Will the CPSIA harm the role playing games market?

[Umbran]

How can you possibly make manufacturers liable for breaking a law which didn't exist?

You don't. The law is about the sale of products, not their production. The burden lies on the sellers. Going forward, sellers have contracts with manufacturers requiring compliance such that they'll be able to shift liability, but for current stock you can't legally go after the manufacturer.

 

[DaveMage]

The minis are the potential problem.

They are marketed for ages 12 and up.

When I asked a WotC rep a while back if they were safe for children, the response I got was essentially "they are for ages 12 and up".

Draw your own conclusions.

 

[Umbran]

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.

Unless they simply change the stated target to be 13 and up, thus sidestepping the law altogether. Given the overwhelming evidence for folks of adult age playing the game, they should have no problem supporting that claim until such time as their supply stream is cleared of lead.

 

[hexgrid]

The minis are the potential problem.

They are marketed for ages 12 and up.

When I asked a WotC rep a while back if they were safe for children, the response I got was essentially "they are for ages 12 and up".

Draw your own conclusions.

Part of the problem is that the definition of a "children's" product is ridiculously broad:

Whether the product is commonly recognized by consumers as being intended for use by a child 12 years of age or younger.

So an age stamp by the manufacturer isn't necessarily good enough.

And what's with it going all the way up to 12, anyway? 12 years old is WAY past the "eat your toys" stage of life (I hope.)

 

[Mistwell]

Here is the FAQ on children's books

Does the new requirement for total lead on children's products apply to children's books, cassettes and CD's, printed game boards, posters and other printed goods used for children's education?

In general, yes. CPSIA defines children’s products as those products intended primarily for use by children 12 and under. Accordingly, these products would be subject to the lead limit for paint and surface coatings at 16 CFR part 1303 (and the 90 ppm lead paint limit effective August 14, 2009) as well as the new lead limits for children’s products containing lead (600 ppm lead limit effective February 10, 2009, and 300 ppm lead limit effective August 14, 2009). If the children’s products use printing inks or materials which actually become a part of the substrate, such as the pigment in a plastic article, or those materials which are actually bonded to the substrate, such as by electroplating or ceramic glazing, they would be excluded from the lead paint limit. However, these products are still considered to be lead containing products irrespective of whether such products are excluded from the lead paint limit and are subject to the lead limits for children’s products containing lead. For lead containing children’s products, CPSIA specifically provides that paint, coatings, or electroplating may not be considered a barrier that would render lead in the substrate inaccessible to a child.

 

[smug]

Here is the FAQ on children's books

'Primarily' must surely be the key word:

"...defines children’s products as those products intended primarily for use by children 12 and under..."

 

[Brown Jenkin]

Unless D&D and the hobby game market have changed drasticly, there is no way it is primarily for children 12 and under.

 

[Baron Opal]

The intent of the law was to allow purchasers to legally attack large merchandisers like Wal-Mart when the sell Chinese toys painted with lead based paint. By putting the onus on the retailer, they can then put pressure on the manufacturer to enusre that the law is obeyed.

The problem comes from situations like donations to Good Will or St. Vincent's. They have had to refuse donations of kid's clothes and books because of this law, which negatively impacts the poor. St. Vincent, being the retailer, has the responsibility of ensuring the lead-free state of the merchandise. There is no exemption for used products. You also have to prove that the merchandise is lead free upon request rather than being penalized if lead is found in the merchandise. That is the killer part of the law. You can't say, "these toddler sleepers were made in Guatamala, not China, and they are cloth, not painted wood."

"So, you have documentation from a lab that states they are lead free?"

"Well..."

I personally am bothered by the kids books being dumped in our landfill because no one can reasonably test them. I don't think this will effect gaming that much, since the primary markets are teens and older, but I am disturbed by the unintended consequences.

Also, homeschoolers are particularly disturbed by this because they rely on a lot of used books to make their lesson plans. There is concern that this may have a chilling effect on homeschooling.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

I think one must look at how the law considers "primarily" rather than a reasonable reader.

Does the law consider a declared age range on a product to mean that entire age range is the "primary" target market? Seems likely to me.

Must there be proof that the statistical average age of real world users is under 13 to qualify as "primarily"? Seems a far too optimistic view of how government regulators work to me. Especially when we not only have the federal Consumer Product Safety Commission but also 50 state Attorneys General and their staff.

Are there any RPG publishers out there who have spoken with counsel on this who could chime in and clear any confusion?

 

[Zelligars Apprentice]

Hope this helps...

http://www.cpsc.gov/businfo/cpsa.pdf

(2) CHILDREN’S PRODUCT.--The term “children's product” means a consumer product designed or intended primarily for children 12 years of age or younger. In determining whether a consumer product is primarily intended for a child 12 years of age or younger, the following factors shall be considered:
(A) A statement by a manufacturer about the intended use of such product, including a label on such product if such statement is reasonable.
(B) Whether the product is represented in its packaging, display, promotion, or advertising as appropriate for use by children 12 years of age or younger.
(C) Whether the product is commonly recognized by consumers as being intended for use by a child 12 years of age or younger.
(D) The Age Determination Guidelines issued by the Commission staff in September 2002, and any successor to such guidelines.

Emphasis mine.