pool established pursuant to this section is subject to by D7OzTt

VIEWS: 29 PAGES: 141

									Submissions for any SSL docket should be sent to CSG at least eight weeks in advance of any scheduled
SSL meeting in order to be considered for the docket of that meeting. Submissions received after this will
typically be held for a later meeting. Anyone desiring an exception to this policy must contact the SSL
committee leadership and will be responsible for preparing and distributing to the SSL committee any
materials that are related to the docket submission in question. The status of any item on this docket is listed
as reported by the submitting state’s legislative Internet Web site or by telephone from state legislative
service agencies and legislative libraries.




                                       CSG COMMITTEE ON
                                  SUGGESTED STATE LEGISLATION

                                              2002 CYCLE
                                            DOCKET BOOK (C)

                                              (AS OF 06/26/01)




This docket and referenced legislation can be downloaded from http://www.csg.org.




                                               1
SSL OVERVIEW

The CSG Committee on Suggested State Legislation (SSL Committee) identifies timely and innovative
state legislation on behalf of the states. The items chosen by the SSL Committee are featured in annual
Suggested State Legislation volumes. SSL Committee members represent all regions of the country and
many areas of state government. Members include legislators, legislative staff, and other state government
officials.

Members from the SSL Committee also serve on an SSL Subcommittee on Scope and Agenda. The
subcommittee screens and refers legislation to the SSL Committee. The subcommittee serves as an
executive committee of the SSL Committee.

Only members of the Committee on Suggested State Legislation or its Subcommittee on Scope and Agenda
can vote on items that are brought before these committees, unless such items require further action by other
CSG committees.

The SSL Subcommittee on Scope and Agenda meets three times each year: December, April, and July or
August (at least two meetings are held along with CSG business meetings). The Committee on Suggested
State Legislation meets immediately after the third subcommittee meeting (e.g., the next day). The
members of the committee examine the proposals referred by the subcommittee and select the items that
will appear in the upcoming volume. The volume is typically published in December.

SSL Committee members, other state officials, and their staff, CSG Associates and CSG staff can submit
legislation directly to the SSL Program. The committee also considers legislation from other sources, but
only when that legislation is submitted through a state official. Other sources include public interest groups
and members of the corporate community who are not CSG Associates.

It takes approximately 210 bills or laws to fill the dockets of one, year-long SSL cycle. Items should be
submitted to CSG at least eight weeks in advance to be considered for placement on the docket of a
scheduled Subcommittee on Scope and Agenda meeting. Items submitted after this date are typically held
for a later meeting.

Legislation that is submitted to the subcommittee is either referred to the committee, deferred to the next
subcommittee meeting or next SSL Cycle, or rejected. Items that are referred to the committee are
recommended for inclusion in the upcoming volume, rejected, or in some cases, deferred until the next
year's cycle.

Committee members prefer to consider legislation that has been enacted into law by at least one state.
Legislation that addresses a single, specific topic is preferable to omnibus legislation that addresses a
general topic or references many disparate parts of a state code. Occasionally, committee members will
consider and adopt uniform or proposed "model" legislation from an organization, or an interstate compact.
In this case, the committee strongly prefers to examine state legislation that enacts the uniform or model
law, or compact.

In order to facilitate the selection and review process on any submitted legislation, it is particularly helpful
to include information on the status of the legislation, an enumeration of other states with similar
provisions, and any summaries or analyses of the legislation.



                                               2
SSL CRITERIA

Does the issue have national or regional significance?
Are fresh and innovative approaches available to address the issue?
Is the issue of sufficient complexity that a bill drafter would benefit from having a comprehensive draft
available?
Does the bill or Act represent a practical approach to the problem?
Does the bill or Act represent a comprehensive approach to the problem or is it tied to a narrow approach
that may have limited relevance for many states?
Is the structure of the bill or Act logically consistent?
Is the language and style of the bill or Act clear and unambiguous?

The word "Act" as used herein refers to both proposed and enacted legislation. Attempts are made to ensure
that items presented to committee members are the most recent versions. However, interested parties should
contact the originating state for the ultimate disposition in the state of any docket entry in question,
including substitute bills and amendments. Furthermore, the Committee on Suggested State Legislation
does not guarantee that entries presented on its dockets or in a Suggested State Legislation volume represent
the exact versions of those items as enacted into law, if applicable.




                                              3
PRESENTATION OF DOCKET ENTRIES

Docket ID#
Title
State/source
Bill/Act

Summary: [These are typically excerpted from bill digests, committee summaries, and related materials
which are contained in or accompany the legislation.]

Status - [Action taken on item in source state.]

Comment: [Contains references to other bills or information about the entry and issues the members should
consider in referring the entry for publication in SSL. Space may also be used to note reaction to an item,
instructions to staff, etc.]

Disposition of Entry: [Action taken on item by the committee(s).]

Scope: (Yr.)(A)(B)(C)
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff: (a, b, c, etc.)



Full: (Yr.)(D)
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff: (a, b, c, etc.)




*Item was deferred from the previous SSL cycle




                                              4
SSL DOCKET CATEGORIES

(01) Conservation and the Environment
(02) Hazardous Materials/Waste
(03) Energy
(04) Science & Technology
(05) Public, Occupational and Consumer Health and Safety
(06) Property, Land and Housing
(07) Growth Management
(08) Economic Development
(09) Business Regulation and Commercial Law
(10) Public Finance and Taxation
(11) Labor
(12) Public Utilities and Public Works
(13) State and Local Government
(14) Transportation
(15) Communications
(16) Elections
(17) Criminal Justice, the Courts and Corrections
(18) Public Assistance/Human Services
(19) Domestic Relations
(20) Education
(21) Health Care
(22) Culture, the Arts and Recreation
(23) Privacy
(24) Agriculture
(25) Consumer Protection




                                          5
ITEM NO. TITLE OF ITEM UNDER CONSIDERATION                               SOURCE ACTION

(01) CONSERVATION AND THE ENVIRONMENT
    1. 01-22C-01 GreenPrint Program                                      MD
    2. 01-22C-02 Commercial Passenger Vessel Environmental Compliance    AK
       Program

(02) HAZARDOUS MATERIALS/WASTE

(03) ENERGY
    3. 03-22C-01 Hydrogen Research and Development                       HI
    4. 03-22C-02 Energy Security and Reliability                         MN

(04) SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

(05) PUBLIC, OCCUPATIONAL AND CONSUMER HEALTH AND SAFETY
    5. 05-22A-02 Cellular 911 Calls                        CA
       (22A-b) See whether other states have similar laws.
       (22B-a) See whether other states have similar laws.
    6. 05-22B-02 Workers’ Compensation Pools               IL
       (22B-b) See whether other states have similar laws.
    7. 05-22C-01 Disclosing Information About Terrorism    WA

(06) PROPERTY, LAND AND HOUSING
    8. 06-22B-03 Building Inspections                                    GA
        (22B-c) See whether other states have similar laws.
    9. 06-22C-01 Leases – Physically Disabled People                     TN
    10. 06-22C-02 Graffiti                                               NV

(07) GROWTH MANAGEMENT

(08) ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

(09) BUSINESS REGULATION AND COMMERCIAL LAW
    11. 09-22B-01 Protected Cell Companies Act                           RI
        (22B-d) Get additional background information about this Act.
    12. 09-22B-05 Cyber Piracy                                           CA
        (22B-e) See whether other states have similar laws and whether
        there are court challenges to it.
    13. 09-22C-01 Cybersquatting                                         HI

(10) PUBLIC FINANCE AND TAXATION

(11) LABOR
    14. 11-22B-01 Employee Computer Records                              CA
    15. 11-22B-02 Telecommuting Incentives                               VA
        (22B-f) See whether other states have similar laws.
    16. 11-22C-01 Liability of Donated Labor                             WA


                                            6
(12) PUBLIC UTILITIES AND PUBLIC WORKS
    17. 12-22C-01 Interruption of Electric Utilities                             FL
    18. 12-22C-02 Natural Gas Marketers                                          GA

(13) STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT
    19. 13-22B-04 Statewide Infrastructure Protection                            AZ
    20. 13-22C-01 Government Information Privacy                                 MT

(14) TRANSPORTATION
    21. 14-22B-04 Motor Vehicle Accidents and Mobile Phones:                     NE
        A Rebuttable Presumption of Negligence if Using a Mobile Phone
        (22B-g) See whether other states have similar laws.
    22. 14-22C-01 Hybrid Vehicles and HOV Lanes                                  AZ

(15) COMMUNICATIONS
    23. *15-21B-04 Uniform Computer Information Transactions Statement           ULC
        (21B-h) Update this Statement with the latest ULC summary, strike the
        last paragraph, get more background information (Statement was revised
        for docket 21C).
        (21C-b) Get additional information about other states and update the
        Statement again (i.e., for the next SSL cycle).
        (22B-h) Update the ULC Statement, add Virginia's amended Act to
        the next docket or to the resource packet for the next meeting.
    24. 15-22C-01A Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act                 VA
    25. 15-22C-01B Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act                 VA
    26. 15-22C-01C Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act                 VA
    27. 15-22B-01 Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act                  MD

(16) ELECTIONS
    28. 16-22B-01D Internet Voting Pilot Program                                 MI
        (22B-i) Get additional legislation from other states about Internet
        voting; write a Note on Internet voting and include the "Special Focus
        on Internet Voting" article by the Center for the Study of Technology
        and Society in the Note.
    29. 16-22B-01E Absentee Ballots: Internet Voting                             MT
    30. 16-22C-01 Absentee Ballots: Internet Voting                              VA
    31. 16-22C-02 Internet Voting Note                                           Note
    32. 16-22B-02 Confidentiality of Elector Records                             WI
    33. 16-22C-03 Election Reform Statement                                      FL

(17) CRIMINAL JUSTICE, THE COURTS AND CORRECTIONS
    34. 17-22C-01 Structured Settlement Protection                               WA
    35. 17-22C-02 White Collar Crime Victim Protection                           FL
    36. 17-22C-03 Female Parity in Corrections                                   HI
    37. 17-22C-04 DNA Evidence – Post-conviction Review                          MD
    38. 17-22C-05 Search Warrants: Application by Video Conference               GA
    39. 17-22C-06 Wiretapping - Exceptions for Out-of-State Interception         MD
    40. 17-22C-07 Cyber Court                                                    MI


                                             7
(18) PUBLIC ASSISTANCE/HUMAN SERVICES

(19) DOMESTIC RELATIONS
    41. 19-22C-01 Gender Violence                                                 IL
    42. 19-22C-02 Family Protection                                               FL

(20) EDUCATION
    43. 20-22B-03 Professional Preparation of School Personnel Statement          KY
    44. 20-22B-05 Support Programs for Teachers/Annual Contracts                  ID
        (22B-k) Better define what this Act does, see whether other states have
        similar laws.
    45. 20-22C-01 Teacher Death Benefits                                          FL
    46. 20-22C-02 Professional Educator Liability Insurance                       FL
    47. 20-22C-03 Public-Private Partnership for School Maintenance and           HI
        Repair
    48. 20-22C-04 Hearing Aid Loan Bank Program                                   MD
    49. 20-22C-05 School Testing Irregularities                                   NV
    50. 20-22C-06 A Coordinated Approach by Public Schools to Prevent             TX
        Obesity and Certain Diseases.

(21) HEALTH CARE
    51. 21-22B-02 Joint Negotiations by Physicians and Dentists with Carriers     NJ
    52. 21-22B-07 Public Cord Tissue Bank                                         FL
        (22B-l) Limit future consideration of the legislation to Section 1
        of the Act.
    53. 21-22B-08 Nursing Facilities – Electronic Monitoring                      MD
        (22B-m) Update the committee on the status of this item, see
        whether other states have similar laws.
    54. 21-22C-01A Nursing Facilities – Electronic Monitoring                     OH
    55. 21-22C-01B Nursing Facilities – Electronic Monitoring                     NJ
    56. 21-22C-01C Nursing Facilities – Electronic Monitoring                     TX
    57. 21-22B-09 Prepaid Limited Health Service Organizations                    TN
        (22B-n) See whether other states have similar laws.
    58. 21-22C-02 Rural Health Access Pilot Program                               AR
    59. 21-22C-03 Prescription Drug Prices                                        ME
    60. 21-22C-04 Telepharmacy                                                    TX
    61. 21-22C-05 Internet Prescription Consumer Protection                       AR

(22) CULTURE, THE ARTS AND RECREATION
    62. 22-22B-01 Recreational Vehicle Rental Space                               AZ
    63. 22-22C-01 Liability of Extreme Sports Areas                               IN
    64. 22-22C-02 Uniform Athlete Agents Act                                      IN
    65. 22-22C-03 Cultural Trust                                                  NJ

(23) PRIVACY
    66. 23-22C-01 Autopsies and Sensitive Records: Privacy                        FL




                                             8
(24) AGRICULTURE
    67. 24-22A-01C Model Producer Protection Act                     Model
        (22A-j) Clarify whether this is a NAAG model law.
    68. 24-22B-01 Farmworker Family Wellness                         CA
    69. 24-22B-02 Agrichemical Remediation                           IA
    70. 24-22B-03 Agricultural Burning Reduction                     WA
    71. 24-22B-04 Soil Amendments and Agricultural Limings           CT
    72. 24-22C-01 Agriculture – U-Pick Products, Limited Liability   GA
    73. 24-22C-02 Farm Products – Liens and Foreclosure              NV

(25) CONSUMER PROTECTION
    74. 25-22A-02 Misrepresenting A Business Name or Location        IA
    75. 25-22B-01 Misrepresenting A Business Name or Location        IL
    76. 25-22B-02 Bottled Water Labeling                             CA
    77. 25-22B-03 Prepaid Calling Cards Rate Disclosure              CT
    78. 25-22C-01 Electronic Transactions Protection                 MD
    79. 25-22C-02 Credit Scores                                      CA




                                           9
01-22C-01 GreenPrint Program                                              MD

This Act establishes a GreenPrint Program in the state department of natural resources (DNR). The purpose
of the program is to create a statewide green infrastructure network by acquiring property and property
interests, including easements, in a manner that compliments existing conservation programs. The program
will be funded as provided in the state budget. With specified exceptions, the DNR may use program funds
to acquire real property interests in the network and provide grants to local governments and land trusts to
acquire real property interests in the network. The DNR must identify areas that form the green
infrastructure network, publish the results, and periodically review and update the identification of the
network. The DNR must submit plans for any purchase involving over $2 million to specified committees
of the General Assembly for review and comment. It must report on expenditures made through the
program to the Governor and the General Assembly by November 1 of each year. The DNR may adopt
regulations to implement the bill.

Submitted as:
Maryland
Chapter 570 of 2001
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             10
01-22C-02 Commercial Passenger Vessel Environmental Compliance            AK
Program

This Act provides for limitations on discharges of sewage and graywater from cruise ships. It establishes a
comprehensive registration, reporting, and monitoring program for cruise ships that covers wastewater,
solid waste and air emissions. This includes sampling, testing and reporting wastewater and air discharges
and permissible standards for such discharges. Compliance fees paid by the owners of commercial
passenger vessels are intended to allow the program to be self-sufficient.

Submitted as:
Alaska
HB 260 (CONFERENCE CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 260)
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                            11
03-22C-01 Hydrogen Research and Development                               HI

This bill establishes a program to research hydrogen as an energy resource in the state.

Submitted as:
Hawaii
SB 1435 SD 1
Status – enrolled to governor on 05/04/01, no further action reported as of 06/21/01

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             12
03-22C-02 Energy Security and Reliability                                    MN

This legislation establishes security and reliability as fundamental goals of the state’s energy and utility
policy. Energy security is defined as "ensuring that the state's energy sources are:
 diverse;
 to the extent feasible, produced in the state;
 environmentally sustainable;
 available to consumers at affordable and stable rates or prices; and
 above all, reliable."

Reliability is defined as ensuring that adequate resources and infrastructure are in place, and are planned
for, to ensure that energy services to Minnesota consumers remains dependable, efficient and secure.

To accomplish these goals, the legislation re-engineers the way that infrastructure is planned for in the state,
allowing public participation in utility planning procedures early in process and requiring the state to
conduct both long term comprehensive statewide resource planning (the "energy security blueprint"), and
planning for shorter term infrastructure needs (the state transmission plan).

In addition, the process for applying for and receiving infrastructure approvals is streamlined. Incentives for
conservation and renewable energy are provided for, as well as for high efficiency, low emission distributed
generation resources, such as fuel cells and micro-turbines. Customer protections and service standards are
updated.

Concerning the essential energy infrastructure, this Act:
 rewrites the Power Plant Siting Act
 provides for a State Transmission Plan
 reforms the Certificate of Need statute
 establishes a Reliability Administrator

Concerning distributed energy resources, this Act:
 makes changes to the state's Conservation Improvement Program
 provides for renewable energy goals and customer rate options
 requires the development of distributed generation interconnection standards
 requires investment in renewable and distributed generation facilities

The Act provides:
 residential customer protections;
 distribution reliability standards and authority;
 authority to form utility joint ventures; and
 a requirement that the state conduct comprehensive energy planning.

It also:
 requires an energy security blueprint and a state transmission plan;
 establishes position of reliability administrator;
 provides for essential energy infrastructure;
 modifies provisions for siting, routing, and determining the need for large electric power facilities;



                                              13
 regulates conservation expenditures by energy utilities and eliminating state pre-approval of
conservation plans by public utilities;
 encourage regulatory flexibility in supplying and obtaining energy;
 regulates interconnection of distributed utility resources; providing for safety and service standards
from distribution utilities;
 clarifies the state cold weather disconnection requirements;
 authorizes municipal utilities, municipal power agencies, cooperative utilities, and investor-owned
utilities to form joint ventures to provide utility services; and
 eliminates the requirement for individual utility resource plans.

Submitted as:
Minnesota
Chapter 212 of 2001
Status – enacted in 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                            14
05-22A-02 Cellular 911 Calls                                                CA

This Act enables 911 calls that are made from cell phones to be routed to call dispatch centers other than the
state highway patrol dispatch office, which had been the only point of dispatch prior to this Act. The law is
intended to save time connecting callers with the appropriate emergency personnel in their area. This Act
also prohibits cell phone companies from charging for 911 calls that are made on cell phones.

Submitted as:
California
Chapter 981 of 2000
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment: Per 22B-a, Alabama Act 98-338, a 1998 law on wireless 911 calls, is in the resource packet
for comparison.

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:
(22A-b) See whether other states have similar laws.
(22B-a) See whether other states have similar laws.


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             15
05-22B-02 Workers’ Compensation Pools                                        IL

This Act enables two or more employers with homogeneous risk characteristics or that are members of a
bona fide professional, commercial, industrial, or trade association, with homogenous risk characteristics to
pool their workers' compensation and employer's liability exposures.

Submitted as:
Illinois
SB 1658 (enrolled version)
Status - enacted as Public Act 91-0757 in 2000

Comment: Illinois legislative staff said this Illinois Act modifies a program that had been authorized for
more than 20 years but had only become operational in recent years.

Neither the National Council on Compensation Insurance staff nor the National Council of Self-Insurers
staff could definitively answer which states have similar laws to this Illinois Act or how common this type
of pooling is.

Arizona and Kansas statutes reference pooling workers’ compensation insurance. Their statutes are listed
below.

Arizona A.R.S. § 23-961.01. Self-insurance pools
A. Two or more employers, each of whom are engaged in similar industries, may enter into contracts to
establish a workers' compensation pool to provide for the payment and administration of workers'
compensation claims pursuant to this chapter. The members of each workers' compensation pool shall elect
a board of trustees to manage the workers' compensation pool established pursuant to this section. Each
member employer shall have been in business for at least five consecutive years before entering into a
contract to establish a workers' compensation pool. The total amount of gross workers' compensation
insurance premiums paid by the members of the pool in the year preceding the execution of the contract
must equal at least seven hundred fifty thousand dollars. The group of employers that makes up a workers'
compensation pool shall have been formed for a specific purpose, other than to engage in self-insurance,
before the formation of a workers' compensation pool. Employers may establish workers' compensation
pools pursuant to this section by one of the following means:
    1. On a cooperative or contract basis.
    2. Through the joint formation of a nonprofit corporation.
    3. By the execution of a trust agreement to carry out the provisions of this chapter directly by the
employers or by contracting with a third party.
B. A workers' compensation pool established pursuant to this section is subject to approval as a self-insurer
by the industrial commission pursuant to section 23-961, subsection A, paragraph 2. The commission shall
adopt rules as necessary to carry out the purposes of this section.
C. Workers' compensation pools established pursuant to this section are exempt from taxation under title
43.
D. Each agreement or contract shall provide that the members of a workers' compensation pool are jointly
and severally liable for the liabilities of the pool. If a member of a pool discontinues its membership in the
pool, that party shall be liable only for liabilities accruing prior to the discontinuation of its membership in
the pool.
E. As to self-insurance pools established under this section, no pool, employer within a pool, or agent of any
pool or employer within a pool may require an employee to be treated by or directed to any specific medical
provider subsequent to the employee's initial visit to treat an industrial injury or illness, except as may be

                                              16
required as part of an independent medical examination for an employee making a workers' compensation
claim.
F. The industrial commission shall adopt rules necessary for safeguarding the solvency of pools and
guaranteeing that injured workers receive benefits as required under this chapter. These rules shall include,
at a minimum, matters pertaining to classification and rating, loss reserves, investments, financial security
including minimum and combined premiums, combined net worth and other indicia necessary for
protection from insolvency, specific and aggregate excess insurance, group homogeneity and assessments
necessary for participation in and administration of the workers' compensation system.

Kansas KSA 44-581 - Group-funded workers compensation pools; requirements.
     (a) Five or more employers, regardless of domicile, who are members of the same bona fide trade,
merchant or professional association, regardless of domicile, which has been in existence for not less than
five years and who are engaged in the same, similar or closely related type of business may enter into
agreements to pool their liabilities for Kansas workers compensation benefits and employers' liability.
     (b) Five or more employers, regardless of domicile, who are members of the same bona fide trade,
merchant or professional association, regardless of domicile, which has been in existence for not less than
five years and who are engaged in dissimilar types of businesses for which the commissioner of insurance
finds an accurate prediction of loss can be made, may enter into agreements to pool their liabilities for
Kansas workers compensation benefits and employers' liability.
     (c) All such arrangements shall be known as group-funded workers compensation pools, which shall
not be deemed to be insurance or insurance companies and shall not be subject to the provisions of chapter
40 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated, except as otherwise provided herein.
     (d) For purposes of this section:
         (1) "Same, similar or closely related type of business" means, but is not limited to, a business in
which the principal payroll is in a manual classification or combination of classifications representing
occupations which contribute to an essential part of the end product or service which is the primary business
interest of the membership of the bona fide trade, merchant or professional association; and
         (2) “principal payroll" means not less than 51% of the total payroll for the preceding policy year or,
in the case of an employer who has no preceding full-year's payroll, not less than 51% of estimated annual
payroll; principal payroll or estimated annual payroll shall not include the annual payroll of those
employees set forth in the standard exceptions contained in the rules promulgated by the national council on
compensation insurance.

History: L. 1983, ch. 166, § 1; L. 1993, ch. 286, § 71; L. 1995, ch. 49, § 3; July 1.

Disposition: 05-22B-02

Scope: 22C                                                 Note to staff:(22B-b) See whether other states
( ) Refer to full Committee                                have similar laws.
( ) Defer consideration:                                   Full: 22D
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee                   ( ) Include in Volume
mtg.                                                       ( ) Defer consideration
    ( ) next SSL cycle                                     ( ) Reject
( ) Reject
                                                           Note to staff:




                                              17
05-22C-01 Disclosing Information About Terrorism                           WA

In 1999 the governor directed the state Emergency Management Council (EMC) to plan for and respond to
criminal terrorists’ incidents, including the use of explosive devices, cyberterrorism, and chemical,
biological or radiological attacks. As a result, public agencies across the state began conducting
vulnerability assessments and developing emergency response plans for incidents involving the domestic
use of chemical, biological, nuclear and radiological weapons, as well as domestic acts of terrorism
involving conventional weapons with catastrophic consequences.

The EMC asked the Legislature to exempt such plans from disclosure through the state Public Disclosure
Act. Accordingly, this Act provides that those portions of records of public agencies containing specific and
unique vulnerability assessments or response plans intended to prevent or mitigate criminal acts of
terrorism are exempt from public inspection and copying, if the public release has a substantial likelihood
of threatening public safety.

Submitted as:
Washington
Chapter 98, Laws of 2001
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             18
06-22B-03 Building Inspections                                             GA

This Act provides that, if a governing authority of a county or municipality cannot provide inspection
services within two business days of receiving a valid written request for inspection, then any person, firm,
or corporation engaged in a construction project which requires inspection can opt to retain, at its own
expense, a professional engineer to provide the required inspection.

Submitted as:
Georgia
HB 151 (as passed House and Senate)
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment: Per 22B-c, CSG contacted the Building Officials and Code Administrators International, Inc.
(BOCA), the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE), the National Academy of Building
Inspection Engineers (NABIE), the Georgia House Industry Committee and this Act’s sponsor. NSPE staff
said the practices authorized by this Act may be common among the states. According to BOCA and
NABIE staff, it is common for licensed engineers to inspect buildings on behalf of buyers and in addition to
inspections by government inspectors. However, the authority that is granted by this legislation to enable
engineers to determine code compliance in lieu of government inspections may be unique, as well as the
requirement that governments must make a an inspection within two business days after receiving a valid
request for inspection.

CSG found one similar law through Westlaw: Florida’s. It’s listed below.
Florida West F.S.A. S 471.045 - Professional engineers performing building code inspector duties
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person who is currently licensed under this chapter to
practice as a professional engineer may provide building code inspection services described in s.
468.603(6) and (7) to a local government or state agency upon its request, without being certified by the
Florida Building Code Administrators and Inspectors Board under part XII of chapter 468. When
performing these building code inspection services, the professional engineer is subject to the disciplinary
guidelines of this chapter and s. 468.621(1)(c)-(h). Any complaint processing, investigation, and discipline
that arise out of a professional engineer's performing building code inspection services shall be conducted
by the Board of Professional Engineers rather than the Florida Building Code Administrators and
Inspectors Board. A professional engineer may not perform plans review as an employee of a local
government upon any job that the professional engineer or the professional engineer's company designed.

