Re: [atlarge-discuss] FYI California State Assembly: Bill AB2297 & Bill AB700

["James S. Tyre" <jstyre@jstyre.com>]

If the Bill passes, expect that it will be challenged on dormant commerce 
clause grounds (under Article I, Section 8, clause 3 of the U.S. Const, 
Congress has the exclusive power to regulate interstate commerce).

Generally speaking (not universally), such challenges have failed if the 
challenge is to state legislation regulating spam, but have succeeded in 
most other instances.

At 07:28 PM 9/3/2002 -0700, Jkhan wrote:
> "This bill provides meaningful privacy protections that will help foster
> the continued growth of the Internet economy. Currently the law is
> unclear on what recourse individuals may have, if any, when somebody
> chooses not to honor their posted privacy policy. Right now, the only
> sure method of recourse is to literally make a federal case of the
> matter. This bill provides for meaningful and accessible enforcement
> under California Law."
>
> See:
> Bill Could Expose Internet Privacy Practices:
> [ http://siliconvalley.internet.com/news/article.php/1454691 ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------
James S. Tyre                               mailto:jstyre@jstyre.com
Law Offices of James S. Tyre          310-839-4114/310-839-4602(fax)
10736 Jefferson Blvd., #512               Culver City, CA 90230-4969
Co-founder, The Censorware Project             http://censorware.net


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de