The beauty of echeck was it's ability to define and operate in a regulatory regime that included provisions of traditional check and EFT law. Doable for business payments -- more difficult when the consumer gets involved.
michael versace :: niteo partners, inc national director, financial services 321 summer street boston ma 02210 www.niteo.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] 617-895-3042 (o) 617-794-0425 (m) > -----Original Message----- > From: David Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 1:24 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Solving the problem of micropayments > > > It's becoming obvious to everybody that technology for these > new payments > methodologies is easily in the grasp of most - even the "new" > P2P stuff. > The issue - and I believe it to be insurmountable in the > short term - is how > do we unleash this new technology without breaking the > judicial underpinings > of value exchange. > > The new technology can be spread as a veneer over existing funds xfer > methodologies (ACH or other bi-lateral mechanisms). The only > barrier here > is the banks willingness to exposed their proprietary > mechanisms to a common > market. However, to take these same technologies and turn them into a > "negotiable instrument" (like eCheck originally tried to do), > is to open the > doors of federal and state regulations - banking, UCC, Dsig, etc. > > The veneer - well maybe it will happen, but I wouldn't hold > my breath. I > think that any new widely adopted means of negotiable > exchange are at least > 10 years away, maybe much further. > > FWIW, > > David > > -----Original Message----- > From: Todd Boyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 6:29 PM > To: David Smith > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Solving the problem of micropayments > > > In an age of ubiquitous networks and advanced SANs, NAS and > BI and other technologies, settlement can be effected much > cheaper than today's banks, credit cards and settlement > infrastructure. > > Today's infrastructure is maintained only by the protections and > regulation of governments who are, in turn, dependent on those > infrastructures for tax collection. > > Todd > > > At 06:29 AM 2/23/2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >Unfortunately, those nice things that banks have come with a > significant > >cost infrastructure. It is that infrastructure that makes > micropayments > >cost prohibitive. For example, suppose someone decided to > compile a CD of > >the tunes he likes. He downloads several hundred songs. He > would have to > >pay for each song (post Napster) and each song would generate a > >transaction. Consider what would be required to post each > micropoayment > >(think of lines of print on a checking account statement -- > required, the > >additional number of pages, additional postage, additional > disk space to > >support online lookups, etc.). Then consider that the bank > has to have > >the infrastructure to support investigations of each of the > charges. The > >cost adds up quickly. > > > >The solutions we had worked on always involved aggregating > transactions to > >minimize the number of transactions posted to a bank > account. A nonbank > >company has the legal ability to do this, a bank does not. > > > >Alan > > > To remove yourself from this list send a message Unsubscribe to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >
