advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

Amazon 1-Click At Center Of U.S.-Euro Online Collision

July 13th, 2011

Other consumer-protection rules in the European pipeline include regulations that cover how and when a company must report a data breach, others that specify how long customers have to cancel orders when ordering from an E-tailer in another EU country (14 days) and the maximum time the E-tailer has to deliver the goods (a month).

In principle, those rules won’t affect U.S. E-tailers shipping to Europe, just as the patentless status of 1-Click in Europe theoretically won’t affect European E-tailers with U.S. customers. And that may be true (although both patent lawyers and governments can try to reach outside their jurisdictions).

In practice, though, many U.S. retailers use foreign subsidiaries to simplify E-Commerce issues. Does that subject a U.S. E-Commerce site to those EU cookie laws, even if that’s not the site a European customer is intended to order through?

What about U.S. retailers that use companies like FiftyOne to handle currency and customs issues for overseas customers? Does that create a strong enough connection that EU cookie law kicks in? If a third party provides the same type of service without a formal connection to the retailer, could that drag a U.S. retailer into European trouble?

Now flip that: What if a U.S. retailer decides to get around U.S. E-Commerce-related problems, including threats from patent holders ranging from Amazon to Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, by moving its E-Commerce servers to Europe? After all, Europe is now a 1-Click-free zone. Would those E-tailers have to comply with EU cookie laws if they’re only selling to customers in the U.S., not to those in Europe?

Or what happens if those servers are in the cloud? They might be in the U.S. or in Europe or even somewhere else. Which laws apply then?

If U.S. and European E-Commerce laws were reasonably close—or at least getting closer—this might be academic. But that’s not the case, and there’s no reason to think these two big markets will line up more closely in the future without a lot of effort.

That means the prospect of either pulling back from any cross-border sales or trying to satisfy both sets of requirements. In some areas, like reporting security breaches, going global may be unavoidable. But when it comes to patents and cookies, that’s going to be a hard choice to make.


advertisement

Comments are closed.

Newsletters

StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

StorefrontBacktalk
Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.