Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Colorado House passes bill to limit surveillance pricing and wage setting

coloradonewsline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 73 posts

Re: Colorado House passes bill to limit surveillance pricing and wage setting

#11

Post by JumpCrisscross »

pnw wrote: post #9
adestefan wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s right at the top of the linked bill. The attorney general or a district attorney may bring a civil action on behalf of the state against a person that violates the prohibition against individualized price or wage setting based on surveillance data to seek the imposition of civil penalties. In addition, a person aggrieved by a violation of the prohibition specified in the bill may bring a civil action on behalf o…

Allowing private right of action means this will be weaponized by attorneys in the same way the ADA has. Just scanning the bill, any small business in the US using dynamic pricing, targeted discounts or "VIP pricing" on their website would be open to suits from Colorado residents. The definitions are extremely broad and there is no safe harbor for small companies either. Damages are also uncapped and apparently Color…

> any small business in the US using dynamic pricing, targeted discounts or "VIP pricing" on their website would be open to suits from Colorado residents

The solution is to use reasonable efforts to block Colorado residents if you can’t comply with the law. That’s a tradeoff a group of people are allowed to make for themselves.

Re: Colorado House passes bill to limit surveillance pricing and wage setting

#13

Post by thegreatpeter »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #8

> Republican Rep. Chris Richardson, an Elbert County Republican, argued that the bill is too broad and could regulate standard analytic usage in the workplace, such as a human resources software that recommends a pay band for employees based on performance. He does not think this is is just selling it further? Oh no, it might prohibit software automatically determining my wages, how could we even have a society if we…

“I absolutely agree that consumers and wage earners should not be exploited by the use of their data,” he said. “But it’s still overly broad and it’s still overly vague in very important parts. And I believe it’s overly simplistic in its definition of wage setting.”

Re: Colorado House passes bill to limit surveillance pricing and wage setting

#14

Post by mememememememo »

pnw wrote: post #9
adestefan wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s right at the top of the linked bill. The attorney general or a district attorney may bring a civil action on behalf of the state against a person that violates the prohibition against individualized price or wage setting based on surveillance data to seek the imposition of civil penalties. In addition, a person aggrieved by a violation of the prohibition specified in the bill may bring a civil action on behalf o…

Allowing private right of action means this will be weaponized by attorneys in the same way the ADA has. Just scanning the bill, any small business in the US using dynamic pricing, targeted discounts or "VIP pricing" on their website would be open to suits from Colorado residents. The definitions are extremely broad and there is no safe harbor for small companies either. Damages are also uncapped and apparently Color…

Is that a bad thing? If you ate going to discount (B2C), do it for all or do it for none.

Re: Colorado House passes bill to limit surveillance pricing and wage setting

#16

Post by wat10000 »

pnw wrote: post #9
adestefan wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s right at the top of the linked bill. The attorney general or a district attorney may bring a civil action on behalf of the state against a person that violates the prohibition against individualized price or wage setting based on surveillance data to seek the imposition of civil penalties. In addition, a person aggrieved by a violation of the prohibition specified in the bill may bring a civil action on behalf o…

Allowing private right of action means this will be weaponized by attorneys in the same way the ADA has. Just scanning the bill, any small business in the US using dynamic pricing, targeted discounts or "VIP pricing" on their website would be open to suits from Colorado residents. The definitions are extremely broad and there is no safe harbor for small companies either. Damages are also uncapped and apparently Color…

Ok, but surely there are also downsides.

Re: Colorado House passes bill to limit surveillance pricing and wage setting

#18

Post by adgjlsfhk1 »

pnw wrote: post #9
adestefan wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s right at the top of the linked bill. The attorney general or a district attorney may bring a civil action on behalf of the state against a person that violates the prohibition against individualized price or wage setting based on surveillance data to seek the imposition of civil penalties. In addition, a person aggrieved by a violation of the prohibition specified in the bill may bring a civil action on behalf o…

Allowing private right of action means this will be weaponized by attorneys in the same way the ADA has. Just scanning the bill, any small business in the US using dynamic pricing, targeted discounts or "VIP pricing" on their website would be open to suits from Colorado residents. The definitions are extremely broad and there is no safe harbor for small companies either. Damages are also uncapped and apparently Color…

Sounds great! The theory behind capitalism only works if prices are transparent and goods are transferable. These sorts of "special discounts" are fundamentally harmful to the economy as a whole.

Re: Colorado House passes bill to limit surveillance pricing and wage setting

#19

Post by AnthonyMouse »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #11
pnw wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Allowing private right of action means this will be weaponized by attorneys in the same way the ADA has. Just scanning the bill, any small business in the US using dynamic pricing, targeted discounts or "VIP pricing" on their website would be open to suits from Colorado residents. The definitions are extremely broad and there is no safe harbor for small companies either. Damages are also uncapped and apparently Color…

> any small business in the US using dynamic pricing, targeted discounts or "VIP pricing" on their website would be open to suits from Colorado residents The solution is to use reasonable efforts to block Colorado residents if you can’t comply with the law. That’s a tradeoff a group of people are allowed to make for themselves.

The problem is that a small business in Florida or Massachusetts that does 95% of their business in their own state may have no idea that this Colorado law exists until someone sues them over it.

We don't really want small companies to have to start blocking people in other states by default. That's not great for interstate competition.

Re: Colorado House passes bill to limit surveillance pricing and wage setting

#20

Post by irishcoffee »

adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #18
pnw wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Allowing private right of action means this will be weaponized by attorneys in the same way the ADA has. Just scanning the bill, any small business in the US using dynamic pricing, targeted discounts or "VIP pricing" on their website would be open to suits from Colorado residents. The definitions are extremely broad and there is no safe harbor for small companies either. Damages are also uncapped and apparently Color…

Sounds great! The theory behind capitalism only works if prices are transparent and goods are transferable. These sorts of "special discounts" are fundamentally harmful to the economy as a whole.

I can see how say, a roofing business might have a “VIP” sale during a slow season, such that a discounted contract is signed and money is exchanged in the future when the weather doesn’t prohibit the work.

I don’t think that is unreasonable.

Post reply on HN