Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Monday May 11 2015, @01:04PM   Printer-friendly
from the yelp-the-heck-out-of-it dept.

Signed into law yesterday by Governor Jerry Brown, California Civil Code Section 1670.8 now provides that:

A contract or proposed contract for the sale or lease of consumer goods or services may not include a provision waiving the consumer's right to make any statement regarding the seller or lessor or its employees or agents, or concerning the goods or services.

This statute comes with a fine of up to $2,500 for the first violation, up to $5,000 for the second and subsequent violations, as well as up to $10,000 for a willful, intentional, or reckless violation.

Software product EULAs are sometimes used to forbid negative reviews, and while this is not mentioned specifically in the text of the law, it is a fairly reasonable argument to think that this provision will apply there as well as in places like Yelp.com.

This law only applies in California, not in other states, or in other nations. Even so, it is a step in the right direction.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Monday May 11 2015, @02:37PM

    by hendrikboom (1125) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 11 2015, @02:37PM (#181475) Homepage Journal

    At least there are now lots of California high- tech corporations specifying that (presumably for their convenience) the laws and courts of California apply.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Monday May 11 2015, @03:13PM

    by VLM (445) on Monday May 11 2015, @03:13PM (#181488)

    As an opposing anecdotal data point, if you want to startup with VC funds you're pretty much "required" to incorporate in Delaware even when you operate in CA.

    "required" in quotes as in not all will demand it, but pissing off the hand that feeds you is probably a bad idea. Also it costs money to re-incorporate in a new state (such as DE) so you may as well just start out there. Also "most" corporate law lawyers don't really understand Montana corporate law but learned Delaware corporate law because thats where the corporations are (aside from family farms, etc) so unless you have a really good reason to incorporate in Idaho, you'd best go to DE.

    From memory of my "starting business" ideas the primary effect of DE registration is you pay $75/yr for an agent to represent you physically in DE, and there's some fuzzy stuff about sales tax (you're now based in CA and DE and pay franchise tax to DE or something). Also there's something hilarious about DE has two ways to bill franchise tax and they always send out an invoice with whichever is more expensive, so its a traditional song and dance to get a bill for $100K based on 10 cents per share or some formula like that, and then request the alternative invoice of percent of (something) which usually works out to like $90/yr. Also when you're small you don't have enough money to afford justice so you'll have to settle out of court for the other guy every time, and once you're big enough to afford justice you'll mostly be bullying people who can't afford justice so it doesn't really matter where you're incorporated or under which state laws, this is a country of might makes right and whoever has more $ tends to win. Also your state, not only CA, will probably require a biz license type paper from the state you're actually in, which you'd require anyway but there might be a different checkbox for your lawyer to check for out of state corporation. My plans never worked out so I never pulled the trigger and incorporated and got to work, but this was from "serious research" level analysis just a step or so short of hiring a lawyer and telling him to do it.