History: Added by Laws 1998, c. 98-419, S 7, eff. Oct. 1, 1998. Amended by Laws 1999, c. 99-254, S 10,
eff. Oct. 1, 1999; Laws 2000, c. 2000-372, S 28, eff. July 1, 2000.

Disposition: 06-22B-03                                    (22B-c) See whether other states have similar
                                                          laws.
Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:                                  Full: 22D
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee                  ( ) Include in Volume
mtg.                                                      ( ) Defer consideration
    ( ) next SSL cycle                                    ( ) Reject
( ) Reject
Note to staff:                                            Note to staff:


                                             19
06-22C-01 Leases – Physically Disabled People                            TN

This Act enables physically disabled people to break certain leases without penalty if public housing
accommodations become available.

Submitted as:
Tennessee
Chapter 169 of 2001
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                            20
06-22C-02 Graffiti                                                        NV

This Act enables counties to pass ordinances to enable the counties to remove graffiti from private
residential property.

Submitted as:
Nevada
AB 571 (enrolled version)
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                            21
09-22B-01 Protected Cell Companies Act                                        RI

This Act facilitates economy and efficiency in funding the insurance obligations of domestic companies
through insurance securitization, and promotes generally the securitization of insurance obligations for the
purpose of increasing the sources and availability of capital and the stability of underwriting results of
domestic companies.

Submitted as:
Rhode Island
Chapter 22 of the 1999 Public Acts
Status - enacted into law in 1999

Comment: Per 22B-d, according to Robert Essen, NAIC staff:

    “Hurricane Andrew and the Northridge Earthquake served as warnings to the Property & Casualty
    Insurance industry that certain severe events could result in losses material to the overall capital and
    surplus of the industry. It was noted that the capital markets as a whole are very much larger, and would
    be more capable of absorbing such losses. Pioneering companies therefore began to "securitize" their
    catastrophe risk by issuing debt securities to the capital markets in return for an interest rate that would
    compensate the capital markets for the possibility of the securities defaulting.

    The default process was built in to the securities - if a pre-defined trigger event occurred (such as a
    hurricane or earthquake) the proceeds of the securities would be used to pay policyholders, and the debt
    holders would receive nothing. For various reasons, these types of securities have been attractive to the
    debt markets, but with the condition that they are issued in such a way that any bankruptcy of the
    issuing insurer would not result in the default of the debt securities absent the triggering event occurring
    i.e., the capital markets just want to deal with the risks relating to the security such as the likelihood of
    a hurricane with such and such a track and such and such a strength, not with the credit risks of the
    issuing insurer.

    Until recently, this end was achieved by issuing the securities through an offshore special purpose
    vehicle. The purpose of the protected cell legislation is to enable domestic U.S. insurers to issue such
    securitizations directly without having to access an offshore special purpose vehicle. A "protected cell"
    would be set up within the domestic insurer that would issue the securitization and hold the proceeds.
    The legislation would prevent those proceeds being used as part of the insolvent estate of the insurer in
    the event insolvency unless the triggering event had taken place. It should be noted that although many
    securitizations have related to catastrophic events, the market continues to develop and may not be
    limited in the future only to catastrophe coverages.

    Rhode Island’s Act is based upon an NAIC model. Generally, such laws provide a basis for a domestic
    insurer to create one or more “protected cells.” These “protected cells” isolate assets and liabilities
    related to an insurance securitization, and are protected from the insolvency of the rest of the insurer.
    Investors in insurance securitizations require this form of protection in order to invest at a reasonable
    rate in such securitizations. The creation of protected cells is intended to be a means to achieve more
    efficiency in conducting insurance securitizations, and to promote the ability of domestic insurers to
    take part in such transactions.

    They typically provide a basis for the creation of protected cells by a domestic insurer as one means of
    accessing alternative sources of capital and achieving the benefits of insurance securitization. Investors

                                               22
in fully funded insurance securitization transactions provide funds that are available to pay the insurer’s
insurance obligations or to repay the investors or both. The creation of protected cells is intended to be
a means to achieve more efficiency in conducting insurance securitizations.

Under the terms of the typical debt instrument underlying an insurance securitization transaction,
prepaid principal is repaid to the investor on a specified maturity date with interest, unless a trigger
event occurs. The insurance securitization proceeds secure both the protected cell company’s insurance
obligations if a trigger event occurs, as well as the protected cell company’s obligation to repay the
insurance securitization investors if a trigger event does not occur. Insurance securitization transactions
have been performed through alien companies in order to utilize efficiencies available to alien
companies that are not currently available to domestic companies. This Act creates more efficiency in
conducting insurance securitizations, allows domestic protected cell companies easier access to
alternative sources of capital, and promotes the benefits of insurance securitization generally.

Section By Section Analysis of Typical Protected Cell laws (based on NAIC model):

§ 1 Short Title – self explanatory.

§ 2 Purpose clause – see above.

§ 3 Definitions – self explanatory.

§ 4 Establishment of protected cells. This requires that each protected cell file an approved plan of
operation with the commissioner, that the assets and liabilities of the protected cell be kept separate and
identifiable from both the general account and other protected cells, and that the protected cell must be
created with assets at least equal to the protected cell’s liabilities. It also confirms that a protected cell is
not a separate legal entity.

§ 5 Use and Operation of Protected Cells. This section requires that protected cell assets and liabilities
may only arise out of the business of the protected cell, that investments of a protected cell are exempt
from concentration and other restrictions in the insurance code, and that protected cells may only
assume business from the general account and therefore may not directly issue contracts of insurance or
reinsurance. It also confirms that only fully funded securitizations are allowed in a protected cell, and
requires that they be indemnity triggered, unless the commissioner has adopted regulations regarding
non-indemnity triggered securitizations.

§ 6 Reach of Creditors and Other Claimants. This confirms that only protected cell creditors have
access to assets of the relevant protected cell, and that should those prove insufficient, then there is no
recourse to other assets of the company. Other creditors or claimants have no recourse to protected cell
assets. Additionally, protected cells are not subject to guaranty fund assessments or contributions.

§ 7 Conservation, Rehabilitation or Liquidation of Protected Cell Companies. This provides that the
receiver must comply with the provisions of this act when dealing with protected cell assets and
liabilities. Effectively, this prevents protected cell assets becoming part of the general estate of a
company.

§ 8 No Transaction of an Insurance Business. This section confirms that protected cell securitizations
are not deemed to be insurance or reinsurance contracts and therefore those persons involved in an


                                            23
    insurance securitization will not be deemed to be conducting potentially unlicensed insurance or
    reinsurance business solely by virtue of their involvement with an insurance securitization.

    § 9 Authority to Adopt Regulations. Provides the commissioner with authority to promulgate
    regulations necessary to effectuate the purposes of the Act.

    § 10 Effective date – self explanatory.”

According to NAIC staff, as of June 2001, Illinois, Iowa, Rhode Island and South Carolina have adopted
legislation that is similar to the NAIC model.

Disposition: 09-22B-01

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:
(22A-c) Check with NCOIL or the NAIC to see how many states have similar laws.
(22B-d) Get additional background information about this Act.


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                               24
09-22B-05 Cyber Piracy                                                        CA

This Act makes it unlawful for a person, with a bad faith intent, to register, traffic in, or use an Internet
domain name that is identical or confusingly similar to the personal name of another living person or
deceased personality. It exempts from liability domain-name registrars and registries.

Submitted as:
California
Chapter 218 of 2000
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment: Per 22B-e, a California legislative staff analysis of this law reports that:

    “Due to the lack of any regulatory control over domain name registration, an Internet phenomenon
    known as "cybersquatting" has become increasingly common in recent years. Cybersquatting involves
    the registration as domain names of well-known trademarks by non-trademark holders who then try to
    sell the names back to the trademark owners.

    Since domain name registrars do not check to see whether a domain name request is related to existing
    trademarks, it has been simple and inexpensive for any person to as domain names the marks of
    established companies. This prevents use of the domain name by the mark owners, who not
    infrequently have been willing to pay "ransom" in order to get "their names" back. Sporty's Farm v.
    Sportsman's Market (2nd Cir. 2000) 202 F3d 489.

    (In 1999) Congress passed the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (as part of PL 106-113 of
    1999). That bill provides that it is a violation of federal trademark and copyright law to register, traffic
    in, or use a domain name that is identical or confusingly similar to the personal name of another living
    person or deceased personality, with bad faith intent and without regard to the goods or services of the
    parties (see below). This California law tracks the existing prohibition against bad faith domain name
    registration.

    S.1948 Intellectual Property and Communications Omnibus Reform Act of 1999 (Introduced in the
    Senate), enacted as P.L. 106-113 (November 29, 1999).

    TITLE III--TRADEMARK CYBERPIRACY PREVENTION

       SEC. 3001. SHORT TITLE; REFERENCES.
          (a) SHORT TITLE- This title may be cited as the `Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act'.
          (b) REFERENCES TO THE TRADEMARK ACT OF 1946- Any reference in this title to the
    Trademark Act of 1946 shall be a reference to the Act entitled `An Act to provide for the registration
    and protection of trademarks used in commerce, to carry out the provisions of certain international
    conventions, and for other purposes', approved July 5, 1946 (15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq.).

       SEC. 3002. CYBERPIRACY PREVENTION.
           (a) IN GENERAL- Section 43 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (15 U.S.C. 1125) is amended by
    inserting at the end the following:
               (d)(1)



                                               25
              (A) A person shall be liable in a civil action by the owner of a mark, including a personal
name which is protected as a mark under this section, if, without regard to the goods or services of the
parties, that person--
                 `(i) has a bad faith intent to profit from that mark, including a personal name which is
protected as a mark under this section; and
                 `(ii) registers, traffics in, or uses a domain name that--
                     `(I) in the case of a mark that is distinctive at the time of registration of the domain
name, is identical or confusingly similar to that mark;
                     `(II) in the case of a famous mark that is famous at the time of registration of the
domain name, is identical or confusingly similar to or dilutive of that mark; or
                     `(III) is a trademark, word, or name protected by reason of section 706 of title 18,
United States Code, or section 220506 of title 36, United States Code.
              `(B)
                 (i) In determining whether a person has a bad faith intent described under subparagraph
(A), a court may consider factors such as, but not limited to--
                     `(I) the trademark or other intellectual property rights of the person, if any, in the
domain name;
                     `(II) the extent to which the domain name consists of the legal name of the person or
a name that is otherwise commonly used to identify that person;
                     `(III) the person's prior use, if any, of the domain name in connection with the bona
fide offering of any goods or services;
                     `(IV) the person's bona fide noncommercial or fair use of the mark in a site
accessible under the domain name;
                     `(V) the person's intent to divert consumers from the mark owner's online location to
a site accessible under the domain name that could harm the goodwill represented by the mark, either
for commercial gain or with the intent to tarnish or disparage the mark, by creating a likelihood of
confusion as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the site;
                     `(VI) the person's offer to transfer, sell, or otherwise assign the domain name to the
mark owner or any third party for financial gain without having used, or having an intent to use, the
domain name in the bona fide offering of any goods or services, or the person's prior conduct indicating
a pattern of such conduct;
                     `(VII) the person's provision of material and misleading false contact information
when applying for the registration of the domain name, the person's intentional failure to maintain
accurate contact information, or the person's prior conduct indicating a pattern of such conduct;
                     `(VII) the person's provision of material and misleading false contact information
when applying for the registration of the domain name, the person's intentional failure to maintain
accurate contact information, or the person's prior conduct indicating a pattern of such conduct;
                     `(VIII) the person's registration or acquisition of multiple domain names which the
person knows are identical or confusingly similar to marks of others that are distinctive at the time of
registration of such domain names, or dilutive of famous marks of others that are famous at the time of
registration of such domain names, without regard to the goods or services of the parties; and
                     `(IX) the extent to which the mark incorporated in the person's domain name
registration is or is not distinctive and famous within the meaning of subsection (c)(1) of section 43.
                 `(ii) Bad faith intent described under subparagraph (A) shall not be found in any case in
which the court determines that the person believed and had reasonable grounds to believe that the use
of the domain name was a fair use or otherwise lawful.
              `(C) In any civil action involving the registration, trafficking, or use of a domain name
under this paragraph, a court may order the forfeiture or cancellation of the domain name or the transfer
of the domain name to the owner of the mark.

                                           26
              `(D) A person shall be liable for using a domain name under subparagraph (A) only if that
person is the domain name registrant or that registrant's authorized licensee.
              `(E) As used in this paragraph, the term `traffics in' refers to transactions that include, but
are not limited to, sales, purchases, loans, pledges, licenses, exchanges of currency, and any other
transfer for consideration or receipt in exchange for consideration.
           `(2)
              (A) The owner of a mark may file an in rem civil action against a domain name in the
judicial district in which the domain name registrar, domain name registry, or other domain name
authority that registered or assigned the domain name is located if--
                  `(i) the domain name violates any right of the owner of a mark registered in the Patent
and Trademark Office, or protected under subsection (a) or (c); and
                  `(ii) the court finds that the owner--
                      `(I) is not able to obtain in personam jurisdiction over a person who would have been
a defendant in a civil action under paragraph (1); or
                      `(II) through due diligence was not able to find a person who would have been a
defendant in a civil action under paragraph (1) by--
                          `(aa) sending a notice of the alleged violation and intent to proceed under this
paragraph to the registrant of the domain name at the postal and e-mail address provided by the
registrant to the registrar; and
                          `(bb) publishing notice of the action as the court may direct promptly after filing
the action.
              `(B) The actions under subparagraph (A)(ii) shall constitute service of process.
              `(C) In an in rem action under this paragraph, a domain name shall be deemed to have its
situs in the judicial district in which--
                  `(i) the domain name registrar, registry, or other domain name authority that registered
or assigned the domain name is located; or
                  `(ii) documents sufficient to establish control and authority regarding the disposition of
the registration and use of the domain name are deposited with the court.
              `(D)
                  (i) The remedies in an in rem action under this paragraph shall be limited to a court
order for the forfeiture or cancellation of the domain name or the transfer of the domain name to the
owner of the mark. Upon receipt of written notification of a filed, stamped copy of a complaint filed by
the owner of a mark in a United States district court under this paragraph, the domain name registrar,
domain name registry, or other domain name authority shall--
                      `(I) expeditiously deposit with the court documents sufficient to establish the court's
control and authority regarding the disposition of the registration and use of the domain name to the
court; and
                      `(II) not transfer, suspend, or otherwise modify the domain name during the
pendency of the action, except upon order of the court.
                  `(ii) The domain name registrar or registry or other domain name authority shall not be
liable for injunctive or monetary relief under this paragraph except in the case of bad faith or reckless
disregard, which includes a willful failure to comply with any such court order.
           `(3) The civil action established under paragraph (1) and the in rem action established under
paragraph (2), and any remedy available under either such action, shall be in addition to any other civil
action or remedy otherwise applicable.
           `(4) The in rem jurisdiction established under paragraph (2) shall be in addition to any other
jurisdiction that otherwise exists, whether in rem or in personam.'



                                           27
       (b) CYBERPIRACY PROTECTIONS FOR INDIVIDUALS-
           (1) IN GENERAL-
              (A) CIVIL LIABILITY- Any person who registers a domain name that consists of the
name of another living person, or a name substantially and confusingly similar thereto, without that
person's consent, with the specific intent to profit from such name by selling the domain name for
financial gain to that person or any third party, shall be liable in a civil action by such person.
              (B) EXCEPTION- A person who in good faith registers a domain name consisting of the
name of another living person, or a name substantially and confusingly similar thereto, shall not be
liable under this paragraph if such name is used in, affiliated with, or related to a work of authorship
protected under title 17, United States Code, including a work made for hire as defined in section 101 of
title 17, United States Code, and if the person registering the domain name is the copyright owner or
licensee of the work, the person intends to sell the domain name in conjunction with the lawful
exploitation of the work, and such registration is not prohibited by a contract between the registrant and
the named person. The exception under this subparagraph shall apply only to a civil action brought
under paragraph (1) and shall in no manner limit the protections afforded under the Trademark Act of
1946 (15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq.) or other provision of Federal or State law.
           (2) REMEDIES- In any civil action brought under paragraph (1), a court may award
injunctive relief, including the forfeiture or cancellation of the domain name or the transfer of the
domain name to the plaintiff. The court may also, in its discretion, award costs and attorneys fees to the
prevailing party.
           (3) DEFINITION- In this subsection, the term `domain name' has the meaning given that term
in section 45 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (15 U.S.C. 1127).
           (4) EFFECTIVE DATE- This subsection shall apply to domain names registered on or after
the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 3003. DAMAGES AND REMEDIES.
       (a) REMEDIES IN CASES OF DOMAIN NAME PIRACY-
           (1) INJUNCTIONS- Section 34(a) of the Trademark Act of 1946 (15 U.S.C. 1116(a)) is
amended in the first sentence by striking `(a) or (c)' and inserting `(a), (c), or (d)'.
           (2) DAMAGES- Section 35(a) of the Trademark Act of 1946 (15 U.S.C. 1117(a)) is amended
in the first sentence by inserting `, (c), or (d)' after `section 43(a)'.
       (b) STATUTORY DAMAGES- Section 35 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (15 U.S.C. 1117) is
amended by adding at the end the following: `(d) In a case involving a violation of section 43(d)(1), the
plaintiff may elect, at any time before final judgment is rendered by the trial court, to recover, instead of
actual damages and profits, an award of statutory damages in the amount of not less than $1,000 and not
more than $100,000 per domain name, as the court considers just.'

   SEC. 3004. LIMITATION ON LIABILITY. Section 32(2) of the Trademark Act of 1946 (15 U.S.C.
1114) is amended-- (1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) by striking `under section 43(a)' and
inserting `under section 43(a) or (d)'; and
       (2) by redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (E) and inserting after subparagraph (C)
the following: ‘(D)
          (i)
              (I) A domain name registrar, a domain name registry, or other domain name registration
authority that takes any action described under clause (ii) affecting a domain name shall not be liable
for monetary relief or, except as provided in subclause (II), for injunctive relief, to any person for such
action, regardless of whether the name is finally determined to infringe or dilute the mark.



                                           28
              `(II) A domain name registrar, domain name registry, or other domain name registration
authority described in subclause (I) may be subject to injunctive relief only if such registrar, registry, or
other registration authority has--
                  `(aa) not expeditiously deposited with a court, in which an action has been filed
regarding the disposition of the domain name, documents sufficient for the court to establish the court's
control and authority regarding the disposition of the registration and use of the domain name;
                  `(bb) transferred, suspended, or otherwise modified the domain name during the
pendency of the action, except upon order of the court; or
                  `(cc) willfully failed to comply with any such court order.
          `(ii) An action referred to under clause (i)(I) is any action of refusing to register, removing
from registration, transferring, temporarily disabling, or permanently canceling a domain name--
              `(I) in compliance with a court order under section 43(d); or
              `(II) in the implementation of a reasonable policy by such registrar, registry, or authority
prohibiting the registration of a domain name that is identical to, confusingly similar to, or dilutive of
another's mark.
          `(iii) A domain name registrar, a domain name registry, or other domain name registration
authority shall not be liable for damages under this section for the registration or maintenance of a
domain name for another absent a showing of bad faith intent to profit from such registration or
maintenance of the domain name.
          `(iv) If a registrar, registry, or other registration authority takes an action described under
clause (ii) based on a knowing and material misrepresentation by any other person that a domain name
is identical to, confusingly similar to, or dilutive of a mark, the person making the knowing and material
misrepresentation shall be liable for any damages, including costs and attorney's fees, incurred by the
domain name registrant as a result of such action. The court may also grant injunctive relief to the
domain name registrant, including the reactivation of the domain name or the transfer of the domain
name to the domain name registrant.
          `(v) A domain name registrant whose domain name has been suspended, disabled, or
transferred under a policy described under clause (ii)(II) may, upon notice to the mark owner, file a civil
action to establish that the registration or use of the domain name by such registrant is not unlawful
under this Act. The court may grant injunctive relief to the domain name registrant, including the
reactivation of the domain name or transfer of the domain name to the domain name registrant.'

SEC. 3005. DEFINITIONS. Section 45 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (15 U.S.C. 1127) is amended by
inserting after the undesignated paragraph defining the term `counterfeit' the following: `The term
`domain name' means any alphanumeric designation which is registered with or assigned by any
domain name registrar, domain name registry, or other domain name registration authority as part of an
electronic address on the Internet. `The term `Internet' has the meaning given that term in section
230(f)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230(f)(1)).'

SEC. 3006. STUDY ON ABUSIVE DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATIONS INVOLVING
PERSONAL NAMES.
      (a) IN GENERAL- Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Patent and Trademark Office and the Federal Election
Commission, shall conduct a study and report to Congress with recommendations on guidelines and
procedures for resolving disputes involving the registration or use by a person of a domain name that
includes the personal name of another person, in whole or in part, or a name confusingly similar thereto,
including consideration of and recommendations for--



                                           29
           (1) protecting personal names from registration by another person as a second level domain
name for purposes of selling or otherwise transferring such domain name to such other person or any
third party for financial gain;
           (2) protecting individuals from bad faith uses of their personal names as second level domain
names by others with malicious intent to harm the reputation of the individual or the goodwill
associated with that individual's name;
           (3) protecting consumers from the registration and use of domain names that include personal
names in the second level domain in manners which are intended or are likely to confuse or deceive the
public as to the affiliation, connection, or association of the domain name registrant, or a site accessible
under the domain name, with such other person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of the
goods, services, or commercial activities of the domain name registrant;
           (4) protecting the public from registration of domain names that include the personal names of
government officials, official candidates, and potential official candidates for Federal, State, or local
political office in the United States, and the use of such domain names in a manner that disrupts the
electoral process or the public's ability to access accurate and reliable information regarding such
individuals;
           (5) existing remedies, whether under State law or otherwise, and the extent to which such
remedies are sufficient to address the considerations described in paragraphs (1) through (4); and
           (6) the guidelines, procedures, and policies of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names
and Numbers and the extent to which they address the considerations described in paragraphs (1)
through (4).
       (b) GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES- The Secretary of Commerce shall, under its
Memorandum of Understanding with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers,
collaborate to develop guidelines and procedures for resolving disputes involving the registration or use
by a person of a domain name that includes the personal name of another person, in whole or in
part, or a name confusingly similar thereto.

    SEC. 3007. HISTORIC PRESERVATION. Section 101(a)(1)(A) of the National Historic
Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470a(a)(1)(A)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
`Notwithstanding section 43(c) of the Act entitled `An Act to provide for the registration and protection
of trademarks used in commerce, to carry out the provisions of certain international conventions, and
for other purposes', approved July 5, 1946 (commonly known as the `Trademark Act of 1946' (15
U.S.C. 1125(c))), buildings and structures on or eligible for inclusion on the National Register of
Historic Places (either individually or as part of a historic district), or designated as an individual
landmark or as a contributing building in a historic district by a unit of State or local government, may
retain the name historically associated with the building or structure.'

   SEC. 3008. SAVINGS CLAUSE.

The U.S. 2nd District Court of Appeals decided a case of cyber squatting. In the Sporty's Farm
decision, the court gave a very good description and background of the Internet, domain names, and
cyber piracy, which follows.

The Internet (or 'World Wide Web') is a network of computers that allows a user to gain access to
information stored on any other computer on the network. Information on the Internet is lodged on files
called web pages, which can include printed matter, sound, pictures, and links to other web pages. An
Internet user can move from one page to another with just the click of a mouse. (A mouse is a device
that allows a computer user to issue commands by moving a marker across the screen and then clicking
on the symbol, word, or icon that represents the particular information that the user wants to access.)

                                          30
Web pages are designated by an address called a domain name. A domain name consists of two parts: a
top level domain and a secondary level domain. The top level domain is the domain name's suffix.
Currently, the Internet is divided primarily into six top level domains:
(1) .edu for educational institutions;
(2) .org for non-governmental and non-commercial organizations;
(3) .gov for governmental entities;
(4) .net for networks;
(5) .com for commercial users, and
(6) a nation-specific domain, which is .us in the United States.
The secondary level domain is the remainder of the address, and can consist of combinations of letters,
numbers, and some typographical symbols. To take a simple example, in the domain name 'cnn.com,'
cnn (Cable News Network) represents the secondary level domain and .com represents the top level
domain. Each domain name is unique.

Over the last few years, the commercial side of the Internet has grown rapidly. Web pages are now used
by companies to provide information about their products in a much more detailed fashion than can be
done through a standard advertisement. Moreover, many consumers and businesses now order goods
and services directly from company web pages. Given that Internet sales are paperless and have lower
transaction costs than other types of retail sales, the commercial potential of this technology is vast.

For consumers to buy things or gather information on the Internet, they need an easy way to find
particular companies or brand names. The most common method of locating an unknown domain
name is simply to type in the company name or logo with the suffix .com. If this proves unsuccessful,
then Internet users turn to a device called a search engine. A search engine will find all web pages on
the Internet with a particular word or phrase.

Given the current state of search engine technology, that search will often produce a list of hundreds of
web sites through which the user must sort in order to find what he or she is looking for. As a result,
companies strongly prefer that their domain name be comprised of the company or brand trademark and
the suffix .com.

Until recently, domain names with the .com top level domain could only be obtained from Network
Solutions, Inc. ("NSI"). Now other registrars may also assign them. But all these registrars grant such
names primarily on a first-come, first-serve basis upon payment of a small registration fee. They do not
generally inquire into whether a given domain name request matches a trademark held by someone
other than the person requesting the name." Sporty's Farm v. Sportsman's Market (2nd Cir. 2000) 202
F3d 489.

Related federal legislation

As the court in Sporty's Farm, Supra, recognized, "Cybersquatters have become increasingly
sophisticated as the case law has developed and now take the necessary precautions to insulate
themselves from liability. For example, many cybersquatters are now careful to no longer offer the
domain name for sale in any manner that could implicate liability under existing trademark dilution
case law. In response, Congress amended the Trademark Act of 1946, creating a specific federal
remedy for cybersquatting.

