New rules for Internet sales to CA buyers

The following subsection of California Business & Professions Code section
17538 took effect 1/1/97 and may be of interest to people following state
attempts to regulate net sales:

[...]
   (d) A vendor conducting business through the Internet or any other
electronic means of communication shall do  all of the following
when the transaction involves a buyer located in California:
   (1) Before accepting any payment or processing any debit or credit
charge or funds transfer, the vendor shall disclose to the buyer in
writing or by electronic means of communication, such as E-mail or an
on-screen notice, the vendor's return and refund policy, the legal
name under which the business is conducted and, except as provided in
paragraph (3), the complete street address from which the business
is actually conducted.
   (2) If the disclosure of the vendor's legal name and address
information required by this subdivision is made by on-screen notice,
all of the following shall apply:
   (A) The disclosure of the legal name and address information shall
appear on any of the following:  (i) the first screen displayed when
the vendor's electronic site is accessed, (ii) on the screen on
which goods or services are first offered, (iii) on the screen on
which a buyer may place the order for goods or services or (iv) on
the screen on which the buyer may enter payment information, such as
a credit card account number.  The communication of that disclosure
shall not be structured to be smaller or less legible than the text
of the offer of the goods or services.
   (B) The disclosure of the legal name and address information shall
be accompanied by an adjacent statement describing how the buyer may
receive the information at the buyer's E-mail address.  The vendor
shall provide the disclosure information to the buyer at the buyer's
E-mail address within five days of receiving the buyer's request.
   (C) Until the vendor complies with subdivision (a) in connection
with all buyers of the vendor's goods or services, the vendor shall
make available to a buyer and any person or entity who may enforce
this section pursuant to Section 17535 on-screen access to the
information required to be disclosed under this subdivision.
   (3) The complete street address need not be disclosed as required
by paragraph (1) if the vendor utilizes a private mailbox receiving
service and  all of the following conditions are met:  (A) the vendor
satisfies the conditions described in paragraph (2) of subdivision
(b) of Section 17538.5, (B) the vendor discloses the actual street
address of the private mailbox receiving service in the manner
prescribed by this subdivision for the disclosure of the vendor's
actual street address, and (C) the vendor and the private mailbox
receiving service comply with all of the requirements of subdivisions
(c) to (f), inclusive, of Section 17538.5.

 ---

Legislative history can be found at

<http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_3320&sess=PREV&h
ouse=B>


--
Greg Broiles                | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell:
gbroiles@netbox.com         | 
http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <3.0.32.19970102144026.0069bc00@mail.io.com>,
Greg Broiles  <gbroiles@netbox.com> wrote:
>
>The following subsection of California Business & Professions Code section
>17538 took effect 1/1/97 and may be of interest to people following state
>attempts to regulate net sales:
>
>[...]
>   (d) A vendor conducting business through the Internet or any other
>electronic means of communication shall do  all of the following
>when the transaction involves a buyer located in California:
[snip]
>
>Legislative history can be found at
>
><http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_3320&sess=PREV&h
>ouse=B>
>


So is this saying that a merchant _anywhere in the world_ can be prosecuted
under California law if someone in California goes to their web page,
and the web page doesn't satisfy the requirements (which I snipped)?

How is a merchant in, say, Finland, supposed to know that this law (or others
like it in any city, state, or country in the world) exists?

   - Ian 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMs6YZEZRiTErSPb1AQEfbQQAkTjheiJ7iX0auSFWzthQ9zsgMQWmrSok
7ETe3D20BhIC11Rqkb6hMm8zwk8j4n+zXk1I6PlGAiRVS8LHlEEoxBhkMCHCzEEO
J0CNjURByuXVIzvEuaKm9VE6ymtOw+U+lHRpPerKt5nrRZM+Wg2ccPhqG5WBhrhJ
hJT8jUYto3Q=
=zyI9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Ian Goldberg wrote:
> In article <3.0.32.19970102144026.0069bc00@mail.io.com>,
> Greg Broiles  <gbroiles@netbox.com> wrote:
> >The following subsection of California Business & Professions Code section
> >17538 took effect 1/1/97 and may be of interest to people following state
> >attempts to regulate net sales:
> >   (d) A vendor conducting business through the Internet or any other
> >electronic means of communication shall do  all of the following
> >when the transaction involves a buyer located in California:

> So is this saying that a merchant _anywhere in the world_ can be prosecuted
> under California law if someone in California goes to their web page,
> and the web page doesn't satisfy the requirements (which I snipped)?
> How is a merchant in, say, Finland, supposed to know that this law (or others
> like it in any city, state, or country in the world) exists?

It's all rather academic, my dear Ian.  Just as the Atom bomb made the
United Nations mandatory, and large-scale war impossible for the U.S.,
the Internet will be the thing that facilitates ushering in one-world
government.  When Bill Gates and friends put up those 800-plus satellites
to beam the "news, entertainment, and important events" all over the world
to everyone's TV set, the circle will be complete.

Ian Goldberg wrote:
 
> So is this saying that a merchant _anywhere in the world_ can be prosecuted
> under California law if someone in California goes to their web page,
> and the web page doesn't satisfy the requirements (which I snipped)?
> 
> How is a merchant in, say, Finland, supposed to know that this law (or others
> like it in any city, state, or country in the world) exists?

  Ignorance is no excuse for violating the law.  This is a standard
legal
principle which can be loosely translated as, "It's not 'our' problem
that you're not psychic, sucker."