Global does not believe, based on current knowledge, that the foregoing legal proceedings or claims, including those where an unfavorable outcome is reasonably possible, after giving effect to existing reserves, are likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. However, depending on the amount and the timing, an unfavorable resolution of some or all of these matters could materially affect j2 Global’s consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows in a particular period. The Company has not accrued for a loss contingency relating to these legal proceedings because unfavorable outcomes are not considered by management to be probable.

Non-Income Related Taxes

As a provider of cloud services for business, the Company does not provide telecommunications services. Thus, it believes that its business and its users (by using our services) are generally not subject to various telecommunication taxes. Moreover, the Company generally does not believe that its business and its users (by using our services) are subject to other indirect taxes, such as sales and use tax.

The current U.S. federal government moratorium on states and other local authorities imposing access or discriminatory taxes on the Internet, which is set to expire December 11, 2015, does not prohibit federal, state or local authorities from collecting taxes on our income or from collecting taxes that are due under existing tax rules.

The Company is currently under audit for indirect taxes in several states and municipalities. On February 27, 2013, the Office of Finance for the City of Los Angeles (the "Los Angeles Office of Finance") issued assessments to a j2 Global affiliate for business and communications taxes for the period of January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2012. On September 11, 2014, the Los Angeles Office of Finance issued revised assessments to a j2 Global affiliate increasing such affiliate's liability to the City of Los Angeles. On April 30, 2015, the Los Angeles Office of Finance Board of Review denied the j2 Global affiliate's request to abate the assessments. The j2 Global affiliate paid the assessments and requested the abatement of penalties associated with the assessments. In addition, the j2 Global affiliate is currently working with the Office of the City Attorney of the City of Los Angeles to obtain a refund of the entire amount paid. For other jurisdictions, the Company currently has no reserves established for these matters, as the Company has determined that the liability is not probable and estimable. However, it is reasonably possible that such a liability could be incurred, which would result in additional expense, which could materially impact our financial results.