Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of m.gmane.org
	designates 80.91.229.3 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=80.91.229.3;
	envelope-from=gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org;
	helo=plane.gmane.org; 
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
From: Andreas Schildbach <andreas@schildbach.de>
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2014 19:21:26 +0200
Message-ID: <lh9jqm$q77$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <CANEZrP0AwR3WgHfwYWcrC9Z_MHPDwymWXAQwp7D8XZ+o2FsK8g@mail.gmail.com>	<lh3m7i$v18$1@ger.gmane.org>	<CANEZrP3zBFs=JpJi6eazTvrTaRX6XCJLu-zrraE6bezYW7b9pQ@mail.gmail.com>	<lh49pp$4bc$1@ger.gmane.org>
	<5335BD17.6050408@plan99.net>	<lh4nma$h3e$1@ger.gmane.org>	<20140329092721.GG62995@giles.gnomon.org.uk>
	<CANEZrP3+-kJiO+pCAdEGtzebcR65eAnTjuFQgQPbzAmh6v-WyQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP3+-kJiO+pCAdEGtzebcR65eAnTjuFQgQPbzAmh6v-WyQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP 70 refund field
Precedence: list

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
>