New 15 U.S.C. @ 1125(d)(1)(A) reads:

                                         31
           A person shall be liable in a civil action by the owner of a mark, including a personal name which
    is protected as a mark under this section, if, without regard to the goods or services of the parties, that
    person:
           1. Has a bad faith intent to profit from that mark, including a personal name which is protected as
    a mark under this section; and,
           2. Registers, traffics in, or uses a domain name that:
             A. In the case of a mark that is distinctive at the time of registration of the domain name, is
    identical or confusingly similar to that mark;
             B. In the case of a famous mark that is famous at the time of registration of the domain name,
    is identical or confusingly similar to or dilutive of that mark;

    The federal Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act also contains a non-exclusive list of factors
    which the courts are directed to consider in finding bad faith. This list is nearly identical to that
    contained in this California law, and the author's stated intention in creation of the list is the same.

    The report of the federal Senate Judiciary Committee explains the federal legislative intent, which may
    also be helpful for the California courts in understanding this California law.

    The Committee intends the prohibited 'use' of a domain name to describe the use of a domain name by
    the domain name registrant, with the bad-faith intent to profit from the goodwill of the mark of another.
    The concept of 'use' does not extend to uses of the domain name made by those other than the domain
    name registrant, such as the person who includes the domain name as a hypertext link on a web page or
    as part of a directory of Internet addresses.

    In addition, the California law balances the property interests of trademark owners with the interests of
    Internet users who would make fair use of others' marks or otherwise engage in protected speech online
    by inclusion of a list of factors, each of which reflect indicators that, in practice, commonly suggest
    bad-faith intent or a lack thereof in cybersquatting cases. Courts must ultimately weigh the facts of each
    case and make a determination based on those facts whether or not the defendant registered, trafficked
    in, or used the domain name with bad-faith intent to profit from the goodwill of the mark of another.”

At least one state, Hawaii, has introduced similar legislation to California’s Act. Hawaii’s bill is on the
docket. CSG staff did not find cases that challenge the legality of this California law or the Hawaii law, but
there are many cases that challenge domain name registrations.

Disposition: 09-22B-05

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:
(22B-e) See whether other states have similar laws and whether there are court challenges to it.


Full: 22D

                                              32
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                          33
09-22C-01 Cybersquatting                                                   HI

This bill prohibits the bad faith registration of domain names on the Internet and establishes penalties for
doing so.

Submitted as:
Hawaii SB 1276 SD 1, HD 1
Status – enrolled to governor on 05/04/01, no further action reported as of 06/21/01

Comment: This bill was added to the docket per 22B-e.

Disposition: 09-22C-01

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             34
11-22B-01 Employee Computer Records                                          CA

This bill prohibits an employer from secretly monitoring the electronic mail or other computer records
generated by an employee.

Submitted as:
California
SB 147 (as introduced)
Status –
LAST HIST. ACT. DATE: 06/11/2001
LAST HIST. ACTION : To Com. on L. & E.
COMM. LOCATION : ASM LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT
HEARING DATE : 07/11/2001

Comment: Per 22A-g, CSG staff checked Westlaw and with the ACLU, the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse,
Senator Bowen’s office (the bill’s sponsor), and the Electronic Privacy Information Center. An ACLU
article says the only limit to employer surveillance comes from the federal Electronic Communications
Privacy Act of 1986, which prohibits employers from deliberately eavesdropping on personal conversations
that employees have at work. That Act apparently does not address electronic mail. However, a 1998
Connecticut law that addresses electronic monitoring could be interpreted to cover electronic mail. It is
listed below. Excepting Connecticut, CSG did not find states with laws similar to this California bill.
Additional information about workplace privacy is in the resource packet.

Connecticut General Statutes Annotated § 3 1-48d: Employers engaged in electronic monitoring required
to give prior notice to employees.

Exceptions. Civil penalty.
(a) As used in this section:
    (1) “Employer” means any person, firm or corporation, including the state and any political
subdivision of the state which has employees;

    (2) “Employee” means any person who performs services for an employer in a business of the
employer, if the employer has the right to control and direct the person as to (A) the result to be
accomplished by the services, and (B) the details and means by which such result is accomplished; and

    (3) “Electronic monitoring” means the collection of information on an employer’s premises
concerning employees’ activities or communications by any means other than direct observation, including
the use of a computer, telephone, wire, radio, camera, electromagnetic, photoelectronic or photo-optical
systems, but not including the collection of information (A) for security purposes in common areas of the
employer’s premises which are held out for use by the public, or (B) which is prohibited under state or
federal law.

(b) ( 1) Except as provided in subdivision (2) of this subsection, each employer who engages in any type of
electronic monitoring shall give prior written notice to all employees who may be affected, informing them
of the types of monitoring which may occur. Each employer shall post, in a conspicuous place which is
readily available for viewing by its employees, a notice concerning the types of electronic monitoring
which the employer may engage in. Such posting shall constitute such prior written notice.
     (2) When (A) an employer has reasonable grounds to believe that employees are engaged in conduct
which (i) violates the law, (ii) violates the legal rights of the employer or the employer’s employees, or (iii)

                                              35
creates a hostile workplace environment, and (B) electronic monitoring may produce evidence of this
misconduct, the employer may conduct monitoring without giving prior written notice.

(c) The Labor Commissioner may levy a civil penalty against any person that the commissioner finds to be
in violation of subsection (b) of this section, after a hearing conducted in accordance with sections 4-1 76e
to 4-184, inclusive. The maximum civil penalty shall be five hundred dollars for the first offense, one
thousand dollars for the second offense and three thousand dollars for the third and each subsequent
offense.

(d) The provisions of this section shall not apply to a criminal investigation. Any information obtained in
the course of a criminal investigation through the use of electronic monitoring may be used in a disciplinary
proceeding against an employee.

Disposition: 11-22B-01

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:
(22A-g) See whether other states have similar laws.




                                             36
11-22B-02 Telecommuting Incentives                                           VA

This bill requires the state secretary of technology to develop policies, standards, specifications and
guidelines for information technology concerning telecommuting by the employees of public bodies. The
state department of technology planning is directed to develop a comprehensive statewide plan for
telecommuting by public employees, and the department of human resource management is directed to
establish an incentive program for telecommuting. The head of each public body, in consultation with the
department of technology planning, is directed to develop a telecommuting policy to maximize
telecommuting without diminished employee work performance.

The state department of technology planning is also directed too:
 advise and assist private sectors in developing employee telecommuting,
 develop incentives for private sectors to utilize employee telecommuting, and
 evaluate the status, effectiveness, and utilization of employee telecommuting, in both public and private
sectors, and report its findings to the secretary of technology, who in turn is directed to annually report such
findings to the general assembly.

Submitted as:
Virginia
Chapter 405 of 2001
Status – enacted in 2001

Comment: Per 22B-f, Florida, Connecticut and Oregon have enacted laws concerning telecommuting by
state employees.

Florida: 2000 Florida Statutes – F.S.A. § 110.171: State employee telecommuting program.
       (1) As used in this section, the term:
            (a) "Agency" means any official, officer, commission, board, authority, council, committee, or
        department of state government.
           (b) "Department" means the Department of Management Services.
           (c) "Telecommuting" means a work arrangement whereby selected state employees are
       allowed to perform the normal duties and responsibilities of their positions, through the use of
       computers or telecommunications, at home or another place apart from the employees' usual
       place of work.
       (2) The department shall:
           (a) Establish and coordinate the state employee telecommuting program and administer this
       section.
           (b) Appoint a statewide telecommuting coordinator to provide technical assistance to state
       agencies and to promote telecommuting in state government.
           (c) Identify state employees who are participating in a telecommuting program and their job
       classifications through the state personnel payroll information subsystem created under s.
       110.116.
       (3) By October 1, 1994, each state agency shall identify and maintain a current listing of the
       job classifications and positions that the agency considers appropriate for telecommuting.
       Agencies that adopt a state employee telecommuting program must:
           (a) Give equal consideration to career service and exempt positions in their selection of
       employees to participate in the telecommuting program.
           (b) Provide that an employee's participation in a telecommuting program will not adversely
       affect eligibility for advancement or any other employment rights or benefits.

                                              37
             (c) Provide that participation by an employee in a telecommuting program is voluntary, and
        that the employee may elect to cease to participate in a telecommuting program at any time.
             (d) Adopt provisions to allow for the termination of an employee's participation in the program
         if the employee's continued participation would not be in the best interests of the agency.
             (e) Provide that an employee is not currently under a performance improvement plan in order
        to participate in the program.
             (f) Ensure that employees participating in the program are subject to the same rules
        regarding attendance, leave, performance reviews, and separation action as are other
        employees.
             (g) Establish the reasonable conditions that the agency plans to impose in order to ensure
        the appropriate use and maintenance of any equipment or items provided for use at a
        participating employee's home or other place apart from the employee's usual place of work,
        including the installation and maintenance of any telephone equipment and ongoing
        communications costs at the telecommuting site which is to be used for official use only.
             (h) Prohibit state maintenance of an employee's personal equipment used in telecommuting,
        including any liability for personal equipment and costs for personal utility expenses associated
        with telecommuting.
             (i) Describe the security controls that the agency considers appropriate.
             (j) Provide that employees are covered by workers' compensation under chapter 440, when
        performing official duties at an alternate worksite, such as the home.
             (k) Prohibit employees engaged in a telecommuting program from conducting face-to-face
        state business at the homesite.
             (l) Require a written agreement that specifies the terms and conditions of telecommuting,
        which includes verification by the employee that the home office provides work space that is
        free of safety and fire hazards, together with an agreement which holds the state harmless
        against any and all claims, excluding workers' compensation claims, resulting from an
        employee working in the home office, and which must be signed and agreed to by the
        telecommuter and the supervisor.

History.--ss. 2, 8, ch. 90-291; s. 29, ch. 92-279; s. 55, ch. 92-326; ss. 1, 3, ch. 94-113; s. 10, ch. 96-399; s. 1,
ch. 98-31

Connecticut: Chapter 67, Sec. 5-248i of Connecticut’s State Personnel Act reads:
(a) The Commissioner of Administrative Services may develop and implement guidelines, in cooperation
with interested employee organizations, as defined in subsection (d) of section 5-270, authorizing
telecommuting and work-at-home programs for state employees where such arrangements are determined
to be cost effective.
(b) Any employee of a state agency may be authorized to participate in a telecommuting or work-at-home
assignment with the approval of his appointing authority and with the approval of the Commissioner of
Administrative Services. Approval of such assignment may be granted only where it is determined to be
cost effective. Any assignment shall be on a temporary basis only, for a period not to exceed six months and
may be extended as necessary.
(c) The Commissioner of Administrative Services shall report annually to the joint standing committee of
the General Assembly having cognizance of matters relating to labor and public employees as to the extent
of use by employees as provided pursuant to subsections (a) and (b) of this section.
(P.A. 96-168, S. 20−22, 34.)

History: P.A. 96-168 effective July 1, 1996.


                                                38
Oregon: 283.550 Telecommuting; state policy; agencies to adopt written policies; biennial report.
(1) As used in this section:
     (a) “State agency” means any state office, department, division, bureau, board and commission,
whether in the executive, legislative or judicial branch.
     (b) “Telecommute” means to work from the employee's home or from an office near the employee's
home, rather than from the principal place of employment.
(2) It is the policy of the State of Oregon to encourage state agencies to allow employees to telecommute
when there are opportunities for improved employee performance, reduced commuting miles or agency
savings.
(3) Each state agency shall adopt a written policy that:
     (a) Defines specific criteria and procedures for telecommuting;
     (b) Is applied consistently throughout the agency; and
     (c) Requires the agency, in exercising its discretion, to consider an employee request to telecommute in
relation to the agency's operating and customer needs.
(4) Each state agency that has an electronic bulletin board, home page or similar means of communication
shall post the policy adopted under subsection (3) of this section on the bulletin board, home page or similar
site.
(5) The Oregon Department of Administrative Services, in consultation with the Office of Energy, shall
provide a biennial report to the Joint Committee on Technology, or a similar committee of the Legislative
Assembly, containing at least the following:
     (a) The number of employees telecommuting;
     (b) The number of trips, miles and hours of travel time saved annually;
     (c) A summary of efforts made by the state agency to promote and encourage telecommuting;
     (d) An evaluation of the effectiveness of efforts to encourage employees to telecommute; and
     (e) Such other matters as may be requested by the committee. [1997 c.311 s.1]

Note: 283.550 was enacted into law by the Legislative Assembly but was not added to or made a part of
ORS chapter 283 or any series therein by legislative action.

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:
(22B-f) See whether other states have similar laws.


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject
Note to staff:



                                             39
11-22C-01 Liability of Donated Labor                                      WA

This Act establishes criteria for public entities to follow when seeking volunteers on community
improvement projects and for determining a contractor's industrial insurance liability when labor is donated
for such a project.

Submitted as:
Washington
Chapter 138, Laws of 2001
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             40
12-22C-01 Interruption of Electric Utilities                                  FL

Currently, in Florida there is neither a law requiring uninterrupted electric service nor a law providing
immunity for interrupting electric service. The potential for liability of an electric utility for an intentional
interruption of electric service is uncertain. The bill gives immunity to the good-faith compliance by an
electric utility with a law enforcement or judicial order to interrupt electric service for the purpose of aiding
law enforcement personnel in the performance of their duties, so long as the utility and its personnel
exercise reasonable care in their actions.

Submitted as:
Florida
SB 408 (enrolled version)
Status – enacted into law as Chapter 165 of 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                               41
12-22C-02 Natural Gas Marketers                                            GA

This Act amends state law to:
 provide that a retail customer shall be authorized to change marketers at least once a year without
    incurring any service charge relating to such change to an alternative marketer;
 limit the amount of deposit that a marketer may require from a retail customer;
 provide for refunds of deposits under certain conditions; to require the Public Service Commission to
have published at least quarterly in newspapers throughout the state a summary of the price per therm and
any other amounts charged to retail customers by each marketer operating in the state and any additional
information which the commission deems appropriate to assist customers in making decisions regarding
choice of a marketer; to authorize the Public Service Commission to adopt rules and regulations relating to
pricing information applicable to gas marketers and billing practices and customer services of such
marketers;
 provide other billing requirements for marketers;
 change the provisions relating to temporary directives;
 authorize said commission to impose temporary directives on marketers under certain conditions;
 provide that any marketer which willfully violates certain provisions of law or any duly promulgated
rules or regulations issued under such laws or which fails, neglects, or refuses to comply with any order of
the Public Service Commission after notice thereof shall be liable for any penalties authorized under state
law;
 provide that in any case where there is a dispute between a marketer and a retail customer concerning
    the amount of a gas bill, the marketer shall be required to confer by telephone or some other verifiable
    means with the retail customer to attempt to resolve such dispute;
 prohibit a marketer from reporting the name of a retail customer to any consumer reporting agency until
    the marketer has conferred with the retail customer and has complied in all respects with certain
    applicable laws and regulations or has obtained a judgment against the retail customer;
 provide that whenever a marketer discovers or has called to its attention a billing error or other mistake
    acknowledged or admitted to by the marketer and resulting in an overpayment by a retail customer,
    such marketer shall be required automatically and immediately to provide a credit or refund of the
    amount of the overpayment to the customer;
 prohibit a marketer from requiring a retail customer to whom it owes a credit or refund to submit in
    writing a request for such credit or refund before the marketer complies with the provisions of this Act;
 change the provisions relating to universal service funds;
 provide for additional purposes for such a fund; and to
 provide for priority of payments from such fund for assistance to low-income customers.

Submitted as:
Georgia
SB 217
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment:




                                             42
Disposition: 12-22C-02

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                      43
13-22B-04 Statewide Infrastructure Protection                                 AZ

This bill and its amendments:
 requires the state national guard to organize a Joint Combined National Guard Computer Emergency
Response Team charged with protecting state guard computer networks;
 states that the Response Team enter into a memorandum of agreement with the United States
Department of Defense Computer Emergency Response Team for the purpose of sharing information
pertaining to issues of threat and vulnerability;
 provides that the Response Team shall adopt rules for the implementation of strategies to protect the
state’s physical and cyber infrastructure;
 establishes the Statewide Infrastructure Protection Center (SIPC), under the state director of emergency
management, which is charged with protecting the state’s physical and cyber infrastructure;
 provides that the SIPC shall:
     1. gather intelligence on threats to the state’s infrastructure;
     2. establish policies in relation to potential or real attacks on the state’s critical infrastructure as well
         as providing guidance for reconstitution efforts;
     3. develop an infrastructure security awareness program in conjunction with the private sector that
         focuses improving alerts in the case of an attack and potential safeguards that may be implemented;
     4. work with state agencies to develop best practice policies with regard to assurance for physical and
         cyber agency infrastructure;
     5. coordinate with the state National Guard Computer Emergency Response Team, through a
         memorandum of agreement, for the sharing of information relating to threat and vulnerability data;
     6. adopt rules relating to the protection of physical and cyber infrastructure;
     7. submit an annual report to the governor, the director of the government information technology
         agency, the president of the senate, the speaker of the house, the chairman of the senate government
         committee and the chairman of the house committee on energy utilities and technology outlining
         the sipc’s plan for protecting the state’s physical and cyber infrastructure;
 establishes the Computer Emergency Response Team under the direction of the director of the
government information technology agency;
 states that the response team must work with the SIPC to provide protection for the state’s information
infrastructure;
 adds that the response team must:
     1. as part of an awareness campaign, establish a program for information assurance simulations;
     2. develop an infrastructure security awareness program in conjunction with the private sector that
         focuses improving alerts in the case of an attack and potential safeguards that may be implemented;
     3. work with state agencies to develop best practice policies with regard to assurance for physical and
         cyber agency infrastructure;
     4. make recommendations to federal, state and local entities charged with information assurance on
         how to effectively work together;
     5. coordinate with the state National Guard Computer Emergency Response Team, through a
         memorandum of agreement, for the sharing of information relating to threat and vulnerability data;
     6. adopt rules necessary for the implementation of information assurance procedures;
     7. submit an annual report to the governor, the director of the government information technology
         agency, the president of the senate, the speaker of the house, the chairman of the senate government
         committee and the chairman of the house committee on energy utilities and technology outlining
         the SIPC’s plan for protecting the state’s physical and cyber infrastructure;
 requires the state adjutant general to organize the Computer Emergency Response Team;



                                               44
 allows the state department of public safety to investigate incidents relating to attacks or threats to
physical or information infrastructure;
 allows the State Infrastructure Protection Center (SIPC) and the Computer Emergency Response Team
(CERT) to coordinate with political subdivisions of the state for the purpose of a statewide information
assurance alertness campaign;
 states that the CERT must provide a clearinghouse for gathering information on information
technology vulnerability as well as to serve as statewide assessment and response entity; and
 provides a means for the state to respond to threats and or attacks on the state’s information

Submitted as:
Arizona
HB 2324 (as amended)
Status - The language in this bill was stricken. The Senate version of this bill, Senate Bill 1123, passed the
legislature but was vetoed by the governor on May 8, 2001.

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             45
13-22C-01 Government Information Privacy                                   MT

This Act requires governmental entities that provide an Internet Web site to provide notice of the entities'
information practices and prohibits collecting personally identifiable information unless the Web site
operator complies with certain provisions.

Submitted as:
Montana
HB 281 (enrolled version)
Status - enacted into law as Chapter 219 of 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             46
14-22B-04 Motor Vehicle Accidents and Mobile Phones:                        NE
A Rebuttable Presumption of Negligence if Using A Mobile Phone

This bill creates a rebuttable presumption of negligence if a driver is involved in a car accident while
simultaneously using a mobile telephone. Drivers of emergency vehicles, such as ambulances, fire
department vehicles, or police vehicles, would not be affected by this bill.

Submitted as:
Nebraska
LB 42 (as introduced)
Status - pending in committee as of June 7, 2001

Comment: Per 22B-g, Nebraska Senate Judiciary Committee legal staff and this bill’s sponsor’s staff
believe that Nebraska is the only state that has introduced this legislation. CSG did not find similar bills
through a search of Westlaw.

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:
(22B-g) See whether other states have similar laws.


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                              47
14-22C-01 Hybrid Vehicles and HOV Lanes                                   AZ

Pending federal approval to the state department of transportation, this Act would permit vehicles that use
hybrid fuel technology to use high occupancy vehicle lanes in the state.

Submitted as:
Arizona
Chapter 168 of 2001
Status – enacted into law in 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                            48
*15-21B-04 Uniform Computer Information Transactions Statement

The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws promulgated the Uniform Computer
Information Transactions Act (UCITA) in 1999. This act provides a comprehensive set of rules for
licensing computer information, whether computer software or other clearly identified forms of computer
information. Computerized databases and computerized music are other examples of computer information
that would be subject to UCITA. It would also govern access contracts to sites containing computer
information, whether on or off the Internet. UCITA would also apply to storage devices such as disks and
CDs that exist only to hold computer information. Other kinds of goods which contain computer
information as a material part of the subject matter of a transaction may also be made subject to UCITA by
express reference in a contract. Otherwise, other laws would apply, such as the laws of sales or leases.
UCITA would not govern contracts, even though they may be licensing contracts, for the traditional
distribution of movies, books, periodicals, newspapers, or the like. Also, a transaction for the creation of a
motion picture or a transaction with a free-lance contractor for news reporting, even though computer
information is dominantly involved, is not governed by UCITA.

Why is there a need for licensing contracts, rather than sale contracts for computer information? Computer
information is peculiarly vulnerable to dissipation of its value by copying. The genius of computers is their
ability to retain and copy information. Copies of information look just like their originals. In fact,
everything is a copy. There are no true originals. Copies can be duplicated in huge numbers and
disseminated to millions of users in times measured in less than seconds. Therefore, those who invest
capital, intellectual effort and labor into the creation of valuable computer information may lose the
economic value of their products in seconds. Without the ability to control copying and dissemination of
computer information, vendors risk losing everything. The risk is so great that without licensing, the
development of computer information products could become uneconomical and the great economic
benefit of computer information products could be lost.

The term “copy” is, in fact, defined in UCITA as the “medium on which information is fixed on a temporary
or permanent basis and from which it can be perceived, reproduced, used, or communicated, either directly
or with the aid of a machine or device.” Transfer of a copy is the basis of a licensing transaction. UCITA
clearly separates transfer of a copy from transfer of ownership of computer information or informational
rights. A licensee’s rights are not dependent upon transfer of title to computer information or informational
rights, although a license contract may expressly transfer title to computer information or informational
rights and/or title to a copy.

A licensing contract involves transferring a copy of computer information, such as software to use in a
computer, from a vendor (called licensor) to a recipient (called licensee). A license may also grant
informational rights to the licensee. Informational rights include any intellectual property rights derived
from copyright, patents and the like, but also all other rights in information that any other law provides to a
person that allows control of the information or restriction on the use of the information by other people.
The difference between a licensing contract and a sale contract is that the license generally contains
restrictions on use and transfer of the computer information by the licensee during the life of the contract. A
breach of express restrictions on use and transfer in the contract provides a remedy to the licensor.

Licensing of information is the standard of the computer information business today. The bulk of vendors
license their computer information products. UCITA, therefore, does not originate licensing contracts.
UCITA was developed to provide basic, recognizable default rules for the existing licensing activity that
goes on and that expands as commerce in computer information expands. That expansion is the primary
source of economic development in the United States and is projected to be the economic mainstay of the

                                              49
United States for the foreseeable future. UCITA, therefore, is responding to existing economic activity and
a mode of contract upon which the computer information industry has come to rely. Firming up the law and
establishing some certainty with respect to the rules that apply, and that apply uniformly, is the modest goal
of UCITA. It is not a radical, destabilizing proposal. It is familiar law adapted to ongoing economic
activity that can use stable, predictable law that otherwise does not now exist.

For the most part, the rules governing computer information contracts in UCITA are default rules. This
means that they may be waived or varied by contract, and that in almost all cases the terms of a contract will
prevail over a contrary rule in UCITA. Rules generally relating to fairness of the contract process are not
default rules, and cannot be disclaimed by contract. Included in the rules that may not be disclaimed are the
obligations of good faith, diligence, and reasonableness; limitations on enforcement imposed by
unconscionability and fundamental public policy; and any standard of care prescribed in UCITA. Express
rules for consumers also may not generally be disclaimed.

UCITA’s rules govern licensing of contracts for computer information and informational rights from
formation through final performance, including remedies if there is a breach of contract. Included in
UCITA are rules for warranties, both implied and express, and rules pertaining to risk of loss in a computer
information transaction. Most of the rules in UCITA are the traditional and familiar rules of contract from
the law of sales and from the common law, but adapted to the special nature of computer information
licensing contracts. Freedom of contract is a dominating underlying policy for UCITA, exactly as that
principle is the foundation for the law of commercial transactions, generally, and exactly as that law has
served all commercial transactions in the United States and has contributed to the economic growth and
health of the United States.

Although a license under UCITA may transfer informational rights, UCITA is not fundamentally rooted in
intellectual property law. A license under UCITA is simply a commercial contract, dependent wholly on
the parties’ ability to enter into a normal, commercial contract, just as a contract of sale or lease is simply
and wholly a commercial contract. However, UCITA may not be used to vary or extend intellectual
property rights, and expressly recognizes preemption by copyright, patent, or other federal intellectual
property law in Section 105(b).

Like the law of sales and leases, in general, the right to contract is constrained by principles of
unconscionability, good faith and fair dealing, UCITA has an additional restraint, an express power for a
court to deny enforcement of a provision in a licensing contract that violates fundamental public policy.
This public policy defense is unique in UCITA. An essential purpose of this defense is to give courts some
latitude in reconciling commercial licensing law with the principles of intellectual property law. Most
intellectual property law is federal, and UCITA expressly recognizes the preemptive effect of that federal
law. But the public policy defense gives courts an additional power to consider intellectual property
principles purely within the context of commercial law.

