E-commerce provides consumers with many new ways to transact business. These novel methods are known by terms not included in older laws. Examples include clickwrap contracts, digital wallets, and bitcoin. Courts and agencies are struggling to determine if consumer protection statutes apply.

The American Law Institute has been attempting to write a Restatement of the Law of Consumer Contracts since 2012. The proposed Restatement has gone through ten drafts and has generated considerable controversy among the ALI membership as well as opposition from both consumer advocacy organizations and business associations. The project is an impossible dream. Companies continually take advantage of advances in technology to make major changes in the consumer marketplace. Consequently, any Restatement will be seriously out-of-date as soon as it is approved by the ALI. Furthermore, there is a paucity of relevant cases and a lack of consensus among the courts that have issued opinions. Consequently, if approved, a Restatement will significantly influence the future development of case law. This would be unfortunate because there are other factors contributing to the inadequacy of the draft that is currently under review. The Reporters' drafts are based on an incomplete description of the consumer marketplace that fails to reflect the reality in which consumers and businesses engage in online transactions. Scholars have questioned their collection and analysis of case law. The Reporters ignore the insights of social science. They have an unduly constricted view of the factors the ALI should consider in drafting a Restatement. A major flaw is the insistence on black letter rules that embody a blanket consumer assent approach that creates a presumption that consumers engaging in online transactions are bound to standard contract terms. Alternatives to a Restatement should be considered.

American consumers increasingly use their mobile devices to pay for goods and services. Technological developments have led to rapid changes in mobile payment products. The law, however, has not kept pace. This article describes the legal framework that applies to mobile payments.The article examines the three stages of mobile payments: Stage 1 considers the law that applies to consumers who enter into contracts for the provision of mobile payment services. The article first describes the complex regulatory environment in which mobile payments occur. The focus of this part is on consumers who contract online. Stage 2 explores the law that relates to consumers’ use of mobile devices to make payments. Differences in the legal treatment of payments made with credit, debit and prepaid card accounts are analyzed. This part also reviews the law applicable to the many parties involved in mobile payments, including banks, non-banks, wireless carriers, payment processors and third-party service providers. Stage 3 describes problems consumers encounter when making payments with mobile devices, including privacy invasions, security breaches, and unauthorized payments. The article examines the sufficiency of laws consumers can use to remedy these problems.At each stage, the article highlights the gaps where no law applies, ambiguities where it is not clear whether or how a law applies, and overlap in which two or more laws apply to the same situation or more than one government agency has legal authority over the same type of conduct. The article concludes by discussing the various options available to lawmakers.Support for this project was provided by The Pew Charitable Trusts. The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of The Pew Charitable Trusts.

In Novare Group, Inc. v. Sarif, the Georgia Supreme Court rejected the plaintiffs' claim that the defendant brokers and developers violated the Georgia Fair Business Practices Act ("FBPA"), Georgia's primary consumer protection statute. The author contends that the court's approach in Novare undermines the Georgia General Assembly's purpose in enacting the FBPA to protect consumers from unfair or deceptive practices. The article criticizes the court for treating claims under the FBPA the same as common law fraud claims. It also examines the court's treatment of reliance, parol evidence, merger clauses and legislative silence. Finally, the article discusses the implications for future actions seeking redress for FBPA violations.

The article first describes mobile financial services for consumers and the types of companies participating in the provision of those services. Anticipated consumer problems are explored, including: security, privacy, unauthorized transfers, error resolution, viruses, system breakdown, consumer mistake, and the need for documentation and a history of transactions. Public policy and government regulatory issues are examined. Applicable U.S. state and federal laws are reviewed; their gaps and inadequacies are identified. The article concludes with a description of a proposed Model Law that provides satisfactory consumer protection.

The article examines major developments in the statutes, regulations and Supreme Court cases that have regulated consumer financial services since 1969. Major victories and defeats in the battle for laws protecting consumers are described. Consumer protection law is analyzed within the context of consumerism and its role as a movement for social change and law reform. The article describes the development of a permanent organizational structure for engaging in consumer law reform. This development has resulted in the institutionalization of consumerism and its values have become embedded in society’s values, better ensuring its survival. Finally, the article explores the prospects of the continued development of strong consumer protection law and the perils it faces in the future.

Home banking is popular with consumers1 and it is reasonable to expect that it will continue to grow in popularity given the public's increasing habit of doing many of life's tasks at the home computer2 and banks' marketing campaigns promoting online banking.3 The ABA Task Force on Home Banking Services Agreement has performed a valuable service in publishing their Home Banking Services Agreement (hereafter Agreement) and commentary in the Business Lawyer. It is