Utah's Third Attempt To Regulate Keywords Fails

Eric Goldman writes "Earlier this month, we discussed HB 450, the Utah Legislature's third attempt to regulate keyword advertising after the past two efforts failed miserably. The latest attempt barely passed the Utah House, aided in part by a 'yes' vote from Representative Jennifer Seelig, who also happens to be a lobbyist-employee of 1-800 Contacts, the principal advocate of HB 450. Nevertheless, HB 450 died in the Utah Senate without a vote when the Utah Legislature adjourned last night. Despite the seeming good news, it would be surprising if the Utah Legislature didn't try a fourth time to regulate keyword advertising in a future session."

Comments

It sounds like

[Steve Franklin]

From what I can extract from the less than informative articles referenced, these bills attempt to protect Utah (read Mormon) companies from having to compete with out-of-state companies that provide the same goods and services. Something tells me this would eventually be shot down on constitutional grounds. I mean, imagine the state legislature of Maine trying to ban advertising for Coke because there's a Maine registered brand called Maine's Best Maple Cola (I'm just making this up).

But yes, they get elected and they think they have to DO SOMETHING. Lulz.

Re:But that's what government is for - to regulate

[Samschnooks]

Because we're all in a Globalized economy. No nation is an economic island anymore. The financial markets, especially, are so interlinked, I don't think it's possible to do business in only one economy.

A great book about it: The World Is Curved: Hidden Dangers to the Global Economy.

Re:Government prevents the few from harming the ma

[Steve Franklin]

[Nice mod of Marvin Kitman's old motto]

There have always been bubbles. Check out "tulipomania" on the web if you doubt this. The difference here is that the extent of the damage is much wider and that wider extent is a direct result of who knows how many hundreds of trillions of dollars of financial derivatives being traded off of any regulated exchange. Though you may be right in general about more unenforced regulations, in this particular case this global financial meltdown is a direct result of lack of regulation. Whether those regulations would have been properly enforced is anyone's guess. Looking at the Madoff case, I have to suspect they wouldn't have. Unfortunately, we will never know, because no one even tried, except for a few voices in the wilderness.

Re:But that's what government is for - to regulate

[commodore64_love]

You forgot Eastern Europe. It experienced a bubble similar to the U.S. housing market, with large investments from the west in various homes/companies that are now going bankrupt.

BTW - watch the EU government carefully. During the 30s the U.S. government made a huge power grab, taking-over tasks traditionally controlled by the state governments, so that Washington became the power. I expect the EU government to do the same thing - and you'll endup kowtowing to Brussels as your focus.

>>>Maybe it starts with corporate employees from grassroots up. If you work for a corporation, why do you allow all life on Earth to be exploited for your masters bidding? You can change things, you have free will, and a duty to us all.
>>>

That leads to getting fired. The employee-corporate relationship is a lot like serf-to-landlord. You do what you're told or you get removed, and then you have no way to feed yourself.