These are some highlights of UCITA:
1. Mass-market license. Traditionally, contract formation contemplates some negotiation and arms-length
give and take between contracting parties. Commercial contract law has abandoned this image of
contracting activity as the only image. Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code has long had rules
governing contracts that do not form in the traditional image, and has legitimized form contracts for sales of
goods for nearly half-a-century. The mass-market license is an electronic form contract for computer
information licensing, exactly as there have been form contracts for the sales of goods for a very long time.
The difference is that a mass-market license is often presented with the package for the computer
information found in retail stores, and, more importantly as electronic commerce grows, as part of the

                                              50
transfer of computer information, electronically, from computer to computer. Whether called
“shrink-wrap” or “click-wrap,” these are mass-market licenses. UCITA treats mass-market licenses
differently from negotiated licenses. A mass-market license is not enforceable against the licensee unless
the terms to be enforced are readily available to the licensee and until the licensee has had a appropriate
time to review them. If, upon review, the licensee does not like the license contract or any part of it, the
copy of the computer information may be returned to the vendor for a refund, plus reasonable expenses for
making a rightful return and compensation for damages to a processing system by the removal of the
information from that system. This right of return may not be waived or disclaimed in a contract. Nowhere
else in the commercial law is there such a no-fault return policy for rejecting or repudiating a contract.

2. Warranties of license are incorporated into UCITA, based on the warranty provisions for sale of goods
under Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code. But computer information requires special implied
warranties. One is the warranty of compatibility of computer systems under Section 405(b). The licensor
has an implied warranty, if the licensee is relying upon the licensor for skill and judgment in selecting
components of a computer system, that the components will function together as a system. Implied
warranties may be disclaimed. Disclaimers in mass-market contracts must be conspicuous. Any
affirmation of fact or promise made by a licensor as part of the basis of the bargain, becomes an express
warranty of the licensor.

3. There are special rules for communication of computer information in electronic form. Since these
transactions are almost all electronic, and faceless, it is necessary to have rules governing the attribution of
electronic signatures, and the accuracy of electronic messages. Part 2, Subpart B is largely devoted to these
communications rules. The term “authenticate” is the basis for these rules. A signature or its electronic
equivalent is the basic means of authentication under UCITA. That “authentication” is attributed to the
person whose intentional act that “authentication” is. A party relying upon that authentication has the
burden of establishing attribution, which may be shown in any manner, including evidence of the efficacy
of any “attribution procedure” used in the communication. An “attribution procedure” is any procedure that
provides greater assurance than a simple transmission of information that the “authentication” is that of the
party to which it is attributed. There are both simple and complex attribution procedures available for
identifying the person who sends an electronic communication, and people may choose the procedures that
suit their particular transactions.

Attribution procedures may have impact on message content in an electronic communication. If a
procedure is in place to detect errors or changes in the message communicated, a party that conforms to the
procedure is not bound by an error or change that results because the other party does not conform to the
procedure. There is a special rule for consumers. Consumers who make errors while entering automated
transactions are not bound by the unintended erroneous message, so long as the consumer notifies the other
party of the error promptly after it is identified, properly returns the computer information received and has
not obtained value or benefit from using the information.

4. An “access contract” is a contract to enter the information system (read computer) of another to obtain
information, or use that information system for specific purposes. Most current computer users have access
contracts, if for no other reason than to use the Internet. UCITA governs these contracts with special rules
relating to rights of access in Section 611.

UCITA also governs support contracts, and service contracts for the correction of performance problems.
No licensor of information is required to provide such contracts (computer software support services are
common), but if it does, it is subject to the express terms of the contract, or if silent, to what is “reasonable
in light of ordinary standards of the business, trade, or industry...”

                                               51
5. In Section 816, UCITA places restrictions on a licensor’s authority to disable computer information
subject to a license and in use by a licensee for breach of contract. The remedy is not available unless the
licensee has manifested assent to the specific part of the licensing contract that permits exercise of the
remedy. There must be notice to the licensee at least 15 days prior to the exercise of the remedy. This
notice gives the licensee the opportunity to cure the breach. The licensor may not exercise the remedy if it
knows that exercise “will result in substantial injury or harm to the public health or safety or grave harm to
the public interest substantially affecting third parties not involved in the dispute” (between licensor and
licensee). The conditions for exercise of the remedy in Section 816 may not be waived or varied by
contract.

In 2000, the ULC amended UCITA Section 103(b)(2); Section 103(d)(2)(A) and (B); Section 103(f)(1) and
(2); Section 103(g); and new Section 216. These amendments included a number of styling and
clarification amendments as well as amendments required to be ratified by the Conference that were part of
a discussion with the following associations: Motion Picture Association of America, Magazine Publishers
of American, Newspaper Association of America, National Cable Television Association, National
Association of Broadcasters, and the Recording Industry Association of America. Five of these
associations had concerns about UCITA and in lengthy discussions, these amendments were worked out as
a package and with the adoption of these amendments by the Conference, these associations formally in
writing have withdrawn their opposition to the enactment of UCITA.

Amendments to Section 102(a)(39)(A) and (B); Section 103(d)(2):

While most transactions that involve the relationship between the insured and the insurer would be covered
by either the financial services transactions exclusion or excluded by the definitions applicable to the scope
of the Act, the state insurance commissioners requested clarity that transactions of similar type subject to
similar state regulatory authority were clearly excluded.

Amendments to Section 103(d)(7)(A) and (B); Section 112(g)

This second group of amendments were worked out with telecommunications industry and under these
changes they have agreed to support enactment of UCITA. The changes do not alter the substantive policy
of the Act and the substance was already discussed in the Comments.

Amendment to Section 104(1)

This is merely a clarification of the intent to include statutory rules and adds clarity in light of discussion in
several States.

Amendment to Section 816

These amendments clarify the limitations on electronic self-help. The prohibition for mass-market
transactions more clearly states a result that was the most likely effect of the existing limitations in the
section. The addition to subsection (d) is a non-substantive clarification the inclusion of which was
indicated by discussion in the various States.

In January 2001, the ULC Executive Committee approved amendments to Sections 605 and 816 of UCITA.
Sections 605 and 816 are intended to act in harmony. Section 605(f) was intended to make clear that the
procedural limitations and safeguards of Section 816 in the event of a breach cannot be avoided by reliance

                                               52
on Section 605. In the JCOTS (Joint Commission on Technology and Science, Virginia) Study, there was
concern that the language might be exploited so as to not accomplish this purpose. Accordingly, changes
were made to the definition of "automatic restraint" to clearly state that it "prevents" a breach; and Section
605(f) now states more clearly that in the event of a possible simultaneous breach and prevention of a
breach, under (b)(4), Section 816 applies unless the affirmative acts are within (i) and (ii). This change of
wording was carefully and extensively examined by all interested groups and the JCOTS staff to
accomplish the stated purpose. The acceptance of the amendments will result in substantial added support
from retail and financial services industries.

The amendments to Section 816 clarify what is a "wrongful use" of electronic self-help (Section 816(c));
remove an ambiguity as to the two kinds of harm that are prohibited by striking the word "grave" (Section
816(g)(1)); and clarify that the repossession of a tangible copy is permissible without breach of peace or
the use of electronic self-help (Section 816(j)). These changes will increase support for U.C.I.T.A.

The ULC will consider final approval to the amendments to Sections 605 and 816 in the summer of 2001.




                                             53
 Comment: Per 22B-h, CSG updated the UCITA Statement with sections summarizing ULC
 amendments in 2000 and amendments that were approved by the ULC Executive Committee in
 January 2001. The 2001 amendments will be given final consideration by the ULC in the summer of
 2001. The updated sections in the statement are italicized. The language of the amendments is listed
 below.

 UNIFORM COMPUTER INFORMATION AMENDMENTS TO TRANSACTIONS ACT AS
 APPROVED BY THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM STATE
 LAWS AUGUST 3, 2000

 SECTION 102. DEFINITIONS.
 (a) In this [Act]:
      (1) “Access contract” means a contract to obtain by electronic means access to, or information from, an
 information processing system of another person, or the equivalent of such access.
      (2) “Access material” means any information or material, such as a document, address, or access code,
 that is necessary to obtain authorized access to information or control or possession of a copy.
      (3) “Aggrieved party” means a party entitled to a remedy for breach of contract.
      (4) “Agreement” means the bargain of the parties in fact as found in their language or by implication
 from other circumstances, including course of performance, course of dealing, and usage of trade as
 provided in this [Act].
      (5) “Attribution procedure” means a procedure to verify that an electronic authentication, display,
 message, record, or performance is that of a particular person or to detect changes or errors in information.
 The term includes a procedure that requires the use of algorithms or other codes, identifying words or
 numbers, encryption, or callback or other acknowledgment.
      (6) “Authenticate” means:
           (A) to sign; or
           (B) with the intent to sign a record, otherwise to execute or adopt an electronic symbol, sound,
message, or process referring to, attached to, included in, or logically associated or linked with, that record.
      (7) “Automated transaction” means a transaction in which a contract is formed in whole or part by
 electronic actions of one or both parties which are not previously reviewed by an individual in the ordinary
 course.
      (8) “Cancellation” means the ending of a contract by a party because of breach of contract by another
 party.
      (9) “Computer” means an electronic device that accepts information in digital or similar form and
 manipulates it for a result based on a sequence of instructions.
      (10) “Computer information” means information in electronic form which is obtained from or through
 the use of a computer or which is in a form capable of being processed by a computer. The term includes a
 copy of the information and any documentation or packaging associated with the copy.
      (11) “Computer information transaction” means an agreement or the performance of it to create,
 modify, transfer, or license computer information or informational rights in computer information. The
 term includes a support contract under Section 612. The term does not include a transaction merely because
 the parties’ agreement provides that their communications about the transaction will be in the form of
 computer information.
      (12) “Computer program” means a set of statements or instructions to be used directly or indirectly in a
 computer to bring about a certain result. The term does not include separately identifiable informational
 content.
      (13) “Consequential damages” resulting from breach of contract includes (i) any loss resulting from
 general or particular requirements and needs of which the breaching party at the time of contracting had
 reason to know and which could not reasonably be prevented and (ii) any injury to an individual or damage

                                               54
to property other than the subject matter of the transaction proximately resulting from breach of warranty.
The term does not include direct damages or incidental damages.
     (14) “Conspicuous,” with reference to a term, means so written, displayed, or presented that a
reasonable person against which it is to operate ought to have noticed it. A term in an electronic record
intended to evoke a response by an electronic agent is conspicuous if it is presented in a form that would
enable a reasonably configured electronic agent to take it into account or react to it without review of the
record by an individual. Conspicuous terms include the following:
         (A) with respect to a person:
              (i) a heading in capitals in a size equal to or greater than, or in contrasting type, font, or color to,
the surrounding text;
              (ii) language in the body of a record or display in larger or other contrasting type, font, or color
or set off from the surrounding text by symbols or other marks that draw attention to the language; and
              (iii) a term prominently referenced in an electronic record or display which is readily accessible
or reviewable from the record or display; and
         (B) with respect to a person or an electronic agent, a term or reference to a term that is so placed in
a record or display that the person or electronic agent cannot proceed without taking action with respect to
the particular term or reference.
     (15) “Consumer” means an individual who is a licensee of information or informational rights that the
individual at the time of contracting intended to be used primarily for personal, family, or household
purposes. The term does not include an individual who is a licensee primarily for professional or
commercial purposes, including agriculture, business management, and investment management other than
management of the individual’s personal or family investments.
     (16) “Consumer contract” means a contract between a merchant licensor and a consumer.
     (17) “Contract” means the total legal obligation resulting from the parties’ agreement as affected by
this [Act] and other applicable law.
     (18) “Contract fee” means the price, fee, rent, or royalty payable in a contract under this [Act] or any
part of the amount payable.
     (19) “Contractual use term” means an enforceable term that defines or limits the use, disclosure of, or
access to licensed information or informational rights, including a term that defines the scope of a license.
     (20) “Copy” means the medium on which information is fixed on a temporary or permanent basis and
from which it can be perceived, reproduced, used, or communicated, either directly or with the aid of a
machine or device.
     (21) “Course of dealing” means a sequence of previous conduct between the parties to a particular
transaction which establishes a common basis of understanding for interpreting their expressions and other
conduct.
     (22) “Course of performance” means repeated performances, under a contract that involves repeated
occasions for performance, which are accepted or acquiesced in without objection by a party having
knowledge of the nature of the performance and an opportunity to object to it.
     (23) “Court” includes an arbitration or other dispute-resolution forum if the parties have agreed to use
of that forum or its use is required by law.
     (24) “Delivery,” with respect to a copy, means the voluntary physical or electronic transfer of
possession or control.
     (25) “Direct damages” means compensation for losses measured by Section 808(b)(1) or 809(a)(1).
The term does not include consequential damages or incidental damages.
     (26) “Electronic” means relating to technology having electrical, digital, magnetic, wireless, optical,
electromagnetic, or similar capabilities.
     (27) “Electronic agent” means a computer program, or electronic or other automated means, used by a
person independently to initiate an action, or to respond to electronic messages or performances, on the


                                                 55
person’s behalf without review or action by an individual at the time of the action or response to the
message or performance.
     (28) “Electronic message” means a record or display that is stored, generated, or transmitted by
electronic means for the purpose of communication to another person or electronic agent.
     (29) “Financial accommodation contract” means an agreement under which a person extends a
financial accommodation to a licensee and which does not create a security interest governed by [Article 9
of the Uniform Commercial Code]. The agreement may be in any form, including a license or lease.
     (30) “Financial services transaction” means an agreement that provides for, or a transaction that is, or
entails access to, use, transfer, clearance, settlement, or processing of:
         (A) a deposit, loan, funds, or monetary value represented in electronic form and stored or capable
of storage by electronic means and retrievable and transferable by electronic means, or other right to
payment to or from a person;
         (B) an instrument or other item;
         (C) a payment order, credit card transaction, debit card transaction, funds transfer, automated
clearing house transfer, or similar wholesale or retail transfer of funds;
         (D) a letter of credit, document of title, financial asset, investment property, or similar asset held in
a fiduciary or agency capacity; or
         (E) related identifying, verifying, access-enabling, authorizing, or monitoring information.
     (31) “Financier” means a person that provides a financial accommodation to a licensee under a
financial accommodation contract and either (i) becomes a licensee for the purpose of transferring or
sublicensing the license to the party to which the financial accommodation is provided or (ii) obtains a
contractual right under the financial accommodation contract to preclude the licensee’s use of the
information or informational rights under a license in the event of breach of the financial accommodation
contract. The term does not include a person that selects, creates, or supplies the information that is the
subject of the license, owns the informational rights in the information, or provides support for,
modifications to, or maintenance of the information.
     (32) “Good faith” means honesty in fact and the observance of reasonable commercial standards of fair
dealing.
     (33) “Goods” means all things that are movable at the time relevant to the computer information
transaction. The term includes the unborn young of animals, growing crops, and other identified things to
be severed from realty which are covered by [Section 2-107 of the Uniform Commercial Code]. The term
does not include computer information, money, the subject matter of foreign exchange transactions,
documents, letters of credit, letter-of-credit rights, instruments, investment property, accounts, chattel
paper, deposit accounts, or general intangibles.
     (34) “Incidental damages” resulting from breach of contract:
         (A) means compensation for any commercially reasonable charges, expenses, or commissions
reasonably incurred by an aggrieved party with respect to:
             (i) inspection, receipt, transmission, transportation, care, or custody of identified copies or
information that is the subject of the breach;
             (ii) stopping delivery, shipment, or transmission;
             (iii) effecting cover or retransfer of copies or information after the breach;
             (iv) other efforts after the breach to minimize or avoid loss resulting from the breach; and
             (v) matters otherwise incident to the breach; and
         (B) does not include consequential damages or direct damages.
     (35) “Information” means data, text, images, sounds, mask works, or computer programs, including
collections and compilations of them.
     (36) “Information processing system” means an electronic system for creating, generating, sending,
receiving, storing, displaying, or processing information.


                                               56
     (37) “Informational content” means information that is intended to be communicated to or perceived
by an individual in the ordinary use of the information, or the equivalent of that information.
     (38) “Informational rights” include all rights in information created under laws governing patents,
copyrights, mask works, trade secrets, trademarks, publicity rights, or any other law that gives a person,
independently of contract, a right to control or preclude another person’s use of or access to the information
on the basis of the rights holder’s interest in the information.
     (39) “Insurance services transaction” means an agreement between the insurer and the insured that
provides for, or a transaction that is, or entails access to, use, transfer, clearance, settlement, or processing
of:
         (A) an insurance policy, contract, or certificate; or
         (B) a right to payment under an insurance policy, contract, or certificate.
(39) (40) “Knowledge,” with respect to a fact, means actual knowledge of the fact.
(40) (41) “License” means a contract that authorizes access to, or use, distribution, performance,
modification, or reproduction of, information or informational rights, but expressly limits the access or uses
authorized or expressly grants fewer than all rights in the information, whether or not the transferee has title
to a licensed copy. The term includes an access contract, a lease of a computer program, and a consignment
of a copy. The term does not include a reservation or creation of a security interest to the extent the interest
is governed by [Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code].
(41) (42) “Licensee” means a person entitled by agreement to acquire or exercise rights in, or to have
access to or use of, computer information under an agreement to which this [Act] applies. A licensor is not
a licensee with respect to rights reserved to it under the agreement.
(42) (43) “Licensor” means a person obligated by agreement to transfer or create rights in, or to give access
to or use of, computer information or informational rights in it under an agreement to which this [Act]
applies. Between the provider of access and a provider of the informational content to be accessed, the
provider of content is the licensor. In an exchange of information or informational rights, each party is a
licensor with respect to the information, informational rights, or access it gives.
(43) (44) “Mass-market license” means a standard form used in a mass-market transaction.
(44) (45) “Mass-market transaction” means a transaction that is:
         (A) a consumer contract; or
         (B) any other transaction with an end-user licensee if:
             (i) the transaction is for information or informational rights directed to the general public as a
whole, including consumers, under substantially the same terms for the same information;
             (ii) the licensee acquires the information or informational rights in a retail transaction under
terms and in a quantity consistent with an ordinary transaction in a retail market; and
             (iii) the transaction is not:
                   (I) a contract for redistribution or for public performance or public display of a copyrighted
work;
                 (II) a transaction in which the information is customized or otherwise specially prepared by
the licensor for the licensee, other than minor customization using a capability of the information intended
for that purpose;
                   (III) a site license; or
                   (IV) an access contract.
(45) (46) “Merchant” means a person:
         (A) that deals in information or informational rights of the kind involved in the transaction;
         (B) that by the person’s occupation holds itself out as having knowledge or skill peculiar to the
relevant aspect of the business practices or information involved in the transaction; or
         (C) to which the knowledge or skill peculiar to the practices or information involved in the
transaction may be attributed by the person’s employment of an agent or broker or other intermediary that
by its occupation holds itself out as having the knowledge or skill.

                                               57
 (46) (47) “Nonexclusive license” means a license that does not preclude the licensor from transferring to
other licensees the same information, informational rights, or contractual rights within the same scope. The
term includes a consignment of a copy.
(47) (48) “Notice” of a fact means knowledge of the fact, receipt of notification of the fact, or reason to
know the fact exists.
(48) (49) “Notify,” or “give notice,” means to take such steps as may be reasonably required to inform the
other person in the ordinary course, whether or not the other person actually comes to know of it.
(49) (50) “Party” means a person that engages in a transaction or makes an agreement under this [Act].
(50) (51) “Person” means an individual, corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, limited
liability company, association, joint venture, governmental subdivision, instrumentality, or agency, public
corporation, or any other legal or commercial entity.
(51) (52) “Published informational content” means informational content prepared for or made available to
recipients generally, or to a class of recipients, in substantially the same form. The term does not include
informational content that is:
          (A) customized for a particular recipient by one or more individuals acting as or on behalf of the
licensor, using judgment or expertise; or
          (B) provided in a special relationship of reliance between the provider and the recipient.
(52) (53) “Receipt” means:
          (A) with respect to a copy, taking delivery; or
          (B) with respect to a notice:
              (i) coming to a person’s attention; or
              (ii) being delivered to and available at a location or system designated by agreement for that
purpose or, in the absence of an agreed location or system:
                   (I) being delivered at the person’s residence, or the person’s place of business through
which the contract was made, or at any other place held out by the person as a place for receipt of
communications of the kind; or
                   (II) in the case of an electronic notice, coming into existence in an information processing
system or at an address in that system in a form capable of being processed by or perceived from a system of
that type by a recipient, if the recipient uses, or otherwise has designated or holds out, that place or system
for receipt of notices of the kind to be given and the sender does not know that the notice cannot be accessed
from that place.
(53) (54) “Receive” means to take receipt.
(54) (55) “Record” means information that is inscribed on a tangible medium or that is stored in an
electronic or other medium and is retrievable in perceivable form.
(55) (56) “Release” means an agreement by a party not to object to, or exercise any rights or pursue any
remedies to limit, the use of information or informational rights which agreement does not require an
affirmative act by the party to enable or support the other party’s use of the information or informational
rights. The term includes a waiver of informational rights.
(56) (57) “Return,” with respect to a record containing contractual terms that were rejected, refers only to
the computer information and means:
          (A) in the case of a licensee that rejects a record regarding a single information product transferred
for a single contract fee, a right to reimbursement of the contract fee paid from the person to which it was
paid or from another person that offers to reimburse that fee, on:
              (i) submission of proof of purchase; and
                        (ii) proper redelivery of the computer information and all copies within a reasonable
time after initial delivery of the information to the licensee;
          (B) in the case of a licensee that rejects a record regarding an information product provided as part
of multiple information products integrated into and transferred as a bundled whole but retaining their
separate identity:

                                              58
             (i) a right to reimbursement of any portion of the aggregate contract fee identified by the
licensor in the initial transaction as charged to the licensee for all bundled information products which was
actually paid, on:
                  (I) rejection of the record before or during the initial use of the bundled product;
                  (II) proper redelivery of all computer information products in the bundled whole and all
copies of them within a reasonable time after initial delivery of the information to the licensee; and
                  (III) submission of proof of purchase; or
             (ii) a right to reimbursement of any separate contract fee identified by the licensor in the initial
transaction as charged to the licensee for the separate information product to which the rejected record
applies, on:
                  (I) submission of proof of purchase; and
                  (II) proper redelivery of that computer information product and all copies within a
reasonable time after initial delivery of the information to the licensee; or
         (C) in the case of a licensor that rejects a record proposed by the licensee, a right to proper
redelivery of the computer information and all copies from the licensee, to stop delivery or access to the
information by the licensee, and to reimbursement from the licensee of amounts paid by the licensor with
respect to the rejected record, on reimbursement to the licensee of contract fees that it paid with respect to
the rejected record, subject to recoupment and setoff.
(57) (58) “Scope,” with respect to terms of a license, means:
         (A) the licensed copies, information, or informational rights involved;
         (B) the use or access authorized, prohibited, or controlled;
         (C) the geographic area, market, or location; or
         (D) the duration of the license.
(58) (59) “Seasonable,” with respect to an act, means taken within the time agreed or, if no time is agreed,
within a reasonable time.
(59) (60) “Send” means, with any costs provided for and properly addressed or directed as reasonable
under the circumstances or as otherwise agreed, to deposit a record in the mail or with a commercially
reasonable carrier, to deliver a record for transmission to or re-creation in another location or information
processing system, or to take the steps necessary to initiate transmission to or re-creation of a record in
another location or information processing system. In addition, with respect to an electronic message, the
message must be in a form capable of being processed by or perceived from a system of the type the
recipient uses or otherwise has designated or held out as a place for the receipt of communications of the
kind sent. Receipt within the time in which it would have arrived if properly sent, has the effect of a proper
sending.
(60) (61) “Standard form” means a record or a group of related records containing terms prepared for
repeated use in transactions and so used in a transaction in which there was no negotiated change of terms
by individuals except to set the price, quantity, method of payment, selection among standard options, or
time or method of delivery.
(61) (62) “State” means a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Unites
States Virgin Islands, or any territory or insular possession subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
(62) (63) “Term,” with respect to an agreement, means that portion of the agreement which relates to a
particular matter.
(63) (64) “Termination” means the ending of a contract by a party pursuant to a power created by
agreement or law otherwise than because of breach of contract.
(64) (65) “Transfer:”
         (A) with respect to a contractual interest, includes an assignment of the contract, but does not
include an agreement merely to perform a contractual obligation or to exercise contractual rights through a
delegate or sublicensee; and


                                               59
         (B) with respect to computer information, includes a sale, license, or lease of a copy of the
computer information and a license or assignment of informational rights in computer information.
(65) (66) “Usage of trade” means any practice or method of dealing that has such regularity of observance
in a place, vocation, or trade as to justify an expectation that it will be observed with respect to the
transaction in question.
     (b) The following definitions in [the Uniform Commercial Code (1998 Official Text)] apply to this
[Act]:
       (1) “Burden of establishing” [Section 1-201]
       (2) “Document of title” [Section 1-201].
       (3) “Financial asset” [Section 8-102(a)(9)].
       (4) “Funds transfer” [Section 4A-104].
       (5) “Identification” to the contract [Section 2-501].
       (6) “Instrument” [Sections 9-105(i) (1995 Official Text) or 9-102(a)(47) (1998 Official Text)].
       (7) “Investment property” [Section 9-115(f) (1995 Official Text) or 9-102(a)(49) (1998 Official
         Text)].
       (8) “Item” [Section 4-104].
       (9) “Letter of credit” [Section 5-102].
       (10) “Payment order” [Section 4A-103].
       (11) “Sale” [Section 2-106].

