From: Andreas Schildbach <andreas@schildbach•de>
To: bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP 70 refund field
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2014 19:21:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <lh9jqm$q77$1@ger.gmane.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP3+-kJiO+pCAdEGtzebcR65eAnTjuFQgQPbzAmh6v-WyQ@mail.gmail.com>
I'd prefer 3 months to 2 just because a quarter of year is a more common
timespan.
But of course its just paint shedding, so 2 sounds good for me too (-:
On 03/29/2014 02:29 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> So how about we say two months? That way it's easy for merchants to
> comply with the EU DSD and we keep RAM usage in check until we come up
> with a more sophisticated refund scheme.
>
> There's another issue with BIP 70 and refunds that I noticed. The
> PaymentRequest doesn't specify whether refunds are possible. So wallets
> have to either never submit refund data, or always submit it even if it
> makes no sense. Because setting things up to get refunds has a non-zero
> cost for the sender, it'd help if we could optimise it away for
> merchants that simply refuse to issue refunds for whatever reason.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Roy Badami <roy@gnomon•org.uk
> <mailto:roy@gnomon•org.uk>> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 09:56:57PM +0100, Andreas Schildbach wrote:
> > On 03/28/2014 07:19 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> >
> > >> Ok, why don't fix this in the spec for now, by defining a fixed
> expiry
> > >> time. In the EU, most products are covered by a 2 years
> warranty, so it
> > >> seems appropriate to pick 2.5 years (30 months) -- allowing for
> some
> > >> time to ship the product back and forth.
> > >
> > > Yeah I was thinking something like that on the walk home. But 2
> years is
> > > a long time. Do we have enough RAM for that?
> >
> > It depends on usage stats, script size, etc...
> >
> > > Plus warranties usually
> > > result in the defective goods being replaced rather than a monetary
> > > refund, right?
> >
> > Usually yes. The next smaller "unit of time" in Germany would be two
> > weeks, the so-called "Fernabsatzgesetz". It allows you to send back
> > mail-orders and usually you want the money back. Don't know if
> that made
> > it into EU law or how it applies to other countries.
>
> It's EU law, but the Distance Selling Directive only says "at least
> seven days", so the exact period probably varies by country (in the UK
> it is 7 days).
>
> But the clock only starts ticking when you receive the goods, and the
> Distance Selling Directive allows the supplier 30 days "to execute the
> order" (I *think* the 30 days always has to include shipping, because
> for consumer contracts title doesn't pass until the goods are
> delivered, so the order wouldn't be considered complete until then).
>
> So I think latest possible deadline for returning the goods for refund
> could be up to 30 days to execute the order plus "at least 7 days"
> (with some countries allowing more). Plus, conceivably, shipping
> time, if some member states have chosen to interpret the 30 day
> execution differently.
>
> So I think this adds up to "a couple of months, give or take". In
> practice, though, even a couple of months is a bit on the short time.
> What if the goods are delayed. How many people have had miner orders
> outstanding for the best part of a year?
>
> roy
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> <mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-30 17:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-03-28 11:07 Mike Hearn
2014-03-28 11:25 ` Andreas Schildbach
2014-03-28 11:31 ` Mike Hearn
2014-03-28 16:59 ` Andreas Schildbach
2014-03-28 18:19 ` Mike Hearn
2014-03-28 20:56 ` Andreas Schildbach
2014-03-29 9:27 ` Roy Badami
2014-03-29 13:29 ` Mike Hearn
2014-03-30 17:21 ` Andreas Schildbach [this message]
2014-03-28 11:38 ` Wladimir
2014-03-28 11:45 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-03-28 11:46 ` Mike Hearn
2014-03-28 11:54 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-03-28 12:27 ` Mike Hearn
2014-03-28 12:55 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-03-28 13:00 ` Mike Hearn
2014-03-28 13:09 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-03-28 11:30 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-03-28 13:18 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-03-28 14:01 ` Gavin Andresen
2014-03-28 14:06 ` Mike Hearn
2014-03-28 14:27 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-03-28 15:23 ` Mike Hearn
2014-03-28 15:26 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-03-28 16:34 ` Mike Hearn
2014-03-28 16:45 ` Tamas Blummer
2014-03-31 9:23 ` Peter Todd
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='lh9jqm$q77$1@ger.gmane.org' \
--to=andreas@schildbach$(echo .)de \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox