Electronic ads on plates

[SP Cook]

http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/21/news/economy/california_budget_electronic_plates/

From California.  Idea is to replace the standard license plates with ones that are a digital display screen which would switch from the numbers to an ad when the vehicle was struck in traffic or parked.

 

[Scott5114]

So what if they're committing an infraction while stopped (i.e. illegal parking, blocking an intersection)?

[agentsteel53]

"do you know why I'm pulling you over?"
"no, sir"
"your plate's out. that is, of course, a fine of $675."

yep, it'll definitely help bring California some revenue.

[algorerhythms]

So, any guesses on how long it will take for 10,000 license plates to be hacked to read "OUTATIME"?

[J N Winkler]

I think this is a thoroughly bad idea.  What if advertising space is bought by an enterprise I disagree with on moral grounds?  Think of a preacher driving a car whose license plate advertises "Playmate Ranch" . . .

[agentsteel53]

I think this is a thoroughly bad idea.  What if advertising space is bought by an enterprise I disagree with on moral grounds?  Think of a preacher driving a car whose license plate advertises "Playmate Ranch" . . .

I would be willing to chalk that up as one of the costs of driving a car in California.  After all, one does not, technically, own their license plate. 

however, another technical issue, what if an advertisement displays "www.penispills.com" or whatnot - and the driver of the car behind them instantly flips open their smart phone, dials up the website while doing 90 down interstate 5, and promptly causes a wreck?

(then again this is a problem with roadside billboards already - does anyone, upon returning home, ever remember a website they saw by the side of the road?)

[KillerTux]

There is so many things wrong with the electronic plates. They won't be as durable as the metal plates so on any truck it will get beat up with trailer hitches and debris. Another thing is power, do I have to replace the batteries or do I have to wire the plate to my car's electrical system? What about classic cars with older systems like positive ground and 6 volt systems? The biggest issue of all is how do the ads get delivered to the plate? I hope one does not have to go down to the DMV and get it changed out or the plate requires a Wi-Fi like system to update.

[agentsteel53]

The biggest issue of all is how do the ads get delivered to the plate? I hope one does not have to go down to the DMV and get it changed out or the plate requires a Wi-Fi like system to update.

that's not a bug, it's a feature.

"do you know why I'm pulling you over?"
"no, sir"
"your license plate advertisements are expired.  Seriously, did you think you could putter down our motorways, brazenly displaying mobile billboards for Confederated Slave Holdings, Arthur Anderson, and pets.com?  That'll be $483, plus the $264 mandatory donation to civil rights causes to encourage minorities to wear motorcycle helmets."

[J N Winkler]

I think this is a thoroughly bad idea.  What if advertising space is bought by an enterprise I disagree with on moral grounds?  Think of a preacher driving a car whose license plate advertises "Playmate Ranch" . . .

I would be willing to chalk that up as one of the costs of driving a car in California.  After all, one does not, technically, own their license plate.

That in turn leads to another problem.  Because the license plate is (presumably) property of the State of California, that implies state endorsement of goods and services advertised on the plate.  I can see a lot of red tape (possibly vitiating the effectiveness of the plates as a revenue source) associated with determining whether an enterprise seeking advertising space offers goods or services that are legal in California--which prostitution is not.

I also don't think the distraction problem is solved by having the advertising appear when the car is stopped--if you are trying to take in an ad which is interrupted by the car in front of you moving off, your attention is off the traffic.  What if the citizen or law enforcement needs to see the plate number when the car is stopped in order to report a crime, and the plate is showing the ad instead of the number?  The message space on license plates is already confined too, so it would be difficult to have ads longer than the number itself and that in turn would almost inevitably imply multi-frame ads.

[agentsteel53]

That in turn leads to another problem.  Because the license plate is (presumably) property of the State of California, that implies state endorsement of goods and services advertised on the plate.  I can see a lot of red tape (possibly vitiating the effectiveness of the plates as a revenue source) associated with determining whether an enterprise seeking advertising space offers goods or services that are legal in California--which prostitution is not.

I don't know if the endorsement is implied.  Do billboard owners endorse every ad that they put up?  I'd imagine, as private companies, they run the gamut from accepting advertisements that they would, themselves, endorse, to the opposite end of doing business with anyone whose money is green.  It would make sense for the state of CA to be heavily on the latter side of that spectrum.  Certainly, people are going to be offended, but at least they'll be offended in non-discriminating patterns.

To check the legality of a business should be fairly straightforward.  Just as billboards aren't allowed to display ads for Jack's Shack of Crack, neither would license plates.  (The "vote X on Prop 8" billboards are an entirely different issue - and, like I said, they should be allowed without discrimination against certain values of X.)

as for it being distracting ... yes, of course it's going to be distracting, and that is one issue I have with it.  (The same way that I've had to exert very strong discipline to not rear-end someone who had a bumper sticker with 1/4" high letters... turns out it was just the name of the manufacturer of the sticker!)

[J N Winkler]

I don't know if the endorsement is implied.  Do billboard owners endorse every ad that they put up?  I'd imagine, as private companies, they run the gamut from accepting advertisements that they would, themselves, endorse, to the opposite end of doing business with anyone whose money is green.  It would make sense for the state of CA to be heavily on the latter side of that spectrum.  Certainly, people are going to be offended, but at least they'll be offended in non-discriminating patterns.