SECTION 103. SCOPE; EXCLUSIONS.
(a) This [Act] applies to computer information transactions.
(b) Except for subject matter excluded in subsection (d) and as otherwise provided in Section 104, if a
computer information transaction includes subject matter other than computer information or subject matter
excluded under subsection (d), the following rules apply:
     (1) If a transaction includes computer information and goods, this [Act] applies to the part of the
transaction involving computer information, informational rights in it, and creation or modification of it.
However, if a copy of a computer program is contained in and sold or leased as part of goods, this [Act]
applies to the copy and the computer program only if:
         (A) the goods are a computer or computer peripheral; or
         (B) giving the buyer or lessee of the goods access to or use of the program is ordinarily a material
purpose of transactions in goods of the type sold or leased.
     (2) Subject to subsection (d)(3)(A), if a transaction includes an agreement for creating or for obtaining
rights to create computer information and a motion picture, this [Act] does not apply to the agreement if the
dominant character of the agreement is for creating or obtaining rights to create a motion picture. In all
other such agreements, this [Act] does not apply to the part of the agreement that involves a motion picture
excluded under subsection (d)(3), but does apply to the computer information.
     (3) In all other cases, this [Act] applies to the entire transaction if the computer information and
informational rights, or access to them, is the primary subject matter, but otherwise applies only to the part
of the transaction involving computer information, informational rights in it, and creation or modification
of it.
(c) To the extent of a conflict between this [Act] and [Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code], [Article
9] governs.
(d) This [Act] does not apply to:
     (1) a financial services transaction;
     (2) an insurance services transaction;
     (3) an agreement to create, perform or perform in, include information in, acquire, use, distribute,
modify, reproduce, have access to, adapt, make available, transmit, license, or display:


                                             60
          (A) a motion picture or audio or visual programming that is provided by broadcast, satellite, or
cable as defined or used in the Federal Communications Act and related regulations as they existed on July
1, 1999, or by similar methods of delivering that programming, other than in (i) a mass-market transaction
or (ii) a submission of an idea or information or release of informational rights that may result in making a
motion picture or a similar information product; or
          (B) a motion picture, sound recording, musical work, or phonorecord as defined or used in Title 17
of the United States Code as of July 1, 1999, or an enhanced sound recording, other than in the submission
of an idea or information or release of informational rights that may result in the creation of such material or
a similar information product.
(3) (4) a compulsory license; or
(4) (5) a contract of employment of an individual, other than an individual hired as an independent
contractor to create or modify computer information, unless the independent contractor is a freelancer in the
news reporting industry as that term is commonly understood in that industry;
(5) (6) a contract that does not require that information be furnished as computer information or a contract
in which, under the agreement, the form of the information as computer information is otherwise
insignificant with respect to the primary subject matter of the part of the transaction pertaining to the
information; or
(6) (7) unless otherwise agreed in a record between the parties:
          (A) telecommunications products or services provided pursuant to federal or state tariffs; or
          (B) telecommunications products or services provided pursuant to agreements required or
permitted to be filed by the service provider with a federal or state authority regulating these services or
under pricing subject to approval by a federal or state regulatory authority.
     (8) subject matter within the scope of [Article 3, 4, 4A, 5, [6,] 7, or 8 of the Uniform Commercial
Code].
 (e) As used in subsection (d)(2)(B) (d)(3)(B), “enhanced sound recording” means a separately identifiable
product or service the dominant character of which consists of recorded sounds but which includes (i)
statements or instructions whose purpose is to allow or control the perception, reproduction, or
communication of those sounds or (ii) other information so long as recorded sounds constitute the dominant
character of the product or service despite the inclusion of the other information.
(f) In this section, “motion picture” means:
     (1) “motion picture” as defined in Title 17 of the United States Code as of July 1, 1999; or
     (2) a separately identifiable product or service the dominant character of which consists of a linear
motion picture, but which includes (i) statements or instructions whose purpose is to allow or control the
perception, reproduction, or communication of the motion picture or (ii) other information as long as the
motion picture constitutes the dominant character of the product or service despite the inclusion of the other
information.
(g) In this section, “audio or visual programming” means audio or visual programming that is provided by
broadcast, satellite, or cable as defined or used in the Communications Act of 1934 and related regulations
as they existed on July 1, 1999, or by similar methods of delivery.

SECTION 104. MIXED TRANSACTIONS: AGREEMENT TO OPT-IN OR OPT-OUT. The parties may
agree that this [Act], including contract-formation rules, governs the transaction, in whole or part, or that
other law governs the transaction and this [Act] does not apply, if a material part of the subject matter to
which the agreement applies is computer information or informational rights in it that are within the scope
of this [Act], or is subject matter within this [Act] under Section 103(b), or is subject matter excluded by
Section 103(d)(1) or (2) (3). However, any agreement to do so is subject to the following rules:
     (1) An agreement that this [Act] governs a transaction does not alter the applicability of any statute,
rule, or procedure that may not be varied by agreement of the parties or that may be varied only in a manner
specified by the rule or procedure, including a consumer protection statute [or administrative rule]. In

                                              61
addition, in a mass-market transaction, the agreement does not alter the applicability of a law applicable to
a copy of information in printed form.
     (2) An agreement that this [Act] does not govern a transaction:
         (A) does not alter the applicability of Section 214 or 816; and
         (B) in a mass-market transaction, does not alter the applicability under this [Act] of the doctrine of
unconscionability or fundamental public policy or the obligation of good faith.
     (3) In a mass-market transaction, any term under this section which changes the extent to which this
[Act] governs the transaction must be conspicuous.
     (4) A copy of a computer program contained in and sold or leased as part of goods and which is
excluded from this [Act] by Section 103(b)(1) cannot provide the basis for an agreement under this section
that this [Act] governs the transaction.

SECTION 112. MANIFESTING ASSENT; OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW.
(a) A person manifests assent to a record or term if the person, acting with knowledge of, or after having an
opportunity to review the record or term or a copy of it:
    (1) authenticates the record or term with intent to adopt or accept it; or
    (2) intentionally engages in conduct or makes statements with reason to know that the other party or its
electronic agent may infer from the conduct or statement that the person assents to the record or term.
(b) An electronic agent manifests assent to a record or term if, after having an opportunity to review it, the
electronic agent:
    (1) authenticates the record or term; or
    (2) engages in operations that in the circumstances indicate acceptance of the record or term.
(c) If this [Act] or other law requires assent to a specific term, a manifestation of assent must relate
specifically to the term.
(d) Conduct or operations manifesting assent may be proved in any manner, including a showing that a
person or an electronic agent obtained or used the information or informational rights and that a procedure
existed by which a person or an electronic agent must have engaged in the conduct or operations in order to
do so. Proof of compliance with subsection (a)(2) is sufficient if there is conduct that assents and
subsequent conduct that reaffirms assent by electronic means.
(e) With respect to an opportunity to review, the following rules apply:
    (1) A person has an opportunity to review a record or term only if it is made available in a manner that
ought to call it to the attention of a reasonable person and permit review.
    (2) An electronic agent has an opportunity to review a record or term only if it is made available in
manner that would enable a reasonably configured electronic agent to react to the record or term.
    (3) If a record or term is available for review only after a person becomes obligated to pay or begins its
performance, the person has an opportunity to review only if it has a right to a return if it rejects the record.
However, a right to a return is not required if:
          (A) the record proposes a modification of contract or provides particulars of performance under
Section 305; or
          (B) the primary performance is other than delivery or acceptance of a copy, the agreement is not a
mass-market transaction, and the parties at the time of contracting had reason to know that a record or term
would be presented after performance, use, or access to the information began.
    (4) The right to a return under paragraph (3) may arise by law or by agreement.
(f) The effect of provisions of this section may be modified by an agreement setting out standards
applicable to future transactions between the parties.
(g) Providers of online services, network access, and telecommunications services, or the operators of
facilities thereof, do not manifest assent to a contractual relationship simply by their provision of these
services to other parties, including but not limited to transmission, routing, or providing connections,


                                               62
linking, caching, hosting, information location tools, or storage of materials at the request or initiation of a
person other than the service provider.

SECTION 201. FORMAL REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, a contract requiring payment of a contract fee of $5,000 or
more is not enforceable by way of action or defense unless:
     (1) the party against which enforcement is sought authenticated a record sufficient to indicate that a
contract has been formed and which reasonably identifies the copy or subject matter to which the contract
refers; or
     (2) the agreement is a license for an agreed duration of one year or less or which may be terminated at
will by the party against which the contract is asserted.
(b) A record is sufficient under subsection (a) even if it omits or incorrectly states a term, but the contract is
not enforceable under that subsection beyond the number of copies or subject matter shown in the record.
(c) A contract that does not satisfy the requirements of subsection (a) is nevertheless enforceable under that
subsection if:
     (1) a performance was tendered or the information was made available by one party and the tender was
accepted or the information accessed by the other; or
     (2) the party against which enforcement is sought admits in court, by pleading or by testimony or
otherwise under oath, facts sufficient to indicate a contract has been made, but the agreement is not
enforceable under this paragraph beyond the number of copies or the subject matter admitted.
(d) Between merchants, if, within a reasonable time, a record in confirmation of the contract and sufficient
against the sender is received and the party receiving it has reason to know its contents, the record satisfies
subsection (a) against the party receiving it unless notice of objection to its contents is given in a record
within 10 days a reasonable time after the confirming record is received.
(e) An agreement that the requirements of this section need not be satisfied as to future transactions is
effective if evidenced in a record authenticated by the person against which enforcement is sought.
(f) A transaction within the scope of this [Act] is not subject to a statute of frauds contained in another law
of this State.

D. IDEA OR INFORMATION SUBMISSIONS
SECTION 216. IDEA OR INFORMATION SUBMISSION.
(a) The following rules apply to a submission of an idea or information for the creation, development, or
enhancement of computer information which is not made pursuant to an existing agreement requiring the
submission:
     (1) A contract is not formed and is not implied from the mere receipt of an unsolicited submission.
     (2) Engaging in a business, trade, or industry that by custom or practice regularly acquires ideas is not
in itself an express or implied solicitation of the information.
     (3) If the recipient seasonably notifies the person making the submission that the recipient maintains a
procedure to receive and review submissions, a contract is formed only if:
          (A) the submission is made and a contract accepted pursuant to that procedure; or
          (B) the recipient expressly agrees to terms concerning the submission.
(b) An agreement to disclose an idea creates a contract enforceable against the receiving party only if the
idea as disclosed is confidential, concrete, and novel to the business, trade, or industry or the party receiving
the disclosure otherwise expressly agreed.

SECTION 816. LIMITATIONS ON ELECTRONIC SELF-HELP.
(a) In this section, “electronic self-help” means the use of electronic means to exercise a licensor’s rights
under Section 815(b).


                                               63
(b) On cancellation of a license, electronic self-help is not permitted, except as provided in this section.
Electronic self-help is prohibited in mass-market transactions.
(c) A If the parties agree to permit electronic self-help, a licensee shall separately manifest assent to a term
authorizing use of electronic self-help. The term must:
     (1) provide for notice of exercise as provided in subsection (d);
     (2) state the name of the person designated by the licensee to which notice of exercise must be given
and the manner in which notice must be given and place to which notice must be sent to that person; and
     (3) provide a simple procedure for the licensee to change the designated person or place.
(d) Before resorting to electronic self-help authorized by a term of the license, the licensor shall give notice
in a record to the person designated by the licensee stating:
     (1) that the licensor intends to resort to electronic self-help as a remedy on or after 15 days following
receipt by the licensee of the notice;
     (2) the nature of the claimed breach that entitles the licensor to resort to self-help; and
     (3) the name, title, and address, including direct telephone number, facsimile number, or e-mail address,
to which the licensee may communicate concerning the claimed breach.
(e) A licensee may recover direct and incidental damages caused by wrongful use of electronic self-help.
The licensee may also recover consequential damages for wrongful use of electronic self-help, whether or
not those damages are excluded by the terms of the license, if:
     (1) within the period specified in subsection (d)(1), the licensee gives notice to the licensor’s designated
person describing in good faith the general nature and magnitude of damages;
     (2) the licensor has reason to know the damages of the type described in subsection (f) may result from
the wrongful use of electronic self-help; or
     (3) the licensor does not provide the notice required in subsection (d).
(f) Even if the licensor complies with subsections (c) and (d), electronic self-help may not be used if the
licensor has reason to know that its use will result in substantial injury or harm to the public health or safety
or grave harm to the public interest substantially affecting third persons not involved in the dispute.
(g) A court of competent jurisdiction of this State shall give prompt consideration to a petition for
injunctive relief and may enjoin, temporarily or permanently, the licensor from exercising electronic
self-help even if authorized by a license term or enjoin the licensee from misappropriation or misuse of
computer information, as may be appropriate, upon consideration of the following:
     (1) grave harm of the kinds stated in subsection (f), or the threat thereof, whether or not the licensor has
reason to know of those circumstances;
     (2) irreparable harm or threat of irreparable harm to the licensee or licensor;
     (3) that the party seeking the relief is more likely than not to succeed under its claim when it is finally
adjudicated;
     (4) that all of the conditions to entitle a person to the relief under the laws of this State have been
fulfilled; and
     (5) that the party that may be adversely affected is adequately protected against loss, including a loss
because of misappropriation or misuse of computer information, that it may suffer because the relief is
granted under this [Act].
(h) Before breach of contract, rights or obligations under this section may not be waived or varied by an
agreement, but the parties may prohibit use of electronic self-help, and the parties, in the term referred to in
subsection (c), may specify additional provisions more favorable to the licensee.
(i) This section does not apply if the licensor obtains possession of a copy without a breach of the peace and
the electronic self-help is used solely with respect to that copy.

SECTION 905. ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES IN GLOBAL AND NATIONAL COMMERCE ACT. The
provisions of this [Act] governing the legal effect, validity, or enforceability of electronic records or
signatures, and of contracts formed or performed with the use of such records or signatures conform to the

                                               64
requirements of Section 102 of the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (____
U.S.C. ____), and supersede, modify, and limit the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce
Act.

AMENDMENTS TO SECTIONS 605 AND 816 OF THE UNIFORM COMPUTER INFORMATION
TRANSACTIONS ACT , NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM STATE
LAWS AS APPROVED BY THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE
OF COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS PURSUANT TO SECTION 4.3(3) OF ITS
CONSTITUTION AT ITS MIDYEAR MEETING IN SAVANNAH, GEORGIA, JANUARY 13th and
14th, 2001 and REVIEWED AND MODIFIED BY THE COMMITTEE ON STYLE OF THE NATIONAL
CONFERENCE at its MEETING IN SARASOTA FLORIDA, JANUARY 17th-21st, 2001

Notes on amendments to U.C.I.T.A., adopted by Executive Committee January 13th-14th, 2001.

Sections 605 and 816 are intended to act in harmony. Section 605(f) was intended to make clear that the
procedural limitations and safeguards of Section 816 in the event of a breach cannot be avoided by reliance
on Section 605. In the JCOTS (Joint Commission on Technology and Science, Virginia) Study, there was
concern that the language might be exploited so as to not accomplish this purpose. Accordingly, changes
were made to the definition of "automatic restraint" to clearly state that it "prevents" a breach; and Section
605(f) now states more clearly that in the event of a possible simultaneous breach and prevention of a
breach, under (b)(4), Section 816 applies unless the affirmative acts are within (i) and (ii). This change of
wording was carefully and extensively examined by all interested groups and the JCOTS staff to
accomplish the stated purpose. The acceptance of the amendments will result in substantial added support
from retail and financial services industries.

The amendments to Section 816 clarify what is a "wrongful use" of electronic self-help (Section 816(c));
remove an ambiguity as to the two kinds of harm that are prohibited by striking the word "grave" (Section
816(g)(1)); and clarify that the repossession of a tangible copy is permissible without breach of peace or the
use of electronic self-help (Section 816(j)). These changes will increase support for U.C.I.T.A.

Amendments To Section 605 Of U.C.I.T.A.

SECTION 605. ELECTRONIC REGULATION OF PERFORMANCE.
(a) In this section, "automatic restraint" means a program, code, device, or similar electronic or physical
limitation the intended purpose of which is to restrict prevent use of information contrary to the contract or
applicable law.
(b) A party entitled to enforce a limitation on use of information may include an automatic restraint in the
information or a copy of it and use that restraint if:
     (1) a term of the agreement authorizes use of the restraint;
     (2) the restraint prevents a use that is inconsistent with the agreement;
     (3) the restraint prevents use after expiration of the stated duration of the contract or a stated number of
uses; or
     (4) the restraint prevents use after the contract terminates, other than on expiration of a stated duration
or number of uses, and the licensor gives reasonable notice to the licensee before further use is prevented.
(c) This section does not authorize an automatic restraint that affirmatively prevents or makes impracticable
a licensee's access to its own information or information of a third party, other than the licensor, if that
information is in the possession of the licensee or a third party and accessed without use of the licensor's
information or informational rights.


                                               65
(d) A party that includes or uses an automatic restraint consistent with subsection (b) or (c) is not liable for
any loss caused by the use of the restraint.
(e) This section does not preclude electronic replacement or disabling of an earlier copy of information by
the licensor in connection with delivery of a new copy or version under an agreement to replace or disable
the earlier copy by electronic means with an upgrade or other new information.
(f) This section does not authorize use of an automatic restraint to enforce remedies in the event because of
breach of contract or of for cancellation for breach. If a right to cancel for breach of contract and a right to
exercise a restraint under subsection (b)(4) exist simultaneously, any affirmative acts constituting electronic
self-help may only be taken under Section 816, including the prohibition on mass-market transactions,
instead of this section. Affirmative acts under this subsection do not include:
     (1) use of a program, code, device or similar electronic or physical limitation that operates
automatically without regard to breach; or
     (2) a refusal to prevent the operation of a restraint authorized by this section or to reverse its effect.

Amendments To Section 816 of U.C.I.T.A.

SECTION 816. LIMITATIONS ON ELECTRONIC SELF-HELP.
(a) In this section,:
     (1) "electronic Electronic self-help" means the use of electronic means to exercise a licensor's rights
under Section 815(b).
     (2) "Wrongful use of electronic self-help" means use of electronic self-help other than in compliance
with this section.
(b) On cancellation of a license, electronic self-help is not permitted, except as provided in this section.
Electronic self-help is prohibited in mass-market transactions.
(c) If the parties agree to permit electronic self-help, the licensee shall separately manifest assent to a term
authorizing use of electronic self-help. In accordance with Section 112(c), a general assent to a license
containing a term authorizing use of electronic self-help is not sufficient to manifest assent to the use of
electronic self-help. The term must:
     (1) provide for notice of exercise as provided in subsection (d);
     (2) state the name of the person designated by the licensee to which notice of exercise must be given
and the manner in which notice must be given and place to which notice must be sent to that person; and
(3) provide a simple procedure for the licensee to change the designated person or place.
(d) Before resorting to electronic self-help authorized by a term of the license, the licensor shall give notice
in a record to the person designated by the licensee stating:
     (1) that the licensor intends to resort to electronic self-help as a remedy on or after 15 days following
receipt by the licensee of the notice;
     (2) the nature of the claimed breach that entitles the licensor to resort to self-help; and
     (3) the name, title, and address, including direct telephone number, facsimile number, or e-mail
address, to which the licensee may communicate concerning the claimed breach.
(e) A licensee may recover direct and incidental damages caused by wrongful use of electronic self-help.
The licensee may also recover consequential damages for wrongful use of electronic self-help, whether or
not those damages are excluded by the terms of the license, if:
     (1) within the period specified in subsection (d)(1), the licensee gives notice to the licensor's designated
person describing in good faith the general nature and magnitude of damages;
     (2) the licensor has reason to know the damages of the type described in subsection (f) may result from
the wrongful use of electronic self-help; or
     (3) the licensor does not provide the notice required in subsection (d).



                                               66
(f) Even if the licensor complies with subsections (c) and (d), electronic self-help may not be used if the
licensor has reason to know that its use will result in substantial injury or harm to the public health or safety
or grave harm to the public interest substantially affecting third persons not involved in the dispute.
(g) A court of competent jurisdiction of this State shall give prompt consideration to a petition for injunctive
relief and may enjoin, temporarily or permanently, the licensor from exercising electronic self-help even if
authorized by a license term or enjoin the licensee from misappropriation or misuse of computer
information, as may be appropriate, upon consideration of the following:
     (1) grave harm of the kinds stated in subsection (f), or the threat thereof, whether or not the licensor has
reason to know of those circumstances;
     (2) irreparable harm or threat of irreparable harm to the licensee or licensor;
     (3) that the party seeking the relief is more likely than not to succeed under its claim when it is finally
adjudicated;
     (4) that all of the conditions to entitle a person to the relief under the laws of this State have been
fulfilled; and
     (5) that the party that may be adversely affected is adequately protected against loss, including a loss
because of misappropriation or misuse of computer information, that it may suffer because the relief is
granted under this [Act].
(h) Before breach of contract, rights or obligations under this section may not be waived or varied by an
agreement, but the parties may prohibit use of electronic self-help, and the parties, in the term referred to in
subsection (c), may specify additional provisions more favorable to the licensee.
(i) This section does not apply if the licensor obtains physical possession of a copy without a breach of the
peace and the electronic self-help is used solely with respect to that copy without use of electronic self-help,
in which case the lawfully obtained copy may be erased or disabled by electronic means.




                                               67
Disposition: 15-21B-04:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:
(21B-h) Update this Statement with the latest ULC summary, strike the last paragraph, get more
background information (Statement was revised for docket 21C).
(21C-b) Get additional information about other states and update the Statement again (i.e., for the next SSL
cycle).
(22B-h) Update the ULC Statement, add Virginia's amended Act to the next docket or to the resource
packet for the next meeting.


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             68
Comment: Per 22b-h, three Virginia laws addressing UCITA have been added to this docket. Virginia
originally enacted UCITA as Chapter 101 of 2000. It is docket item 15-22C-01A. Chapter 101 was
amended in 2001 by Chapters 762 and 763. They are both on the docket as items 15-22C-01B and
15-22C-01C respectively, because a single statute incorporating the amendatory language of both
Chapters 762 and 763 was not available at the time this docket was prepared.

15-22C-01A Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act             VA

This Act creates the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act (UCITA). The UCITA was
promulgated by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. Modeled after the
Uniform Commercial Code, Article 2, the UCITA is designed to govern transactions of computer
information. This bill is a recommendation of the Joint Commission on Technology and Science. The Joint
Commission on Technology and Science is directed to study the impact of the act and report its findings to
the Governor and General Assembly by December 1, 2000. The UCITA will become effective July 1, 2001.

Submitted as:
Virginia
Chapter 101 of 2000
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment:

15-22C-01B Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act             VA

This Act makes several amendments to the Virginia’s Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act
(UCITA) (§ 59.1-501.1 et seq.) and the Virginia Consumer Protection Act (VCPA) (§ 59.1-196 et seq.).
The bill changes UCITA's references to other laws or rules to other statutes, administrative rules,
regulations or procedures where applicable. The bill also changes references to the VCPA to other
consumer protection statutes, administrative rules or regulations including, but not limited to, the VCPA.
The bill provides that a mass-market license may be transferred if such transfer involves making a gift or
donation of a computer along with mass-market software to a public school, a public library, a charity or a
consumer. The bill amends the definition of "goods" as used in the VCPA to include "computer
information" and "informational rights" as defined in UCITA.

Submitted as:
Virginia
Chapter 762 of 2001
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment:




                                            69
15-22C-01C Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act                VA

This Act amends several provisions of the Virginia’s Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act
(UCITA) to clarify the definitions of "electronic agent" and "mass-market transaction," modify UCITA's
scope over motion pictures and online service providers; clarify the applicability of other statutes, rules and
regulations; provide that a contract term that specifies a judicial forum must be expressly stated, and in a
mass-market transaction, such contract term must be expressly and conspicuously stated; modify the terms
of mass-market licenses; create a special rule for using standard form licenses with nonprofit libraries,
archives, and educational institutions; modify the terms governing transferability; clarifies the definition of
automatic restraint; and modifies the restrictions on use of electronic self-help.

Submitted as:
Virginia
Chapter 763 of 2001
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment


Disposition: 15-22C-01A                Disposition: 15-22C-01B                 Disposition: 15-22C-01C

Scope: 22C                             Scope: 22C                              Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee            ( ) Refer to full Committee             ( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:               ( ) Defer consideration:                ( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope &                       ( ) next Scope &                        ( ) next Scope &
Agenda Subcommittee mtg.               Agenda Subcommittee mtg.                Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle                     ( ) next SSL cycle                      ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject                             ( ) Reject                              ( ) Reject

Note to staff:                         Note to staff:                          Note to staff:


Full: 22D                              Full: 22D                               Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume                  ( ) Include in Volume                   ( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration                ( ) Defer consideration                 ( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject                             ( ) Reject                              ( ) Reject

Note to staff:                         Note to staff:                          Note to staff:




                                              70
15-22B-01 Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act                  MD

This is Maryland’s version of the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act (UCITA) a commercial
contract statute that provides substantive rules governing electronic commerce contracts and licenses for
computer information or programs. This Act is limited in scope to “computer information transactions,”
which are agreements with the primary purpose to create, modify, transfer, or license computer information
or informational rights in computer information. It generally applies to computer information transactions
unless the parties agree otherwise.

The Act also applies to mixed transactions. If the transaction involves “non-goods,” it applies only to that
part of the transaction that involves computer information; other applicable law will govern the other part of
the transaction. If the transaction involves “goods,” the Maryland UCC, Title 2 of the Commercial Law
Article applies to the “goods” and UCITA applies to the computer information. If the computer information
is embedded in the goods, such as on a diskette, UCITA only applies if the goods are “a computer or
computer peripheral” or “access to or use of the [computer] program is ordinarily a material purpose of the
transaction.”

This Act does not apply to:
 financial services transactions;
 contracts to create audio or visual programming provided by broadcast, satellite, or cable;
 certain agreements in the development of motion pictures;
 sales of books, prints, magazines, or newspapers, except online books or other similar online products;
 contracts for the employment of people who are not independent contractors; or
 certain insurance service transactions.

A valid contract may be formed under this Act in any manner sufficient to show an agreement, including
offer and acceptance and the conduct of the contracting parties, or the operations of the electronic agents. In
the absence of conduct or performance by both parties, a contract is not formed if there is a material
disagreement about a material term.

The Act expressly states that conflicting federal law and consumer protection laws in Maryland supercede
provisions of UCITA and that a court may invalidate a contract term that is unconscionable or would violate
a fundamental public policy of Maryland. It clarifies that a contract term is unenforceable if it conflicts with
a statute, rule, or procedure that cannot be varied by agreement under federal copyright law, including fair
use provisions.

