- This topic has 7 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
hey guys. We are starting to see some of the changes being made in the Item Specifics fields as they relate to the Categories we select to list in.
We are seeing more and more “specific” fields growing in number. More fields wanting more data. Most are falling in the “Recommended” area which makes them more or less optional, especially if the field really doesn’t apply to the item we are listing.
BUT we are now seeing the Cal. Prop 65 being a “Required” field up at the top and if we skip it we are seeing some items getting messages that we have listings that need a “Required” field.
OK, but here is the problem. What do we put in that field. What wording that fulfills the Cal. Prop 65 need for us to tell buyers that an item does not contain chemicals that could be harmful to humans, the air or the climate?
With vintage ceramics, glass, pyrex, leather, books, candle holders, etc., etc. all made from metals, brass, resin, polester, polypropelyene, wood, glaze, etc., etc. from all over the world dating from the 1920’s forward. How do we know what is in, on, or made with anything that could violate Prop 65.
Do we have to run chemical tests on everything now? How do we know that materials used 50 to 70 years ago haven’t began to break down and out-gas something?
So is the old stand by, “Does Not Apply” going to be allowed to be used? Basically that allows us to say, heck we don’t know so why are you asking.
Any thoughts on compliance with Cal. Prop 65 now being a “Required Field” and what to say to fill it in.
Just curious down here in Atlanta.
Mike – MDC Concepts, Inc.
MDC Galleries and Fine Art
-
-
Mike: by the way. It seems to me that Sixbit is playing catch-up with eBay item specifics changes so it may help to be up-to-date on that. Also, I was seeing a problem in Sixbit with edits to item specifics for running listings not always propagating back to the inventory item. Not sure if this is fixed or not yet.
-
I think most of us would meet this exception:
Businesses with less than 10 employees and government agencies are exempt from Proposition 65’s warning requirements and prohibition on discharges into drinking water sources.
Businesses are also exempt from the warning requirement and discharge prohibition if the exposures they cause are so low as to create no significant risk of cancer or are significantly below levels observed to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm.
https://oehha.ca.gov/proposition-65/businesses-and-proposition-65
-
-
I think I may be using “Not for use with Food. For decorative / display use only”. Copy and paste this into that field and saving it in my templates.
This is what all the imports from other countries do / use on their tags or stamped on the products. Many dyes, glazes, colors contain phthalates, cadmium and other stuff. Without really knowing what all is in most of our old stuff then maybe the above disclaimer will cover most of it. Seems to work on the import labeling.
mike – mdcgfa
-
My helper made a statement that may hold true. She said if we say “Not for Food Use”, it mat send a signal that we know something in it is harmful and may discourage some buyers. That may very well be true.
Guess maybe a simple “none” as Timo suggests may be a better choice.
-
-
-
I agree with all the above responses. The intent of the law is to place the obligation to provide any warning materials such as labels on the producer or packager rather than on the retail seller. A reseller (even if less than 10 employees) does have to provide a Prop 65 warning if the item is sold under their own or licensed brand; they obscure, alter or remove any existing Prop 65 warnings on any item; they fail to include in the sale any Prop 65 warning materials that they received with an item; or they knowingly introduce any listed chemical into an item.
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.