They are talking about children's products. I am not sure how this works out for rpg books. Or even other hobby products. And I cant find any age indicator on any such product.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Will the CPSIA harm the role playing games market?
- Thread starter AdmundfortGeographer
- Start date
They are talking about children's products. I am not sure how this works out for rpg books. Or even other hobby products. And I cant find any age indicator on any such product.
Herremann the Wise
First Post
Let's say you have Joe Bloggs Hobby Shop.
He has a whole heap of stock, some from big suppliers who would most likely provide the required certification upon request. From smaller suppliers, he could most likely access nothing (except maybe an email certifying that their products (books) are lead/phthalate-free but with no further documentation).
Is Joe Bloggs going to be that worried about all of this? Sure, he might focus on his miniature range making sure everything's in order but all his books and games too? Surely he has nothing to be worried about? I mean are a bunch of government accountants followed by a bunch of scientists going to come traipsing into his premises threatening him? Is Joe Bloggs going to worry about being sued in twenty years time because he sold an uncertified RPG book to Johnny?
Or is Joe Bloggs going to say that this "law" doesn't apply to him?
I'm speaking from Sydney, Australia here where in the main, it is considered ridiculous that you can successfully sue a furniture shop for damages relating to you tripping over your own child in their premises. YMMV - such legal action being seen as just, responsible and appropriate.
Best Regards
A somewhat bemused Herremann the Wise
He has a whole heap of stock, some from big suppliers who would most likely provide the required certification upon request. From smaller suppliers, he could most likely access nothing (except maybe an email certifying that their products (books) are lead/phthalate-free but with no further documentation).
Is Joe Bloggs going to be that worried about all of this? Sure, he might focus on his miniature range making sure everything's in order but all his books and games too? Surely he has nothing to be worried about? I mean are a bunch of government accountants followed by a bunch of scientists going to come traipsing into his premises threatening him? Is Joe Bloggs going to worry about being sued in twenty years time because he sold an uncertified RPG book to Johnny?
Or is Joe Bloggs going to say that this "law" doesn't apply to him?
I'm speaking from Sydney, Australia here where in the main, it is considered ridiculous that you can successfully sue a furniture shop for damages relating to you tripping over your own child in their premises. YMMV - such legal action being seen as just, responsible and appropriate.
Best Regards
A somewhat bemused Herremann the Wise
Jan van Leyden
Adventurer
I've had dealt with a similar question for our products. Our mother company decided to go for RoHS-compliancy with all products. Due to this we had to certify that our printed manuals were RoHS-conform as well.
Essentially we had to ask our printers', who in turn asked their sources for paper, toner, and glue.
We shifted the blame on the printers with a contract which made clear that they must only ship us manuals which were produced with materials they recieved from such certified vendors.
After a few heated meetings with sour looking representatives from the printers' everything went back to normal.
Is the US law really allowing for retro-active action? This might hurt...
Essentially we had to ask our printers', who in turn asked their sources for paper, toner, and glue.
We shifted the blame on the printers with a contract which made clear that they must only ship us manuals which were produced with materials they recieved from such certified vendors.
After a few heated meetings with sour looking representatives from the printers' everything went back to normal.
Is the US law really allowing for retro-active action? This might hurt...
JDJblatherings
First Post
"Under the new law, children’s products with more than 600 ppm total lead cannot lawfully be sold in the United States on or after February 10, 2009, even if they were manufactured before that date. The total lead limit drops to 300 ppm on August 14, 2009.
The new law requires that domestic manufacturers and importers certify that children’s products made after February 10 meet all the new safety standards and the lead ban. Sellers of used children’s products, such as thrift stores and consignment stores, are not required to certify that those products meet the new lead limits, phthalates standard or new toy standards.
The new safety law does not require resellers to test children’s products in inventory for compliance with the lead limit before they are sold. However, resellers cannot sell children’s products that exceed the lead limit and therefore should avoid products that are likely to have lead content, unless they have testing or other information to indicate the products being sold have less than the new limit. Those resellers that do sell products in violation of the new limits could face civil and/or criminal penalties. "
from: Information on the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA)
That's just an overview but it is poorly worded and the CPSIA and enforcement of it will be a train-wreck to U.S. retail.
The new law requires that domestic manufacturers and importers certify that children’s products made after February 10 meet all the new safety standards and the lead ban. Sellers of used children’s products, such as thrift stores and consignment stores, are not required to certify that those products meet the new lead limits, phthalates standard or new toy standards.
The new safety law does not require resellers to test children’s products in inventory for compliance with the lead limit before they are sold. However, resellers cannot sell children’s products that exceed the lead limit and therefore should avoid products that are likely to have lead content, unless they have testing or other information to indicate the products being sold have less than the new limit. Those resellers that do sell products in violation of the new limits could face civil and/or criminal penalties. "
from: Information on the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA)
That's just an overview but it is poorly worded and the CPSIA and enforcement of it will be a train-wreck to U.S. retail.
AdmundfortGeographer
Getting lost in fantasy maps
But D&D has an age range of 12 and up, the law covers all products sold to ages 12 and under. Leaving an overlap because of kids aged 12, thus D&D will be affected. How about all of those partner companies who make supplements for D&D under the GSL?
Brown Jenkin
First Post
They stamp on them "Ages 13 and up." The GSL does not require any age range compatibility.
Similar Threads