The Act authorizes parties to agree to a choice of forum to litigate a dispute unless the choice is
unreasonable or unjust. It provides that a Maryland court must determine the enforceability of a choice of
forum term in a mass-market transaction. It also clarifies that Maryland courts may exercise personal
jurisdiction over out-of-state people dealing in computer information and computer programs in the same
manner as if they were dealing in goods or services. UCITA also allows parties to agree to a choice of law,
but specifies that Maryland law applies in mass-market transactions if an agreement is not made.

The Act addresses standard form non-negotiable contracts for computer information called “shrink-wrap”
(in the box) and “click wrap” (on-line) agreements. It follows the holdings of all case law since 1993,
including four federal Circuit Court decisions, which uphold the enforceability of these types of
agreements. If such an agreement is with a consumer or certain non-consumer in the retail marketplace, the



                                              71
bills define the agreement as a “mass-market transaction” and certain protections are granted. The
protections for mass-market transactions include:
 cost-free right of return of computer information if the license terms are not available and the licensee
elects to refuse the terms;
 that a term in a mass-market license is unenforceable if it is unconscionable, against fundamental public
policy (including policies related to competition or innovation), or pre-empted by federal law;
 the ability in mass-market licenses to opt out of UCITA; and
 requirements that automatic restraints contained in mass-market licenses be conspicuous; and
 a prohibition against electronic self-help by a licensor (repossession of computer information by
electronic means) in all mass-market transactions.

In addition to the protections available in all consumer contracts as within the definition of mass-market
transaction, this Act provides specific consumer protections, including:
 if there is a conflict between UCITA and a Maryland consumer protection statute, the provisions of the
Maryland consumer protection law prevail;
 an amendment of the Maryland Consumer Protection Act to ensure that it will apply to all consumer
contracts for computer information, including agreements where the Act does not clearly apply now, such
as in access contracts and software downloaded through the Internet;
 a new consumer defense for electronic error in an automated transaction that gives a consumer the right
to avoid the effect of an electronic mistake; and
 a four-year statute of limitations for mass-market transactions, including consumer transactions, that
cannot be reduced by an agreement.

The Act maintains a licensor’s obligation to meet express warranties and add new implied warranties
including:
 an implied warranty of merchantability of a computer program (warranty that the program will work for
the general purpose for which it was intended);
 an implied warranty of informational content (warranty given if the program contains charts or data
expected to be correct, that the information was collected with reasonable care); and
 an implied warranty of system integration (warranty given if the program was bought by relying on the
merchant’s advice that it will work with other programs or equipment).

In a consumer contract, a disclaimer or modification of the implied warranties of merchantability and
system integration and the remedies for these warranties are prohibited unless the computer program is
given to the consumer free of charge or is for the purposes of a beta test.

In the event of a breach of contract, it provides remedies and damages to place the aggrieved party in the
same position as the party would have been in had the other party performed as agreed. Access contracts
may be discontinued for a material breach; however, a three-day notice must be provided before
discontinuation unless the breach involves a violation of a contractual use term.

A license may only be canceled under the Act for a material breach and, if canceled, the licensor has the
right to the possession of the copies of the information and to prevent the continued use of the information
by the licensee. The only non-judicial means to exercise these rights under the bills is the limited remedy of
electronic self-help.




                                             72
This law expressly prohibits electronic self-help unless the parties agree to permit its use and electronic
self-help is strictly prohibited in mass-market transactions regardless of what the agreement provides. If the
parties agree to permit the use of electronic self-help, certain limitations still apply, including:
 prior to the cancellation of a license, a licensee must be given an opportunity to cure the breach;
 before electronic self-help is exercised, a licensor must give a licensee 30 days notice (the notice is
required to state the nature of the claimed breach and provide contact and address information for the
licensee to use to communicate with the licensor);
 electronic self-help may only be exercised without a breach of the peace and without foreseeable risk of
personal injury or significant physical damage to information or property other than the licensed
information;
 in the event of a wrongful exercise of self-help, a licensee can recover direct and incidental damages as
well as consequential damages at the time self-help is exercised; and
 electronic self-help may not be used if the licensor has a reason to know it will result in substantial
injury to the public health, or safety, or grave harm to the public interest affecting a third person not
involved in the dispute.

This law also establishes a technology oversight committee comprised of five senators and five delegates to
review the implementation of UCITA and to make any appropriate recommendations to the governor, the
legislative policy committee, the senate finance committee, and the house economic matters committee.
The joint committee may also study and make recommendations on other technology issues.

Submitted as:
Maryland
HB 19 (enrolled version)
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment:

Disposition: 15-22B-01

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



                                             73
16-22B-01D Internet Voting Pilot Program                                      MI

This bill directs the secretary of state, beginning January 1, 2002 and through December 31, 2005, to
establish a pilot project to test Internet voting in at least six but not more than eight jurisdictions. The
secretary of state must name an even number of pilot jurisdictions that vary in size of population. One-half
must be jurisdictions in which a majority of the voters who cast ballots for president in the 2000 general
election voted for the Republican party candidate and the other half must be jurisdictions in which the
majority of such voters voted for the Democratic party candidate. The secretary of state must implement
Internet voting in a pilot jurisdiction in an election at which a single question is on the ballot. The secretary
of state must prescribe the procedures for a secure means for Internet voting.

Submitted as:
Michigan
SB 250
Status - introduced and referred to the Committee on Government Operations on February 21, 2001, no
further action reported as of June 21, 2001

Comment:


16-22B-01E Absentee Ballots: Internet Voting                                  MT

This Act allows absentee voter registration and voting by facsimile and electronically through the Internet
for overseas electors in the United States service, while recognizing that state and local election officials
have the responsibility to maintain the accuracy, integrity, and secrecy of the election process and the
individual election ballot.

Submitted as:
Montana
HB 241 (Ch. 80) of 1999
Status - enacted into law in 1999

Comment:




                                               74
Disposition: 16-22B-01D

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:
(22B-i) Get additional legislation from other states about Internet voting; write a Note on Internet voting
and include the "Special Focus on Internet Voting" article by the Center for the Study of Technology
and Society in the Note.


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:


Disposition: 16-22B-01E

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             75
16-22C-01 Absentee Ballots: Internet Voting                              VA

Virginia Chapter 793 of 2001 requires that beginning in November 1999, the state board of elections shall
implement a system that enables eligible people to request and receive an absentee ballot application
electronically through the global information system known as the Internet. Electronic ballot applications
must be in a form approved by the state board of elections.

Submitted as:
Virginia
Chapter 793 of 2001
Status - enacted in 2001

Comment: This bill was added to the docket per 22B-i.

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                            76
16-22C-02 Internet Voting Note

It seems that the more that people use the Internet the more uses they find for it. Voting is an example. The
2000 Presidential elections dramatized the need for a reliable system that ensures that people can get to the
polls, records their votes, and provides an efficient way to checking the tally. To some, Internet voting
offers a way to achieve these objectives. To others, Internet voting raises concerns about privacy and the
ability of some voters to either access such a system or know how to use it.

The Center for the Study of Technology and Society’s Special Focus on Internet Voting reports that:

    “In the blizzard of criticism that followed the Florida election incident, many analysts and critics
    argued that Internet voting could have prevented many of the election problems. However, they often
    confused Net voting (which is still not ready for wide deployment) with general electronic voting -
    which would have solved the problems without the risks posed by Net voting.

    The Problem

    Should voting over the Internet be permitted? How would it work? How might it affect our democracy?

    Background

    As other aspects of politics move online, including campaigning, fundraising and news reporting,
    speculation has increased that elections might be moved online, too.

    Minor elections - such as votes for positions in clubs and student governments - have been held online
    for years, but the first official Internet elections for state and national governments were not held until
    2000. In the past few years, a number of companies specializing in Internet elections have begun
    offering their services to election boards. Recognizing that governments will pay significant amounts of
    money for help operating Internet elections, these companies strongly support online voting.

    Several studies and reports analyzing Internet elections have been published. The most important so
    far has been the final report of a California task force; that report was cautiously supportive of Internet
    voting, and recommended "a strategy of evolutionary rather than revolutionary" transition to
    Internet voting. Another major report, commissioned in 1999 by President Clinton, is expected.

    How Does Internet Voting Work?

    The term "Internet voting" is used loosely to describe very different things. For instance, many informal
    votes are conducted by e-mail or in online polls. But because the stakes are higher in government
    elections, the requirements for security are far more stringent.

    Here are the basic types of Internet voting that would be sufficiently secure for government elections.

    Electronic voting at traditional polling sites. This form of voting does not actually use the Internet at all,
    but it is a key first step in the transition to Net voting: simply replace voting machines and paper ballots
    with computers. Election officials would still be present at voting sites to prevent voter fraud. The key
    benefit of this type of voting would be an end to the paper ballot problems that plagued the Florida
    elections in 2000. Although the technology would cost money, voting districts would also save money
    by not printing paper ballots. Just under 10 percent of Americans already use this type of voting.

                                               77
Internet voting at traditional polling sites. Once sufficient security systems are in place, the
computers described above could be connected to the Internet. This would speed the tabulation and
reporting of votes. Election officials would remain at the voting sites. Some supporters of Internet
voting say this type of balloting undermines a key benefit of the Internet voting -- the ability to vote
from anywhere.

Internet voting from any location. This is usually what people think of when they hear the term
"Internet voting" -- voters could cast ballots from anywhere, including their own home. Because no
election officials would be present, this type of voting would require a new way to ensure each voter's
identity. This type of Internet voting would probably be used in addition to voting at traditional
polling sites.

Major Internet Votes Held To Date

The first major Internet votes were conducted in 2000.

Alaska Republicans. The Republican Party of Alaska held a straw poll in January 2000 for the
position of U.S. president. This vote was a non-binding poll and not a true election, and only a few
dozen participants cast ballots online, but it was the first Internet vote to catch the attention of the
national press. (This vote was managed by VoteHere.net.)

Arizona Democrats. This was the first official Internet election for a national office in U.S. history.
The Arizona Democratic Party conducted its presidential primary online over a four-day period in
March 2000. A total of 39,942 voters cast ballots over the Internet, and only one tenth of those
Internet votes were cast from traditional polling sites. A major lawsuit almost prevented this primary
election from being conducted online. (This vote was managed by Votation.com, a company now
owned by Election.com.)

Washington State Republicans. The Washington State Republican Party used the Internet to
select delegates in one county convention on April 8 and then again at their state convention on June
16. They chose to vote over the Internet to speed up the process of counting ballots. (This vote was
managed by iPolitics.com.)

ICANN. The body that regulates the Internet, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and
Numbers, held a global Internet vote (with 34,035 valid votes cast) for its new board members in the
summer and autumn of 2000. (this vote was managed by Election.com.)

Arguments For Internet Voting

Many supporters of Internet voting see it as a natural, or even inevitable, result of the spread of
information technology. Among the main supporters of Internet voting are the companies which plan to
sell their expertise in online voting to election officials. Here are some of the major arguments in favor
of Internet voting:
      The convenience of Internet voting might encourage more people to vote, which proponents
         consider healthy for democracy.
      The Internet could make voting easier for the elderly, the disabled and people in remote
         locations at home (like snowbound parts of Alaska) or abroad (like military personnel at sea).
      Election results would be calculated quickly and efficiently, with less chance of human error.

                                          78
           Ballot security and fraud are important issues, but there will probably be technical solutions for
            them soon -- and besides, offline voting has always been prone to those problems anyway.

    Arguments Against Internet Voting

    Opponents of Internet voting believe it threatens democracy. A number of nonprofit organizations are
    opposed to Internet voting, most notably the Voting Integrity Project. Here are some of the main
    arguments against Internet voting:

           Because only about half of all Americans have Internet access at home (as of mid-2000), voting
            online would unfairly favor those with access to the Internet.
           Democracy should not be made more convenient for those too lazy to make an effort to vote.
           Also, by lowering the threshold of effort required to cast a ballot, Internet voting might
            encourage the participation of ill-informed people who would otherwise not vote.
           The Internet is a fundamentally anonymous medium; as of today, there is no way to
            authenticate every voter's identity online. Internet ballots might be cast by people who are
            unregistered or even ineligible to vote.
           The Internet is an unsafe medium to depend upon for something like voting; there is a risk that
            malicious hackers might alter ballots, snoop on citizens' votes or crash voting Web sites,
            effectively disenfranchising voters.
           Officials monitor traditional polling places to make sure no one bullies voters and to protect the
            secrecy of each ballot. If Internet voting is allowed outside of traditional polling sites, it could
            result in harassment of voters and violations of their privacy.

    What Happens Next?

    For now, the long-term implications of Internet voting for our democracy are unclear. Until security
    measures can be put in place to prevent fraud, it is unlikely that Internet voting will be widely accepted.

    However, experiments in online voting will probably continue for several years as officials at all levels
    of government familiarize themselves with the important issues involved. States and counties that
    choose to permit Internet voting will most likely hire private contractors to manage their elections.
    Also, those states and counties will probably face lawsuits challenging the legality of Internet voting.
    As experimentation continues, election officials may grow more confident in and more willing to adopt
    Net voting.”

Between 2000 and 2001, Internet voting-related bills were introduced in California, Connecticut, Florida,
Hawaii, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Montana, New York, Vermont and Virginia. Excepting
Pennsylvania, most form commissions to study the issue. And most, although technically viable at the time
this docket was prepared, will die in committee. Pennsylvania’s is the most comprehensive, but hasn’t been
enacted into law.

Pennsylvania HB 145 authorizes and establishes procedures to enable voting via the Internet. Specifically,
the bill:
 directs the secretary of state to establish all standards, adopt all rules and regulations, and take all steps
necessary to implement Internet elections.
 directs the secretary to authorize and direct Internet voting for registering or recording and computing
the vote at all elections and primaries held at polling places in counties;


                                              79
 directs county board of elections to purchase, lease or otherwise procure for each election district of
such county, the components of an Internet voting machine of a kind approved by the secretary, and the
board to thereafter notify the secretary, in writing, that they have done so.

Under this bill, in order for Internet voting to be implemented, the system must:
(1) Provide for the secure identification and authentication of any information transmitted on the system,
including, but not limited to, personal information required to be provided by
qualified electors.
(2) Provide for the secure identification and authentication of all elections officials and electoral
jurisdictions, their servers, and all other related electronic equipment being used by the elections officials
and electoral jurisdictions supervising and responsible for voting.
(3) Protect the privacy, integrity and anonymity of each qualified elector's ballot.
(4) Prevent the casting of multiple ballots in any one election cycle by any qualified elector.
(5) Provide protection against tampering, fraudulent use, illegal manipulation or other abuse by voters,
elections officials or any other individual or group.
(6) Legibly convey all information mandated by law to be included in the ballot for each qualified elector,
including lists of all candidates for office and all ballot measures qualified to appear on the ballot, in any set
or randomly generated order mandated by law.
(7) Provide the means by which qualified electors may cast write-in votes for candidates whose names do
not appear on the ballot.
(8) Provide uninterrupted, reliable availability during the voting period established by law.
(9) Be readily accessible and easy to use for all qualified electors.
(10) Be usable by qualified electors with disabilities, consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act of
1990 (Public Law 101-336, 104 Stat. 327 § 12101).
(11) Be capable of being upgraded as technology improves.
(12) Be capable of archiving votes, allowing recounts and of being audited as to contents, results and
process at a sufficient level to guarantee the integrity of the system and the public's confidence in its
integrity.
(13) Be capable of transmitting encrypted information over a secure network.
(14) Be capable of establishing an Internet website that securely receives ballots, provides ballots to
qualified electors that reflect the elections in their electoral jurisdictions and is maximally resistant to being
interrupted or shut down by denial of service, computer virus or other attacks.
(15) Be capable of tabulating ballots cast to its Internet
(16) Be capable of providing qualified electors with receipts showing that their votes have been received
without alteration, validated as coming from a qualified elector who has not yet cast a ballot and stored for
counting.

The legislation directs the seecretary of state to:
(1) Approve a sufficient number of Internet voting systems ensure adequate bidding opportunities.
(2) Approve that Internet voting is fit to implement.

The bill directs that the following procedures will be applicable for the conduct of the election at the
election district:
(1) At least one hour before the time set for the opening of the polls at each election, a county board shall
deliver to each election district a sealed copy of a clean operating system contained on suitable write-once
media approved and provided by the secretary for use in starting the Internet voting machines.
(2) The members of the district election board shall arrive at the polling place at least one-half hour before
the opening of the polls. Prior to the commencement of the election, the district election board shall inspect
the district components of the Internet voting system to see that they are in proper

                                               80
working order and shall break the seal of the operating system and insert it into the Internet voting machine
and start the machine.
(3) A qualified elector who wishes to utilize the Internet voting machine procedure shall be permitted to
vote at any polling place within the elector's county of residence.
(4) A qualified elector shall retire to one of the voting booths in which the Internet voting machines are
located.
(5) The elector shall visit the Internet balloting web page for his county and authenticate himself to that
server by entering any personal information required for authentication and request a ballot.
(6) The server shall send an image of the appropriate ballot back to the elector.
(7) The elector shall mark the ballot with the keyboard, mouse or touch screen if the machine is so
equipped.
(8) When the elector is finished making his choices, he shall click a button on the screen to send the ballot.
A screen will then be displayed that shows all of the elector's choices for verification. When the elector
confirms the selections, the ballot is encrypted and sent to the central vote server. If the elector does not
confirm the selections, the ballot is reset and he has the option of remarking the ballot.
(9) When the vote server receives the ballot, it will verify that it has been sent from a qualified elector who
has not yet voted and has not been altered in any form during transmission.
(10) Once the vote has been verified, the server will send feedback to the voter acknowledging that the vote
has been accepted.
(11) The server then separates the vote from the identification of the elector and stores the vote for
counting.
(12) After the polls close for the day, the county elections officials, one being from each party, shall enter
their separate decryption keys so that the ballots can be decrypted and canvassed.

The bill directs that any election officer or other person who unlawfully tampers with or injure or attempt to
injure any component of an Internet voting system to be used at any primary or election, or who
shall prevent or attempt to prevent the correct operation and communication of such a system, or any
unauthorized person who shall make or have in his possession a decryption key to an Internet voting system
to be used or being used in any primary or election, shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof,
shall be sentenced to pay a fine of not less than fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) and not to exceed one
hundred thousand dollars ($100,000), or to undergo an imprisonment of not less than ten years, but not
more than twenty years, or both, at the discretion of the court.

Pennsylvania HB 145 was pending in a House committee as of June 11, 2001.

California AB 2519 of 2000 establishes an Internet Voting Pilot Program. The program would be under the
direction of the secretary of state, and would test the viability, accuracy, security, integrity, efficacy, and
public acceptance of use of an Internet voting system as a supplementary method of voting in local elections
held in whole or in part within a participating county.

This bill requires the pilot program to allow voters to engage in Internet voting using a computer at any one
of various county-controlled polling places within the participating county. It requires the secretary of state
to select not more than three participating counties in accordance with criteria developed by the secretary of
state. The bill provides that participation by a county in the pilot program would be voluntary and subject to
approval by the county's board of supervisors.

The bill requires the secretary of state to certify the Internet voting system for use by a county participating
in the pilot program. It authorizes this Internet voting system to be used in a regularly scheduled or special
county, municipal or district primary or general election held on or before July 1, 2003.

                                              81
The bill provides that a local election that includes a candidate for any federal or state office or a state
measure on the ballot is not eligible for inclusion in the program.

It requires each participating county to evaluate its participation and experience with the Internet voting
system and report thereon to the secretary of state on or before October 1, 2003. It would require the
secretary of state to summarize the county reports, evaluate the Internet voting system, and report thereon to
the Legislature on or before January 1, 2004.

California AB 2519 passed the Legislature but was vetoed by the governor in 2000.

Connecticut Raised Bill 5122 of 2001 establishes a task force to study issues raised by the incorporation of
on-line and Internet technologies in the voting process. This bill died in committee.

Florida Chapter 164 of 2000 creates a state technology office within the department of management
services and provides for a study and recommendations concerning online voting.

Hawaii introduced three resolutions in 2001 asking the legislative reference bureau to conduct a study on
the feasibility of voting via the Internet, SR57, SCR78, HR128 and HCR136.

Illinois HB 0590 creates an Internet Voting Commission to study and implement a system of voting via the
Internet at elections in 2004 and thereafter. This bill was pending in the House Rules Committee as of June
11, 2001.

Michigan SB 250 directs the secretary of state, beginning January 1, 2002 and through December 31, 2005,
to establish a pilot project to test Internet voting in at least six but not more than eight jurisdictions. The
secretary of state must name an even number of pilot jurisdictions that vary in size of population. One-half
must be jurisdictions in which a majority of the voters who cast ballots for president in the 2000 general
election voted for the Republican party candidate and the other half must be jurisdictions in which the
majority of such voters voted for the Democratic party candidate. The secretary of state must implement
Internet voting in a pilot jurisdiction in an election at which a single question is on the ballot. The secretary
of state must prescribe the procedures for a secure means for Internet voting. This bill was pending in
committee as of June 11, 2001.

Montana Chapter 80 of 1999 allows absentee voter registration and voting by facsimile and electronically
through the Internet for overseas electors in the United States service, while recognizing that state and local
election officials have the responsibility to maintain the accuracy, integrity, and secrecy of the election
process and the individual election ballot.

New York AB 242 of 2001 provides for the state board of elections to undertake a study of the feasibility
for voting by mail, telephone and/or the internet and authorizes a pilot program for such voting during the
study. This bill was in committee as of June 12, 2001.

Vermont HB 109 of 2001 directs the secretary of state to establish a pilot project for the general election of
November 2002 for evaluating the efficiency, security, and accuracy of conducting general elections,
wherein the submission of all ballots for local, state, and national offices are submitted to the secretary via
the Internet. This project shall:
(1) provide a Web site wherein all voters from a certain geographic area, as determined by the secretary,
may cast ballots for their elected officials from their own personal computers;

                                               82
(2) provide every polling place, in a certain geographic area, as determined by the secretary, with the
equipment to allow voters to cast ballots via the internet;
(3) ensure that every officer participating in the election and every voter who casts ballots via the internet
adheres to the certain provisions of state law.
This bill was left in committee for the 2001 session. It will be carried over to the 2002 session.

Virginia Chapter 793 of 2001 requires that beginning in November 1999, the state board of elections shall
implement a system that enables eligible people to request and receive an absentee ballot application
electronically through the global information system known as the Internet. Electronic ballot applications
must be in a form approved by the state board of elections.

Comment: this note was added to the docket per 22b-i.

Disposition: 16-22C-02

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                              83
16-22B-02 Confidentiality of Elector Records                                  WI

Prior to this Act, the names and addresses of all electors who vote, and in municipalities where registration
is required, the names of electors who register to vote, were publicly accessible. Electors must orally
disclose their names and addresses at polling places, which are recorded on poll and registration lists.
Polling place observers may inspect the lists of names and addresses of registered and actual voters.

This Act permits certain electors to vote or register to vote confidentially. To be eligible for a confidential
listing:
 an elector must have been granted a protective order by a court that is currently in effect restraining
another person from having or causing contact with the elector for reasons relating to domestic abuse;
 the elector must reside in an organized shelter for people whose personal security is or may be
threatened by other people with whom the residents have had contact; or
 the elector must present the affidavit of a sheriff or chief of a police department verifying that a person
has been charged with or convicted of an offense relating to domestic abuse in which the elector was a
victim and reasonably continues to be threatened by that person.

Under the Act, an “offense relating to domestic abuse” includes sexual assault, battery, stalking, harassment
or sexual exploitation. A confidential listing expires:
 when a protective order expires;
 when an individual ceases to be a resident of a shelter;
 when the sheriff or chief of a police department who signed an affidavit notifies a municipal clerk that a
judgment in a domestic abuse case has been vacated or that a domestic abuse charge has been dropped; or
 upon expiration of the two-year period following creation of the listing, whichever first occurs.
A listing may be renewed in the same manner as provided for creation of an original listing.

Under the Act, a municipal clerk must still provide access to a confidential name and address to a law
enforcement officer for official purposes, including:
 to a state or local governmental officer pursuant to a specific law that necessitates obtaining the name or
address;
 pursuant to a court order citing a reason that access to a name or address should be provided;
 to a clerk of circuit court for purposes of jury selection; or
 at the request of the protected elector for the purpose of permitting the elector to qualify as a signer on
certain petitions.

The law directs municipal clerks to issue to each elector who is entitled to a confidential listing an
identification card containing a unique number issued by the elections board, which may be presented to
election inspectors (poll workers) in lieu of providing a name and address. Alternatively, it permits an
elector where registration is required to give their name and identification card number in lieu of an address.

The Act provides that polling place observers may not view the name or address of any elector who is
entitled to be listed on a poll or registration list confidentially. However, the inspectors must disclose to any
observer, upon request, the existence of any confidential list of electors, the number of electors whose
names appear on the list and the number of electors who have voted at any point in the proceedings. It
prohibits election officials and other people who are provided confidential information relating to the
names and addresses of electors from disclosing that information to other people who are not authorized to
obtain that information.



                                               84
It prohibits an individual from providing false information to a municipal clerk for the purpose of obtaining
a confidential listing on a poll or registration list. Violators are guilty of a misdemeanor and are subject to a
fine of not more than $1,000 or imprisonment for not more than six months, or both, for each offense.

Submitted as:
Wisconsin
1999 Act 49
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                               85
16-22C-03 Election Reform Statement                                             FL

This comprehensive Act amends state law to:
 require the use of precinct-based voting technology (opti-scan technology at a minimum, with touch
screen systems permitted) that allows the voter to correct mistakes made while voting.
 prohibit punch-card and other antiquated voting systems in Florida.
 provide Florida’s counties with $24 million over the next two years for the purpose of modernizing
voting equipment.
 provide for the development of a standardized and unambiguous ballot design to be used in Florida’s
primary and general elections.
 provide $6 million in funding for the development of voter education programs and the recruitment and
training of poll workers.
 provide $2 million for the development and implementation of a statewide, centralized voter
registration database by June 2002.
 allow a voter whose name does not appear on the voter registration roll to vote a provisional ballot that
will be counted if the voter is subsequently found to be properly registered to vote.
 clarify and provide standards for the procedures to be followed when recounting votes.
 facilitate absentee ballot voting by Florida’s military and overseas voters.
 clarify that vote totals are to be certified no later than seven days following a primary election and 11
days following a general election.
 eliminate the second primary for the 2002 election cycle and provide a 2004 sunset provision to give the
Legislature the option of deciding whether to permanently eliminate the second primary.
 remove justification requirements for absentee ballot voting to increase the convenience of the voting
process.
 require the posting of a Voter’s Bill of Rights and Responsibilities in each polling place in Florida.

