Which of the following can be considered as a substantial contact for personal jurisdiction?

Substantial contact for personal jurisdiction refers to a connection between the defendant and the forum state that justifies the state's exercise of jurisdiction over the defendant. In this context, remote transactions conducted through a website can indeed establish substantial contact. Courts often consider the nature and extent of virtual interactions, such as online sales or services, as significant enough to confer jurisdiction if those interactions have a meaningful connection to the forum state.

In the case of remote transactions, if a party is actively engaging in business within a state through its website—such as selling products or providing services that can be accessed by residents of that state—this behavior can establish a substantial contact. The key point is whether the defendant has purposefully availed themselves of the privileges of conducting business in that particular state, thereby invoking the protections and responsibilities of its laws.

The other responses do not align with the criteria for substantial contact as recognized by courts. Physical presence can establish jurisdiction but is not the only way. Social media interactions, unless tied to business activities, typically do not constitute sufficient contact to establish jurisdiction. Therefore, remote transactions through a website represent a modern and relevant way to establish the necessary ties for personal jurisdiction.