3 ms·
It's good that each state can determine the laws applicable in its jurisdiction. If you don't want to comply, don't do business in California.
by epc 7y ago
It's good that each state can determine the laws applicable in its jurisdiction. If you don't want to comply, don't do business in California.
- judge2020 7y agoOf course the question when you want to block California or run different code for users in California is "how do you legally and reliably tell if a user is in California"; eg. if they're using a VPN to new york could they sue you/file a complaint and win? What if Maxmind's IP database is outdated and you miss a bunch of California users?
- r00fus 7y agoCould this be handled with a single checkbox stating that you are either in CA or a CA resident/etc?
- judge2020 7y agoI suppose so, but it's a similar situation as GDPR/cookie consent when you need to perform 0-interaction data collection like running Ads for incognito users or creating a session that might also be used to track you on other websites. Maybe these use cases will just fall out of play as compliance when using them gets harder (which would not be a bad thing).
- bobthepanda 7y agoIf we weren't collecting personally identifying information with paper ads, no reason to just allow it just because technology lets you.
- robbrown451 7y agoWithin limits. There is stuff in the Constitution about interstate commerce. For instance, California had to refund me an "emissions fee" after I moved here with a car bought elsewhere that didn't have the same emissions standards. It was found to be unconstitutional. Other climate initiatives are facing similar objections. https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/the-commerce-clause-implications-of-californias-climate-change-initiatives.html https://www.mofo.com/resources/insights/the-commerce-clause-...