The provisional ballot parts of the legislation are particularly noteworthy. Under this Act, a provisional
ballot will be issued to a person who goes to the polls on election day and whose name does not appear on
the precinct register and whose eligibility cannot be determined. Provisional ballots will also be used by a
voter who has requested an absentee ballot but who appears at the polls to vote and who does not return the
absentee ballot to the poll workers. The provisional ballot will be similar to an absentee ballot in that the
person votes the ballot, places it in a secrecy envelope, then places the secrecy envelope in another envelope
containing a Provisional Ballot Voter’s Certificate. The Voter’s Certificate contains pertinent information
about the person to assist the supervisor of elections in determining the person’s eligibility.

All provisional ballots are returned unopened to the supervisor of elections. The county canvassing
board will review the information on the Voter’s Certificate and determine if the person was
eligible to vote in the election. If it is determined that the person was registered and entitled to
vote, the ballot is counted for those races in which the voter was entitled to vote. If it is
determined that the person voting the provisional ballot was not registered or entitled to vote, the
ballot is never removed from the envelope containing the Voter’s Certificate.

Allowing people whose names do not appear on the precinct register and whose eligibility cannot be
determined to vote a provisional ballot will assure that voters who are entitled to vote are given the
opportunity to do so and that ineligible persons will not be allowed to cast a vote.




                                             86
Submitted as:
Florida
Chapter 40 of 2001
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment: A copy of Chapter 40 is in the resource packet.

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                        87
17-22C-01 Structured Settlement Protection                                  WA

This Act creates a legal process by which a third party must first obtain court approval before acquiring the
beneficiary’s rights under a structured settlement agreement. It requires the court to make a finding that the
transaction is in the best interests of the original beneficiary.

Submitted as:
Washington
Chapter 178 of the 2001 laws
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             88
17-22C-02 White Collar Crime Victim Protection                             FL

This bill provides for restitution orders governing a broader range of victims of white collar crimes than
provided under current law, increases penalties for committing white collar crime schemes that victimize
multiple victims or the state, and facilitates prosecution of Internet-related crimes. A state Task Force on
Privacy and Technology recommended legislation that is the substance of this bill.

Submitted as:
Florida
SB 540 (enrolled version)
Status - passed legislature, awaiting governor’s action as of 05/07/01

Comment: A Florida legislative staff analysis is in the resource packet.

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             89
17-22C-03 Female Parity in Corrections                                   HI

This bill requires that adult women who are charged with or convicted of crimes and juvenile females
adjudicated for offenses that would be crimes if committed by an adult or who are adjudicated delinquents,
must be provided the range and quality of programming that is substantially equivalent to the range and
quality offered to males. It requires the state department of public safety to develop and implement
gender-responsive community-based programs for women offenders and requires the office of youth
services to develop and implement gender-responsive community-based programs for female adjudicated
youths.

Submitted as:
Hawaii
SB 119 SD1 HD2 CD1 (enrolled version)
Status – enrolled to governor in May 2001, no further action reported as of 06/21/01

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                            90
17-22C-04 DNA Evidence – Post-conviction Review                          MD

This Act authorizes a person convicted of specified offenses to file a petition for post-conviction DNA
testing of evidence the state possesses and is related to the judgment of the person’s conviction.

Submitted as:
Maryland
Chapter 418 of 2001
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                            91
17-22C-05 Search Warrants: Application by Video Conference                GA

This Act enables any judge in the state to conduct applications for the issuance of search warrants by video
conference and to sign the warrants electronically.

Submitted as:
Georgia
HB 292
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             92
17-22C-06 Wiretapping - Exceptions for Out-of-State Interception          MD

This Act allows certain information to be used and certain people to disclose certain information
concerning certain communications intercepted in out-of-state jurisdictions in certain proceedings if the
interception was made in accordance with the law of the other jurisdiction under certain circumstances. It
also requires a motion to suppress the contents of certain communications or certain evidence be made in
accordance with the state’s rules.

Submitted as:
Maryland
SB 310 (enrolled version)
Status - enacted as Chapter 370 of 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                            93
17-22C-07 Cyber Court                                                   MI

According to legislative staff, this bill creates and regulates an Internet "cyber court" to conduct electronic
hearings and proceedings in order to accommodate parties located outside the state in commercial litigation
involving more than $25,000. The stated purpose of the cyber court would be "to allow disputes between
business and commercial entities to be resolved with the speed and efficiency required by the information
age economy." The bill also would amend state law to make an exception to the act's requirement that
anyone practicing law in the state be licensed to practice law in Michigan; the exception would apply to a
person who was duly licensed and authorized to practice law in another state and representing a client in a
matter that was before the cyber court in Michigan.

The cyber court would be located in one or more counties as determined by the state supreme court, and
would sit in facilities designed to allow all hearings and proceedings to be conducted by means of electronic
communications, including, but not limited to, video and audio conferencing and Internet conferencing.
Whenever it is technologically feasible, all of the cyber court's proceedings would be broadcast on the
Internet. The cyber court's staff and support services would be maintained at the seat of government, and
would hold session and schedule hearings or other proceedings to accommodate parties or witnesses who
were located outside of Michigan. A cyber court facility would be open to the public to the same extent as a
circuit court facility.

The state supreme court would assign circuit court judges to serve as judges of the cyber court for terms
lasting at least three years. The total number of judges assigned to the cyber court would have to reasonably
reflect the caseload of the cyber court. In selecting judges for assignment to the cyber court, the supreme
court would have to consider a judge's experience in presiding over commercial litigation and his or her
experience and interest in the application of technology to the administration of justice. The Michigan
Judicial Institute would provide appropriate training for judges who were assigned to the cyber court.

The cyber court would have concurrent jurisdiction over commercial litigation actions in which the amount
in controversy exceeded $25,000. Any county in which the cyber court had been located by the supreme
court would be a proper county in which to commence an action in the cyber court.

An action could be filed in the cyber court by filing a complaint with the clerk of the cyber court, but a
defendant could remove the action to circuit court at any time before filing an answer to a complaint filed
with the clerk of the cyber court. The supreme court would adopt special rules for the cyber court regarding
practice and procedures, the form and manner of pleadings, and the manner of service of process in the
cyber court.

All matters heard in the cyber court would be heard by means of electronic communications, including, but
not limited to, video and audio conferencing and Internet conferencing among the judge and court
personnel, parties, witnesses, and other persons necessary to the proceedings.

An action in the cyber court would be heard by the judge without a jury, and unless a party removed an
action filed in the cyber court to the circuit court, all parties to an action in the cyber court would be
considered to have waived the right to trial by jury and to have waived the right to move for a change of
venue. The court could grant a new trial upon the same terms and under the same conditions and for the
same reasons as prevail in the case of the Michigan circuit court in a case heard by a judge without a jury.

The cyber court would have the same power as the circuit court to subpoena witnesses and require the
production of books, papers, records, documents, electronic documents, and any other evidence, and to

                                              94
punish for contempt. The judge and clerk of the cyber court could administer oaths and affirmations and
take acknowledgements of instruments by electronic means. An oath or affirmation taken from a person
located outside of Michigan would be considered to be an oath or affirmation authorized by Michigan law.

An appeal from the cyber court would be to a special panel of the court of appeals, as prescribed by the state
supreme court, and the time within which an appeal as of right could be taken would be governed by
supreme court rules. The clerk of the cyber court would have to immediately furnish the parties to every
action with an electronic notice of entry of any final order or judgment.

Submitted as:
Michigan
HB 4140 (as introduced)
Status -

02/06/2001 HJ 4 P. 77 referred to Committee on Civil Law and the Judiciary
06/07/2001 HJ 50 P. 862 reported with recommendation with substitute (H-3)
06/07/2001 HJ 50 P. 862 referred to second reading

Comment: This bill is reported to be the first of its kind.

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                              95
19-22C-01 Gender Violence                                                  IL

This bill provides that any person who has been subjected to gender-related violence may bring a civil
action for damages, an injunction, or other appropriate relief against the person who committed that act.
The bill requires commencement of such an action within 10 years after the right to bring the action first
accrued or, if the person is a minor, within 7 years after the person turns 18.

Submitted as:
Illinois
HB 3279
Status -
MAR-15-01 H DO PASS/SHORT DEBATE 010-002-001 HJUA
APR-04-01 H SECOND READING-SHORT DEBATE
APR-04-01 H HELD ON CAL ORDER 2ND RDG - SHORT DEBATE
APR-06-01 H RE-REFERRED TO RULES COMM/RULE 19(A) RULES                                HRUL
* no further action reported as of 06/21/01

Comment: The bill is reported to be the first to grant civil damages for these types of crimes. A State
Legislatures article notes that:

    “Each year more women are injured by domestic violence than are killed by automobile and cancer
    deaths combined, according to the American Bar Association’s Commission on Domestic Violence.
    With passage of the 1994 Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), Congress for the first time adopted
    comprehensive protections for victims of sexual assault and gender-based violence. Programs under the
    Act have provided help to prosecute cases of domestic violence, sexual assault and child abuse and
    have expanded victim services and law enforcement resources.

    A major component of VAWA was the section that allowed victims of sexual assault or gender-based
    crimes (violent acts against women, gays or lesbians) to sue in federal court for monetary damages. The
    U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled the act unconstitutional, citing in the decision an unwarranted
    intrusion into state authority to regulate civil and criminal matters.

    Illinois responded by introducing the Gender Violence Act, a state initiative that would allow civil
    lawsuits to be filed, in addition to existing criminal statutes, against perpetrators of sexual or
    gender-based crimes. The proposal grants the right to sue not only to women, but also to victims of
    crimes based on sexual orientation.

    The Illinois Act, unlike the federal law, would allow victims to sue groups, institutions or corporations
    that may be responsible for an assault. Civil statutes have always allowed attack victims to sue, but the
    intent of the Illinois law is to grant specific relief to victims of sexual or gender-based assaults.

    The proposed Illinois law is modeled on the VAWA that was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court.
    If enacted, HR 4407 would make Illinois the first state in the country to grant civil damages for these
    crimes.

    Congress recently reauthorized the Violence Against Women Act for another five years. The new
    version expands programs under the act and adds new provisions to fund civil legal representation for
    victims of domestic violence. Significant provisions in the Act offer grants to coordinate victim


                                             96
    advocates with law enforcement, support shelters, improve enforcement of protective orders across
    state lines and provide broader definitions regarding date rape and cyberstalking.”

Disposition: 19-22C-01

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                           97
19-22C-02 Family Protection                                                 FL

This Act provides for a minimum term of imprisonment of five days, in any addition to other statutory
penalties, for anyone who is found guilty of, has had adjudication withheld on, or has pled nolo contendere
to a crime of domestic violence which involved physical injury to another.

The bill provides that a person who is convicted of battery and has a prior conviction for battery,
aggravated battery, or felony battery and commits a subsequent battery may be charged with felony
battery. Under prior state law, a defendant must have two prior battery convictions before he or she can be
charged with a felony. This Act defines “conviction” as “a determination of guilt that is the result of a plea
or a trial, regardless of whether adjudication is withheld or a plea of nolo contendere is entered.” It adds an
additional surcharge of $200 to any sanction for a violation of statutes prohibiting assault, battery, felony
battery, aggravated battery, or any offense of domestic violence. The sanction is made a condition of any
probation, community control, or other court-ordered supervision.

The Act requires the clerk of the court to deposit $85 of the surcharge into a state Domestic Violence Trust
Fund. The remainder is used by the county sheriff to defray the costs of incarceration and to train law
enforcement to prevent domestic violence. The Act permits the Executive Office of the Governor to spend
up to $500,000 each year from the proceeds of the surcharge to administer a statewide public awareness
campaign regarding domestic violence.

The law requires people who are convicted of domestic violence offenses to attend a batterer’s intervention
program as a condition of probation or community control and requires the defendant to pay the costs of the
program.

Submitted as:
Florida
HB 1673 (enrolled version)
Status – enacted into law as Chapter 50 of 2001

Comment: There are several drafts on domestic violence in SSL volumes dating from 1981-1995. However,
the Florida and Illinois bills on this docket are reported to contain innovative strategies to address the
problem.

Disposition: 19-22C-02
                                                           Full: 22D
Scope: 22C                                                 ( ) Include in Volume
( ) Refer to full Committee                                ( ) Defer consideration
( ) Defer consideration:                                   ( ) Reject
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee
mtg.                                                       Note to staff:
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                              98
20-22B-03 Professional Preparation of School Personnel Statement

This Act:
      creates a Teachers’ Professional Growth Fund to provide money to teachers for tuition
reimbursements and stipends for approved university and college courses and professional development
activities;
      requires that the growth fund be focused on middle school teachers for the next four years and the
next two years on mathematics;
      creates a Center for Middle School Academic Achievement to improve middle school teachers’
knowledge and instructional practices in the core disciplines of mathematics, language arts science, and
social studies;
      emphasizes the evaluation and professional growth of teachers;
      requires a statewide recruitment plan for the teaching profession;
      requires the identification of out-of-field teaching;
      adds a conforming section on ranking of teachers;
      establishes criteria on the use of the postsecondary education trust finds that are designated for
teacher preparation;
      authorizes tuition-free classes for supervising teachers;
      permits a classroom teacher or administrator to be provided additional compensation for serving as
a teaching mentor or professional development leader in the core discipline;
      requires the establishment of an electronic bulletin board by the state department of education
about professional development opportunities;
      adds clarifying language relating to professional development and requires the establishment of
teacher academies in subject areas;
      requires the department of education provide to available training to teachers in human resource
management;
      requires changing the length of time to complete training for members and requires training of
council mentors when a principal vacancy occurs;
      requires that professional development days relate to teacher or administrator individual growth
plans, content area or assignment or school improvement plan; and
      permits the state education professional standards board to approve a university inquest for an
alternative preparation program for teachers or administrators that combines college postbaccalaureate
coursework arid internship requirements.

Submitted as:
Kentucky
SB 77
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment: SB 77 is in the resource packet.




                                            99
Disposition : 20-22B-03

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                      100
20-22B-05 Support Programs for Teachers/Annual Contracts                     ID

This Act provides for training and support for teachers during their first three years of employment with a
school district. These include mentoring, peer assistance and professional development. This law also gives
greater latitude to school boards to renew or not renew the contracts of teachers during their first three years
of employment.

The law establishes a tiered employment process for teachers who are in their first three years of teaching.
During the first year, teachers are employed on a limited, one-year contract. Districts can choose not to
renew such contracts without explanation. However, when a district chooses not to re-employ teachers with
two or three years experience, the district must provide an explanation to the teacher and a probationary
period to correct performance problems, respectively.

Submitted as:
Idaho
SB 1372
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment: The abstract to this item was clarified per 22B-k. CSG checked with Idaho legislative staff but
did not find similar laws in other states. An Idaho committee report about this bill is in the resource
packet.

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:
(22B-k) Better define what this Act does, see whether other states have similar laws.


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                              101
20-22C-01 Teacher Death Benefits                                          FL

The bill provides special benefits for any teacher who is killed while engaged in the performance of
teaching duties or dies in the line of duty.

The bill provides four benefits:
 $75,000 to the decedent teacher's beneficiary or heirs;
 $1,000 to be paid toward the funeral and burial expenses of such teacher;
 payment of health insurance premiums for the teacher's surviving spouse and dependent
children; and
 waiver of any state matriculation and tuition fees for the teacher's dependent children admitted
into a state vocational-technical school, community college, or university.

Two of the benefits, the payment of the health insurance premiums and the educational benefits, are
retroactive to May 26, 2000. Two of the death benefits for teachers (the $75,000 lump sum payment, and the
educational fee waivers) apply to teachers "engaged in the performance of teaching duties," and "in the line
of duty.” The other two benefits (the $1,000 funeral expense payment and the health insurance premium
payments) are specifically limited to teachers “killed in the line of duty as a result of an act of violence
inflicted by another person while the teacher is engaged in the performance of teaching duties.”

Submitted as:
Florida
CS/HB 279 (enrolled version)
Status – enacted into law as Chapter 180 of 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                            102
20-22C-02 Professional Educator Liability Insurance                           FL

This bill directs that the state shall, in its annual General Appropriations Act, provide funding for educator
professional liability coverage for all full-time instruction personnel. This insurance will be provided at no
cost to the full-time instructional personnel. The bill also offers the same liability insurance to all part-time
instructional personnel, and to administrative, at the low-cost group rate. Instructional personnel includes
classroom teachers, guidance counselors, social workers, school psychologists, librarians, learning resource
specialists, educational paraprofessionals and other personnel whose function includes direct instructional
services and support to students. Administrative personnel includes principals, assistant principals,
superintendents, assistant superintendents, deputy superintendents and vocational center directors.

Professional liability coverage, as used in this bill, means protection from having to pay monetary
damages or the cost of attorney's fees resulting from defending claims made against them, arising out of
actions in the course of their professional capacity. Liability insurance is inherently defensive in nature,
and cannot be used to finance litigation against other parties.

Submitted as:
Florida
CS/HB 409 (enrolled version)
Status – enacted into law as Chapter 46 of 2001

Comment: According to Florida legislative staff, a recent survey found that liability protection is among
teachers' top three concerns. At the country's third largest insurer of teachers, the number of teachers
purchasing professional liability insurance has increased 25 percent during the last five years. A Florida
legislative staff analysis is in the resource packet.

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                              103
20-22C-03 Public-Private Partnership for School Maintenance and            HI
Repair

This bill establishes a pilot project to be known as the public-private partnership for school maintenance
and repair, to assist in the public-private funding of public school repair and maintenance projects.
The partnership shall serve primarily as an oversight group to work with the state department of education
and the state department of accounting and general services. The partnership shall include representatives
of key stakeholders’ groups with expertise in the relevant domains to establish the guidelines and principles
for grants and contracts, as well as to review and advise in the identification and selection of appropriate
repair and maintenance projects. The bill also establishes a tax credit for contributions of in kind services
for repairing and maintaining public schools by licensed contractors, professional engineers, architects,
surveyors and landscape architects.

Submitted as:
Hawaii
SB 493 SD 2
Status – enrolled to governor on 05/04/01, no further action reported as of 06/21/01

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                            104
20-22C-04 Hearing Aid Loan Bank Program                                     MD

This bill establishes a Hearing Aid Loan Bank Program within the state department of education for the
purpose of ensuring that children under three years of age will be able to hear properly during the critical
period of language learning.

The program’s director, who must be a licensed audiologist, must provide and maintain a pool of hearing
aids as well as equipment to test and repair the hearing aids. Upon receipt of a prescription from a licensed
audiologist, the director must lend hearing aids to the parent or guardian of an eligible hearing-impaired
child for up to six months. Under specified conditions, a loan period may be extended by three months. The
parent or guardian of a child receiving a hearing aid through the program is responsible for the hearing aid
and must sign a written agreement that states the terms and conditions of the loan. The director must ensure
that the child’s audiologist instructs the parent or guardian in the proper care and usage of the hearing aid.
Beginning in 2002, the State Superintendent of Schools must report annually to the Governor and the
General Assembly on the implementation of the program. The Governor must include funding for the
program in the annual State budget, and the State Board of Education must adopt regulations to implement
the program.

Submitted as:
Maryland
HB 282 (enrolled version)
Status - enacted into law as Chapter 369 of 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             105
20-22C-05 School Testing Irregularities                                  NV

This Act:
 requires the state department of education and the board of trustees of each school district to adopt a
plan setting forth procedures concerning the security of certain examinations;
 requires the department to establish certain additional procedures and programs relating to the
examinations; requiring certain schools to provide for additional administration of the examinations under
certain circumstances;
 prohibits retaliatory action against an official of a school district or charter school who discloses
information regarding irregularities in testing administration or testing security;
 provides that a teacher or administrator who intentionally fails to observe and carry out the provisions
of a plan for test security is subject to disciplinary action; and
 provides penalties for violating the Act.

Submitted as:
Nevada
AB214 (enrolled version
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                           106
20-22C-06 A Coordinated Approach by Public Schools to Prevent Obesity                     TX
and Certain Diseases.

This Act authorizes the State Board of Education (SBOE) by rule to require elementary school students to
participate in daily physical activity as part of a school district's physical education curriculum. If the SBOE
adopts such rules, it must provide an exemption from daily physical activity for a student who is ill or
disabled. It requires the state education agency to make available to each school district a coordinated
health program designed to prevent obesity, cardiovascular disease, and Type II diabetes in elementary
school students. The program must provide for coordinating health education, physical education and
physical activity, nutrition services, and parental involvement. The state education agency is required to
notify each district of the availability of the program.

Submitted as:
Texas
SB 19 (enrolled version)
Status: enacted into law in 2001.

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                              107
21-22B-02 Joint Negotiations by Physicians and Dentists with Carriers             NJ

This Act permits two or more independent physicians or dentists who are practicing in the geographic
service area of a carrier to jointly negotiate with the carrier and engage in related joint activity over the
terms and conditions of a proposed contract. The negotiations would be carried out through a joint
negotiation representative selected by the physicians or dentists to act on their behalf.

The terms and conditions that may be the subject of the negotiations include non-fee-related matters which
may affect patient care, such as any of the following:
      the definition of medical necessity and other conditions of coverage;
      utilization management criteria and procedures;
      clinical practice guidelines;
      preventive care and other medical management policies;
      patient referral standards and procedures, including, but not limited to, those applicable to
out-of-network referrals;
      drug formularies and standards and procedures for prescribing off-formulary drugs;
      quality assurance programs;
      respective physician or dentist and carrier liability for the treatment or lack of treatment of covered
people;
      the methods and timing of payments;
      other administrative procedures, including, but not limited to, eligibility verification systems and
claim documentation requirements for covered people;
      credentialing standards and procedures for the selection, retention and termination of participating
physicians or dentists;
      mechanisms for resolving disputes between the carrier and physicians or dentists, including, but not
limited to, the appeals process for utilization management and credentialing determinations;
      the health benefits or dental plans sold or administered by the carrier in which the physicians or
dentists are required to participate;
      the formulation and application of reimbursement methodology;
      the terms and conditions of physician or dentist contracts, including, but not limited to, all products
clauses, and the duration and renewal provisions of the contract; and
      the inclusion or alteration of a contractual term or condition, except when the inclusion or alteration
is required by a federal or state regulation concerning that term or condition; however,
      the restriction shall not limit a physician's or dentist's rights to jointly petition the federal or state
government, as applicable, to change the regulation.

In addition, this Act provides that the following terms and conditions of a proposed contract concerning
fees and fee-related matters may be subject to joint negotiations if the attorney general, in consultation with
the commissioners of banking and insurance and health and senior services, finds that the carrier has
substantial market power in its service area and that any of the terms or conditions of the contract with the
carrier pose an actual or potential threat to the quality and availability of patient care among covered people.

These matters include, but are not limited to, any of the following:
 the amount of payment or the methodology for determining the payment for a health care or dental
service, including, but not limited to, cost of living increases;
 the conversion factor for a resource-based relative value scale or similar reimbursement methodology
for health care or dental services;


                                              108
 the amount of any discount on the price of a health care or dental service;
 the procedure code or other description of a health care or dental service covered by a payment and the
appropriate grouping of the procedure codes;
 the amount of a bonus related to the provision of health care or dental services or a withholding from the
payment due for a health care or dental service; and
 the amount of any other component of the reimbursement methodology for a health care or dental
service.

The legislation requires that a person or entity that proposes to act as a joint negotiation representative shall
submit a petition to the attorney general, for his approval. The petition shall identify the representative, the
physicians or dentists who the representative will represent, the intended subject matter of the proposed
negotiations and other information specified in the substitute. Upon submitting the petition, the
representative shall pay a fee to the attorney general, in an amount determined by the attorney general,
which shall be reasonable and necessary to cover the costs associated with carrying out the provisions of
this Act.

After the joint negotiation representative and the carrier have reached an agreement on the contractual terms
or conditions that were the subject matter of their negotiations, the representative shall submit a copy of the
proposed contract between the physicians or dentists and the carrier to the attorney general, for his
approval. The attorney general shall provide written approval or disapproval of a petition or a proposed
contract furnished by the representative no later than 30 days after receipt of the petition or proposed
contract.

The substitute provides that a joint negotiation representative shall not engage in negotiations with a carrier
unless the representative's petition has been approved in writing by the attorney general, and a proposed
contract between physicians or dentists and a carrier negotiated under this substitute shall not be
implemented unless the attorney general has approved the contract. The substitute further provides that
either party may decline to negotiate or terminate negotiations. In either event, the representative shall so
notify the attorney general.

The attorney general shall approve a petition or a proposed contract if they determines that the petition or
proposed contract demonstrates that the benefits which are likely to result from the proposed joint
negotiations or contract, as applicable, outweigh the disadvantages attributable to a reduction in
competition that may result from the proposed joint negotiations. In making their determination, the
attorney general shall consider physician or dentist distribution by specialty and its effect on competition in
the geographic service area of the carrier.

The bill directs that its provisions shall not be construed to:
 permit two or more physicians or dentists to jointly engage in a coordinated cessation, reduction or
limitation of the health care or dental services which they provide;
 permit two or more physicians or dentists to meet or communicate in order to jointly negotiate a
requirement that at least one of the physicians or dentists, as a condition of participation with a carrier, be
allowed to participate in all of the products offered by the carrier;
 permit two or more physicians or dentists to jointly negotiate with a carrier to exclude, limit or
otherwise restrict a non-physician or non-dentist health care provider from participating in the carrier's
health benefits or dental plan based substantially on the fact that the health care provider is not a physician
or dentist, unless that exclusion, limitation or restriction is otherwise permitted by law;



                                              109
 prohibit or restrict activity by physicians or dentists that is sanctioned under federal or state law or
subject such activity to the requirements of the Act;
 affect governmental approval of, or otherwise restrict activity by, physicians or dentists that is not
prohibited under federal antitrust law; or
 require approval of physician or dentist contract terms to the extent that the terms are exempt from state
regulation under ERISA.

