NONE: Re: ONLINE-ADS>> The Law and Shop The Web
Re: ONLINE-ADS>> The Law and Shop The Web
Jonathan I. Ezor (jezor_at_newmedialaw.com)
Thu, 06 Feb 97 17:38:43 est
Jim Sterne wrote:
<quote>
At 06:17 AM 2/5/97 +0000, Glenn Barry wrote: >
>For the full statment go to:-
>http://www.webcom.com/~lewrose/article/minn.html >
>1. If you have a site marketing a product that is not approved of by
>Minnasota and while you are asleep 250 people from Minessota log on
to >your site you have commited a crime.
Nor do I play one on TV, but it seems "Void Where Prohibited" ought to
cover it, yes?
Is there a lawyer in the house?
</quote>
I just walked into the house. :)
There are a number of issues here, but I see it as boiling down to two
possibilities: content regulation per se, and consumer protection laws.
The benefits and risks of the former have been debated to death and will
soon be before the Supreme Court. The latter has always been primarily the
purview of the states, since they have the best sense (arguably) of how
their citizens live and buy (as well as a strong interest in protecting the
local economy!). While I don't oppose governments putting in place
content-regulation laws (like the CDA and New York's equivalent, for
example) which make crimes of online behavior which would be legal in
person or in print, I think there is a role for consumer protection law,
provided it addresses the reality of the Internet and how it works.
>From my prospective, an appropriate local consumer protection law might:
1) Require the vendor to prominently tell the users who may take advantage
of a deal (e.g. Void in Minnesota and Florida, and open only to residents
of the U.S.)
2) Require the vendor not to *fulfill* orders to prohibited states
(although you can't prevent the transmission of information to, or
reception of orders from, users).
3) Reference and supplement rather than replace existing fraud statutes.
I deal with Web business deals all the time, and the truth is that the
concepts involved in Internet law are not very different from existing
legal practice. It's just that a combination of factors and perspectives,
from software licensing to telecommunications regulation to advertising
law, are all brought together by the unique characteristics (worldwide,
instantaneous, all-digital, not owned by anyone, one-to-many) of the
Internet.
Bottom line is, I don't believe Minnesota should treat Web commerce any
differently from telephone or mail order commerce. Prohibit fraud, help
consumers seek redress, promote education about rights, but don't try to
regulate Internet commerce out of existence--the citizens won't be better
served by it, and even the local businesses won't be able to take advantage
of the incredible business-to-business advantages that Internet commerce
offers to everyone, from the smallest to the largest firms. {Jonathan, who
will be speaking on Web contracts at Spring Internet World in Los Angeles}
Jonathan I. Ezor
New Media Attorney, Davis & Gilbert, 1740 Broadway, New York, NY 10019
Tel: 212-468-4989 Fax: 212-468-4888 E-mail: jezor_at_newmedialaw.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This week's Online Advertising Discussion List sponsors:
ADSmart.net is the best way to buy or sell online advertising space.
ADSmart's TrueTargeting methodology accurately pinpoints target audiences,
matching campaigns to the most appropriate ad spaces on the Web.
http://www.adsmart.net
---------------
Q: How can I maximize my Web site*s revenues from banner advertising?
A: Don*t carry unsold, excess ad space. Sell out every impression.
adbot: the auction market for internet advertising (tm)
contact us: http://www.adbot.com, mailto:info_at_adbot.com or 888-ADBOT-INC
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Online Advertising Discussion List To Unsubscribe send UNSUBSCRIBE
http://www.o-a.com/ to online-ads-request_at_o-a.com