Finally, this law directs that its provisions shall not apply to a health benefits or dental plan which is
certified by the state commissioner of human services to the state attorney general as providing covered
services exclusively or primarily to people who are eligible for Medicaid.

Submitted as:
New Jersey
Senate Committee Substitute for Senate Nos. 1033 and 1098
Status –
Feb-28-2000 Introduced And Referred To Senate Health Committee
Nov-9-2000 Reported Senate Committee Substitute 2nd Reading
Dec-4-2000 Senate Floor Amendments Passed (23-3) (Codey)
Dec-4-2000 Emergency Resolution (30-0) (Bark)
Dec-4-2000 Passed Senate (22-6)
Dec-7-2000 Received In Assembly Referred To Assembly Health Committee
Jun-4-2001 Reported 2nd Reading
- no further action reported as of June 21, 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                            110
21-22B-07 Public Cord Tissue Bank                                           FL

This Act establishes a statewide consortium to be known as the Public Cord Blood Tissue Bank. The Public
Cord Blood Tissue Bank is established as a nonprofit legal entity to collect, screen for infectious and
genetic diseases, perform tissue typing, cryopreserve, and store umbilical cord blood as a resource to the
public. Selected state universities will jointly form the collaborative consortium, and work with community
resources such as regional blood banks, hospitals and other health care providers to develop local and
regional coalitions for the purposes set forth in the Act. The consortium participants must align their
outreach programs and activities to all geographic areas of the state, covering the entire state. The
consortium is encouraged to conduct outreach and research for Hispanics, African-Americans, Native
Americans and other ethnic and racial minorities.

Submitted as:
Florida
Chapter 305 of 2000
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:
(22B-l) Limit future consideration of the legislation to Section 1 of the Act.



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             111
21-22B-08 Nursing Facilities – Electronic Monitoring                         MD

This bill requires nursing homes to permit a resident or a resident's legal representative to monitor the
resident with video cameras or other electronic monitoring devices. It requires the homes to provide power
sources and mounting space to set up electronic monitoring devices. It prohibits the homes from refusing
to admit an individual or removing a resident from the related institution because of a request to install an
electronic monitoring device. The bill establishes penalties for violators and requires that tapes created from
electronic monitoring be admissible in criminal and civil actions brought in state courts.

Submitted as:
Maryland
HB 433 (as introduced)
Status -
This bill did not pass the Legislature in 2001. It was referred for interim study in 2001. It must be
reintroduced in the next Legislature to remain viable. Maryland legislative staff said this legislation will not
likely be introduced again in Maryland until after 2003. That will be after a report is due on a pilot program
that was started in 2001 to set up monitors in three nursing homes that volunteered for the pilot.

Comment: per 22B-m, as of June 2001, nine states have introduced similar legislation; Florida, Louisiana,
Maryland, Massachusetts, North Carolina, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Texas. Of these, only New
Jersey SB 2231 and Ohio HB 216 remained viable as of June 19, 2001.

For example, North Carolina HB 996 permits residents of nursing homes or adult care homes, and their
families to monitor the resident through the use of video cameras or other electronic monitoring devices at
the expense of the resident; requires nursing homes and adult care homes to provide a power source and
mounting space for electronic monitoring devices; prohibits nursing homes and adult care homes from
refusing to admit residents because of a request to install electronic monitoring devices; and requires that
tapes from monitoring devices be admissible in criminal and civil actions subject to the rules of evidence.
HB 996 died in committee.

The Louisiana House adopted HSR 26 which requests the House Health and Welfare Committee to study
the use of electronic monitoring devices to allow a nursing home resident or the resident’s legal
representative to monitor the resident. HB 457, which permits a nursing home resident or the resident's legal
representative to monitor the resident through the use of electronic monitoring devices, died in committee.

Florida enacted a provision in 2001 in an omnibus long-term care reform Act (SB 1202) that requires the
state agency for health care administration and the state office of the attorney general to study the use of
electronic monitoring devices in nursing homes.

Legislation from New Jersey, Ohio and Texas are on the docket for comparison.




                                              112
Disposition: 21-22B-08

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:
(22B-m) Update the committee on the status of this item, see whether other states have similar laws.


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                           113
21-22C-01A Nursing Facilities – Electronic Monitoring                         OH

Current law in Ohio specifies rights of a resident of a home, including the right to a safe and clean living
environment, the right to make personal decisions, and the right to be free from abuse. "Home" includes
facilities licensed by the Director of Health as nursing homes or residential care facilities; skilled nursing
facilities certified under Medicare or Medicaid; and county homes. A resident who believes that the
resident's rights have been violated may file a grievance with the home's grievance committee. Any other
person may file a report with the Ohio Department of Health. If the grievance committee determines that a
violation exists, the violation must be corrected within ten days. If the violation is not corrected, the
grievance committee must refer the violation to the Department of Health. The Department of Health must
investigate grievances or refer them to the Attorney General for investigation. It also must investigate any
reports it receives from persons who are not residents of homes. Under certain circumstances the
Department may hold adjudicative hearings. If a home is found to have violated a resident's rights, it may be
ordered to correct the violation and fined. The home may appeal the Department's order to a court of
common pleas. The Department must refer any criminal matters to the county prosecuting attorney.

This bill extends residents' rights to include the right, on request, to the use of electronic monitoring devices
in a resident's room. To exercise this right, a resident or resident's sponsor must pay the costs of the devices
and installation; arrange the device so as to protect the privacy of others to the extent reasonably possible;
and have a notice of electronic monitoring posted on the resident's room door.
Under the bill, "electronic monitoring device" means video surveillance cameras, audio devices, video
telephones, internet video surveillance devices, or any other device designed to capture the audio
recordings or visual images of its surroundings.

A home must allow a resident to use an electronic monitoring device and provide reasonable physical
accommodations for the device, including a secure place to mount the device and access to a power source.
A home may not refuse to admit an individual as a resident and may not discharge a resident due to a request
to use an electronic monitoring device. The home's administrator may require requests for installation of
electronic monitoring devices to be made in writing. If a home fails to honor a resident's right to use
electronic monitoring devices, the resident has the same recourse as provided in current law when other
resident's rights are violated: the resident may file a grievance with the home's grievance committee, which
is required to refer it to the Department of Health if a violation is found and is not corrected.

Submitted as:
Ohio
HB 216 (as introduced)
Status - pending in committee as of June 13, 2001

Comment: This item was added to the docket per 22B-m.




                                              114
21-22C-01B Nursing Facilities – Electronic Monitoring                     NJ

This bill directs that a nursing home shall permit a resident to be monitored or the resident's legal
representative to monitor the resident in the resident's room through the use of an electronic monitoring
device in accordance with the provisions of the Act. A nursing home shall inform a resident and the
resident's legal representative of the resident's right to electronic monitoring.

Submitted as:
New Jersey
SB 2231 (introduced version)
Status - pending in Senate committee as of June 19, 2001.

Comment: This item was added to the docket per 22B-m.



21-22C-01C Nursing Facilities – Electronic Monitoring                     TX

This Act allows for the audio or video monitoring of a resident's room in a nursing home facility and
provides the parameters for both the resident and the nursing home to follow in relation to monitoring.

Submitted as:
Texas
SB177 (enrolled version)
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment: This item was added to the docket per 22B-m.

Disposition: 21-22C-01A               Disposition: 21-22C-01B                Disposition: 21-22C-01C

Scope: 22C                            Scope: 22C                             Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee           ( ) Refer to full Committee            ( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:              ( ) Defer consideration:               ( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope &                      ( ) next Scope &                       ( ) next Scope &
Agenda Subcommittee mtg.              Agenda Subcommittee mtg.               Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle                    ( ) next SSL cycle                     ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject                            ( ) Reject                             ( ) Reject

Note to staff:                        Note to staff:                         Note to staff:



Full: 22D                             Full: 22D                              Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume                 ( ) Include in Volume                  ( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration               ( ) Defer consideration                ( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject                            ( ) Reject                             ( ) Reject

Note to staff:                        Note to staff:                         Note to staff:


                                            115
21-22B-09 Prepaid Limited Health Service Organizations                     TN

This Act appears to enable health maintenance organizations to offer a package of benefits that are typically
available as separate coverage, i.e., dental care, vision care, mental health and substance abuse.

Submitted as:
Tennessee
Public Acts 2000, Chapter 948
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment: CSG found references to prepaid limited health service organizations in the statutes of Florida,
Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota and West Virginia. These states enacted their laws between 1989 and
1997. Florida, Nebraska, Nevada and West Virginia laws are in the resource packet for comparison.

Disposition:

Scope: 22C

( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:
(22B-n) See whether other states have similar laws.


Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                            116
21-22C-02 Rural Health Access Pilot Program                             AR

This Act establishes a Rural Health Access Pilot Program as a bridge connecting and assisting government,
communities and citizens to build a more comprehensive and responsible health care system, which seeks
to expand access and education with regard to health services for economically disadvantaged, uninsured,
working adults.

Submitted as:
Arkansas
Public Act 549 of 2001
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                           117
21-22C-03 Prescription Drug Prices                                          ME

This Act enables the state to act as a pharmacy benefit manager in order to make prescription drugs more
affordable for qualified state residents.

Submitted as:
Maine
Chapter 786 of the Public Laws of 1999 (LD2599)
Status - enacted into law in 1999

Comment: This law is reported to be the first of its kind in the country. It was upheld in court in May 2001.
A note on senior citizen prescription drug price controls is in the 2001 SSL volume but does not cover this
Maine Act.

The committee also considered and rejected the 1999 Maine Act LD 2082 during the 2001 SSL cycle. That
Act enabled a drug manufacturer that sells prescription drugs in the state to voluntarily elect to enter into a
rebate agreement with the state in order provide low-cost prescription drugs to qualified residents.

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             118
21-22C-04 Telepharmacy                                                        TX

This Act amends state law to authorize a community or institutional pharmacy located in the state to
provide pharmacy services, including the dispensing of drugs through a telepharmacy system
in a facility that is not at the same location as the operating pharmacy.

It provides that a telepharmacy system is required to be under the continuous supervision of a pharmacist as
determined by the state Board of Pharmacy (board). It provides that the pharmacist is not required to be
physically present at the site of the telepharmacy system to qualify as continuous supervision. It requires a
pharmacist to supervise a telepharmacy system electronically by audio and video communication. A
telepharmacy system is authorized to be located only at a health care facility in this state that is regulated by
the state or the United States.

This law requires the state Board of Pharmacy to adopt rules regarding the use of a telepharmacy system no
later than February 28, 2002. The rules are to include the types of health care facilities at which a
telepharmacy system may be located, record keeping requirements and security requirements. The bill
prohibits pharmacy services from being provided through a telepharmacy system until the board adopts
such rules.

It prohibits a telepharmacy system from being located in a community in which a pharmacy is located as
determined by board rule. If a pharmacy is established in a community in which a telepharmacy system is
already located, the telepharmacy system may continue to operate in the community.

Submitted as:
Texas
SB65 (enrolled version)
Status – enacted into law in 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:

                                              119
21-22C-05 Internet Prescription Consumer Protection                        AR

This Act requires Internet pharmacies to make certain disclosures on their Web sites, to list the principals,
pharmacists, and physicians associated with the site, and to include amending licensing requirements for
pharmacists and physicians to address prescribing and dispensing medication via the Internet.

Submitted as:
Arkansas
Act 1411 of 2001
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment: This law differs from the 2000 SSL draft Filing Electronically Transferred Prescriptions. That
Act says that nothing shall prohibit pharmacists from filling or refilling a valid prescription by way of
electronic data processing equipment if certain conditions are met. These include:
 recording in writing certain information about the prescription (e.g., date of which the original
prescription is on file);
 obtaining consent when required; and
 canceling the prescription on file.
That law also enables two or more pharmacies to establish and use a common electronic file to maintain
required dispensing information.

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject




                                             120
22-22B-01 Recreational Vehicle Rental Space                              AZ

This Act regulates and determines the rights, obligations and remedies for a recreational vehicle space
rented in a recreational vehicle park or mobile home park by the same tenant for more than 180 consecutive
days.

Submitted as:
Arizona
Chapter 289 of 2000
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                           121
22-22C-01 Liability of Extreme Sports Areas                                 IN

This Act provides that governmental entities that operate extreme sports areas have limited tort claims
immunity for damages at an extreme sports areas if:
 a set of rules governing the use of the facilities are clearly posted at each entrance to the extreme sports
areas; and
 a warning concerning the hazards and dangers associated with the use of the facilities is clearly posted
at each entrance to the extreme sports areas.

The legislation provides that governmental entities that operate extreme sports areas are required to
maintain the areas in a reasonably safe condition.

Submitted as:
SB 141 (enrolled version)
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             122
22-22C-02 Uniform Athlete Agents Act                                     IN

This Act:
 establishes registration requirements for an athlete agent,
 authorizes the attorney general to regulate athlete agents,
 establishes requirements for agency contracts between student athletes and athlete agents,
 allows a student athlete to cancel an agency contract within 14 days after the contract is signed;
 establishes various criminal and civil penalties for violation of the act;
 authorizes an action by an educational institution against an athlete agent or a former student athlete for
damages caused by violation of the act;
 modifies the crime of failure to disclose recruitment to include failure to disclose an endorsement
contract ten days before the contract is executed;
 provides that a consent to use a student athlete's right of publicity is void if it is obtained under a void or
voided agency contractor without required disclosures.

Submitted as:
Indiana
SB 171 (enrolled version)
Status – enacted as Public Law 54 of 2001

Comment: This bill is based on the ULC Uniform Athletes-Agents Act. The ULC released the final draft of
its Act in November 2000.

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                              123
22-22C-03 Cultural Trust                                                    NJ

This Act creates a state Cultural Trust and directs the establishment of a permanent, interest-generating
fund to be an additional source of revenue to nonprofit arts, history, and humanities organizations,
specifically for the building of endowments, the improvement of institutional and financial stability, and the
capital improvement of cultural facilities.

Submitted as:
New Jersey
Chapter 76 of 2000
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             124
23-22C-01 Autopsies and Sensitive Records: Privacy                     FL

This Act provides exemptions from the state public records law for publishing photographs and video and
audio recordings of an autopsy. Generally, it prohibits the custodian of a photograph or video or audio
recording of an autopsy from permitting any person to view or duplicate a photograph or video or audio,
except pursuant to court order and under the direct supervision of the custodian.

Submitted as:
Florida
HB 1083 (enrolled version)
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                          125
24-22A-01C Model Producer Protection Act

This model legislation contains comprehensive language governing all aspects of agriculture production, as
opposed to the Iowa and Nebraska bills that were considered in a previous SSL cycle. Those bills primarily
addressed the meatpacking industry and competitive livestock markets. This model defines agricultural
contracts to include marketing and production contracts and commodities to include livestock, raw milk and
crops.

This legislation requires contracts to be written in plain language and contain disclosures about risks. It
provides contract producers with a three-day right to review production contracts and prohibits the
inclusion of confidentiality provisions in contracts. The draft provides producers with a first priority lien for
payments due under a production contract and makes it harder for processors to terminate production
contracts capriciously or as a form of retribution if farmers have already made sizable capital investments
pursuant to requirements in the contracts. It also makes it an unfair practice for processors to retaliate or
discriminate against producers who exercise certain rights (such as the right of producers to join producer
organizations).

Submitted as:
Iowa and South Dakota Attorneys General Model

Comment: Per 22A-j, according to Eric Tabor, Chief of Staff, Iowa Attorney General’s Office, this Act is
not a NAAG model. It is an initiative of Iowa Attorney General Miller and former North Dakota Attorney
General Heitkamp, which had been endorsed by the Attorneys General in 16 states as of September 2000.
Mr. Tabor drafted the model. A press release and statement of attorneys general is in the resource
packet.

The NAAG Memorandum #00-148 that was included in the 22A resource packet is an invitation to sign the
statement that is referenced above.

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:
(22A-j) Clarify whether this is a NAAG model law.



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:

                                              126
24-22B-01 Farmworker Family Wellness                                        CA

Under prior state law, the state rural health policy council in the state health and human services agency was
established to improve access to, and the quality of, health care in rural areas. This Act requires the state
department of health services to review and survey the extent to which agricultural workers and their
families use those public health programs for which they are eligible, in order to provide improved delivery
of services to the families of agricultural workers. This law specifies the components of the survey, requires
the department, in conducting the survey, to ensure the full participation of entities that provide services to
agricultural workers, and requires the department to report the survey results to the Legislature on or before
March 1, 2001, and to submit an implementation plan based on those results to the Legislature on or before
December 31, 2001.

Under prior state law, the state department of housing and community development was required to develop
a statewide Farmworker Housing Assistance Plan and related policies, goals, and objectives for inclusion in
a statewide housing plan. This law requires that the farm labor housing assistance plan include specified
information regarding availability of, and funding for, housing for farm laborers, and other information.
This Act also requires the department to establish a task force to assist in the development of the farm labor
housing assistance plan and would require that the plan be developed or revised with the specified
information by July 1, 2002.

Prior law required the department of housing and community development to establish a farmworker
housing grant program to make funds available to local public entities and nonprofit corporations for the
construction or rehabilitation of housing for agricultural employees and their families. This Act renames
this program and creates a Farmworker Family Wellness Program to provide for the integration of, among
other things, family health and other family services to agricultural workers in conjunction with these
programs.

This Act authorizes the department to enter into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) or contract, as
specified, with a nonprofit corporation that demonstrates statewide experience, capacity, and capability in
designing, financing, and implementing programs for providing housing for agricultural workers and
integrating health services with the provision of farmworker housing.

This Act also provides that the department shall not enter into a new MOU or contract or commit additional
funding to these programs after January 1, 2004, except as specified. Nonprofit corporations must report to
the department and would require the department to report the results of the wellness program to the
Legislature on or before December 31, 2002.

Submitted as:
California
Chapter 312 of 2000
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment:




                                             127
Disposition: 24-22B-01

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                     128
24-22B-02 Agrichemical Remediation                                          IA

This Act establishes an authority, a procedure, and a fund to identify, prioritize and orchestrate cleaning up
sites that have been contaminated with pesticides and fertilizers.

Submitted as:
Iowa
Chapter 1184 of 2000
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             129
24-22B-03 Agricultural Burning Reduction                                  WA

This Act provides tax exemptions and credits to encourage alternatives to the field burning of cereal grains
and field and turf grass grown for seed. The exemptions and credits are available to farmers and other
people engaged in activities that make it possible to reduce field burning or to reduce the air emissions
resulting from such burning. It is the intent of the legislature that the exemptions and credits provided by
this Act apply not only to facilities and machinery and equipment for alternatives currently available, but
also to those that may become available in the future.

Submitted as:
Washington
Chapter 40, Laws of 2000
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                            130
24-22B-04 Soil Amendments and Agricultural Limings                       CT

This Act regulates the labeling, sales and distribution of agricultural soil amendments and agricultural
liming. Agricultural soil amendments are defined as any substance intended to improve the physical or
chemical characteristics of soil, excluding commercial fertilizers, agricultural liming materials,
unmanipulated animal manure, unmanipulated vegetable manures, compost, pesticides or other items as
defined by the state agriculture commissioner. Agricultural liming material is a product that contains
calcium or magnesium compounds that are capable of neutralizing soil acidity.

Submitted as:
Connecticut
Public Act No. 00-96
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                           131
24-22C-01 Agriculture – U-Pick Products, Limited Liability                 GA

This Act limits the liability of farms that offer pick-your-own agricultural products.

Submitted as:
Georgia
HB 89
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             132
24-22C-02 Farm Products – Liens and Foreclosure                            NV

This Act provides for the creation and foreclosure of a lien for farm products, particularly concerning those
involved in agricultural producer contracts.

Submitted as:
Nevada
SB 88
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                            133
25-22A-02 Misrepresenting A Business Name or Location                      IA

This Act makes it unlawful for a person to misrepresent the geographic location of a supplier or a service or
product by listing a fictitious business name or an assumed business name in a local telephone directory or
directory assistance database.

Submitted as:
Iowa
HF 2148
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                            134
25-22B-01 Misrepresenting A Business Name or Location                    IL

This Act prohibits advertising or listing an assumed business name that intentionally misrepresents the
location of the business.

Submitted as:
Illinois
HB 2991(enrolled version)
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                           135
25-22B-02 Bottled Water Labeling                                           CA

This legislation enacts bottled water and vended water labeling and notification requirements. However, the
Act permits the state health department, by written permission, to allow a person to package water for use in
public emergencies without obtaining a water bottling plant license, where the emergency has resulted in
the interruption, or has compromised the quality of, the public drinking water supply.

Submitted as:
California
Chapter 533 of 2000
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                            136
25-22B-03 Prepaid Calling Cards Rate Disclosure                             CT

This Act requires every prepaid calling card company that sells or offers for sale prepaid calling cards shall,
at the time of sale, disclose clearly and conspicuously:
 the amount that will be charged for each minute of use after deducting any application, activation or
     other fee;
 any rounding of time used by the consumer and the formula of computation of such rounding of time;
 any application or other fees charged to the consumer;
 any restrictions on use of the prepaid calling card; and
 a toll-free consumer assistance telephone number.

Submitted as:
Connecticut
Public Act No. 00-71
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment:

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             137
25-22C-01 Electronic Transactions Protection                                MD

This Act establishes an Electronic Transaction Education, Advocacy and Mediation Unit in the
Office of the Attorney General and specifies the purpose and the duties of the Unit. The purpose of the unit
is to protect the privacy of someone’s personal information and to protect the public from unfair or
deceptive unlawful conduct or practices in electronic commerce transactions.

Under the Act, the unit shall:
(1) receive complaints from individuals concerning:
     (i) anyone obtaining, compiling, maintaining, using, disclosing, or disposing of personal information
in a manner that may be potentially unlawful or violate a stated privacy policy relating to that individual;
and
     (ii) unfair or deceptive trade unlawful conduct or practices in electronic commerce transactions;
(2) provide information and advice to consumers the public on effective ways of handling complaints that
involve violations of:
     (i) privacy related laws, including identity theft and identity fraud; or
     (ii) unfair or deceptive trade unlawful conduct or practices in electronic commerce transactions;
(3) refer complaints where appropriate to local, state, or federal agencies that are available to assist
consumers the public with privacy and electronic commerce transaction related complaints;
(4) develop information and educational programs and materials to foster public understanding and
recognition of the issues related to privacy in electronic commerce and unfair or deceptive trade unlawful
conduct or practices in electronic commerce transactions;
(5) identify consumer problems in, and facilitate the development and use of best practices by persons
engaged in electronic commerce for the protection of the privacy of personal information in electronic
commerce transactions;
(6) promote voluntary and mutually agreed upon nonbonding arbitration and mediation of privacy related
or electronic commerce transaction disputes where appropriate;
(7) investigate and assist in the prosecution of:
     (i) identity theft and other privacy related crimes, and, as necessary, coordinate with local, state, and
federal law enforcement agencies in the investigation of similar crimes; and
     (ii) unfair or deceptive trade unlawful conduct or practices in electronic commerce transactions; and
(8) assist and coordinate in the training of local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies regarding
identity theft, other privacy related crimes, and unfair or deceptive trade unlawful conduct or practices in
electronic commerce transactions as appropriate.

Submitted as:
Maryland
Chapter 440 of 2001
Status - enacted into law in 2001

Comment:




                                             138
Disposition: 25-22C-01

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                      139
25-22C-02 Credit Scores                                                       CA

This Act, operative July 1, 2001, requires consumer credit reporting agencies to disclose specified
information, including a consumer's credit score and an explanation of the credit score, as defined, and the
key factors, as defined, under specified circumstances. It permits a consumer credit reporting agency to
charge a reasonable fee for providing credit score information. The Act requires a person using a credit
score in connection with a loan secured by residential real property, as defined, to provide to a consumer a
copy of those same disclosures required above along with a specified notice to the loan applicant except as
specified.

The law provides that a person is not obliged to explain the information provided and that any contractual
provisions that prohibit the disclosure of a credit score by a person who makes or arranges loans or a
consumer credit reporting agency are void. Under the Act, lenders shall not have liability for disclosure of
credit scores under any contractual provision.

Submitted as:
California
Chapter 978 of 2000
Status - enacted into law in 2000

Comment:
An article in State Legislatures magazine reads as follows:

    “Bought a home or a car lately? Applied for insurance or a credit card? Chances are your approval or
    denial was based on your credit score. But chances are greater that you don’t know what your score is.
    And this concerns some state legislators.

    Information, such as payment history, the number and type of accounts you have, late payments,
    collection actions, outstanding debt and the age of your accounts, is collected from your credit
    application and your credit report. Using a statistical program, creditors compare this information to the
    credit performance of consumers with similar profiles.

    A credit scoring system awards points for each factor that helps predict who is most likely to repay a
    debt. The resulting credit score, ranging from 300 to 900 points, helps predict how credit-worthy you
    are, that is, how likely it is that you will repay a loan and make the payments when due.

    Until recently, credit scores were kept confidential. Few consumers knew that these scores were
    included on most credit reports, and even fewer saw them. Credit bureaus that license the software for
    generating these scores agreed not to share scores with individual consumers, and banks also are not
    obligated to disclose them. But that may change.

    During the last five years, at least 13 states have considered bills related to credit scoring. Many of these
    would require lenders to disclose and explain credit scores to consumers, and others would prevent the
    denial of insurance for homes or automobiles on the basis of a low credit score. Similar bills are also
    being considered on the federal level.

    California recently passed legislation giving consumers access to their credit scores. The legislation
    requires lenders to provide consumers with their specific credit score, the key reasons that a consumer’s
    score was not better and the factors that determined that score.

                                              140
    It also allows consumers to receive a copy of their credit scores from their credit file for a small fee.”

Disposition:

Scope: 22C
( ) Refer to full Committee
( ) Defer consideration:
    ( ) next Scope & Agenda Subcommittee mtg.
    ( ) next SSL cycle
( ) Reject

Note to staff:



Full: 22D
( ) Include in Volume
( ) Defer consideration
( ) Reject

Note to staff:




                                             141

								
To top