Actually, I would expect it to be just the opposite.  Private companies have the freedom to deal with anyone who has the green.  They don't have to adopt a moral stance on anything unless that is part of a commercial strategy.  Government, on the other hand, has a responsibility to promote the welfare of the general public.  This is inconsistent with having a license plate advertising program which is open to all comers, including vendors of goods and services which are illegal in the jurisdiction issuing the license plates.

To check the legality of a business should be fairly straightforward.  Just as billboards aren't allowed to display ads for Jack's Shack of Crack, neither would license plates.  (The "vote X on Prop 8" billboards are an entirely different issue - and, like I said, they should be allowed without discrimination against certain values of X.)

The reason "Vote X on Proposition Whatever" billboards are a different issue is that they are a form of political speech, which is protected from the restrictions generally applicable to advertising.  FWIW, I don't think there is actually a law against advertising "Jack's Shack of Crack"--it would just be pointless, because there is nowhere in the world that crack is legal.  "Playmate Ranch" is a realistic scenario though because prostitution is illegal in California but legal in Nevada under the county-option system.  For that matter, so is "Matt's Hut of Qat."

as for it being distracting ... yes, of course it's going to be distracting, and that is one issue I have with it.  (The same way that I've had to exert very strong discipline to not rear-end someone who had a bumper sticker with 1/4" high letters... turns out it was just the name of the manufacturer of the sticker!)

Another consideration:  we don't allow advertising signs of any description (including political campaign signs) within the highway right-of-way.  Why should we make an exception for license plates?

[agentsteel53]

Actually, I would expect it to be just the opposite.  Private companies have the freedom to deal with anyone who has the green.  They don't have to adopt a moral stance on anything unless that is part of a commercial strategy.  Government, on the other hand, has a responsibility to promote the welfare of the general public.  This is inconsistent with having a license plate advertising program which is open to all comers, including vendors of goods and services which are illegal in the jurisdiction issuing the license plates.

what about the Adopt-a-Highway program?  Would they let Gambino Family Concrete Overshoes apply?

as for something that is not universally illegal - there's nothing preventing people from going to a different jurisdiction.  In the case of prostitution, Nevada isn't even a logistical challenge, like a Dutch coffee shop would be.  

To "promote the general welfare" is not to play "see no evil, hear no evil" with regard to activities outside a particular sphere of influence.

Another consideration:  we don't allow advertising signs of any description (including political campaign signs) within the highway right-of-way.  Why should we make an exception for license plates?

see: Adopt-a-Highway program, in which a certain form of advertisement is not only allowed in the right of way, but furnished by the state, in exchange for various considerations.

[J N Winkler]

what about the Adopt-a-Highway program?  Would they let Gambino Family Concrete Overshoes apply?

"Gambino Family Concrete Overshoes" is subtle, and might get through.  I am fairly sure though that there are multiple precedents for hate groups (KKK, various neo-Nazi organizations) being refused lengths under the Adopt-A-Highway program.  Similarly, in most (if not all) states you cannot get vanity tags with swearwords, "Heil Hitler," and the like.

as for something that is not universally illegal - there's nothing preventing people from going to a different jurisdiction.  In the case of prostitution, Nevada isn't even a logistical challenge, like a Dutch coffee shop would be.

There is certainly nothing preventing people from going to jurisdictions where the behavior is legal, but the argument still applies that the state shouldn't be encouraging or otherwise condoning behavior that it has declared illegal as a matter of public policy, even if it occurs elsewhere.

To "promote the general welfare" is not to play "see no evil, hear no evil" with regard to activities outside a particular sphere of influence.

In practice it means the state does not interfere with third-party advertising except to provide certain consumer protections (e.g. truth-in-advertising laws, FTC supervision, etc.), but it in no way obligates the state to provide a forum for advertising goods or services which are illegal or otherwise considered contrary to public policy.

Another consideration:  we don't allow advertising signs of any description (including political campaign signs) within the highway right-of-way.  Why should we make an exception for license plates?

see: Adopt-a-Highway program, in which a certain form of advertisement is not only allowed in the right of way, but furnished by the state, in exchange for various considerations.

Adopt-A-Highway signs, like other apparent counterexamples like LOGO signs, are really exceptions that prove the rule.  Identification of the person or business only is allowed (no other advertising content) and the identification must fit within a message space of fixed dimensions.  Adopt-A-Highway signs have the additional requirement that the identification must be in a standard typeface on all signs.  Moreover, there are strict eligibility criteria, and the administering entity has the right to refuse persons or businesses it considers unsuitable (e.g., hate groups).

[agentsteel53]

In practice it means the state does not interfere with third-party advertising except to provide certain consumer protections (e.g. truth-in-advertising laws, FTC supervision, etc.), but it in no way obligates the state to provide a forum for advertising goods or services which are illegal or otherwise considered contrary to public policy.

To me it doesn't seem to be too difficult to filter out the illegal services.  Yes, maybe the Gambino family business (try our fish-related insomnia treatments!) wouldn't be noticed for a few days, but I figure eventually someone will call and complain.  Given the general lethargy of the DMV, I don't see the state taking care of it very quickly or expensively, but at some point the plate will get changed.  

(in general, what's the procedure for dealing with a vanity plate that turns out offensive?  I know a few MILF plates got out in the very beginning of that acronym coming into use, because apparently the DMV is square when it comes to slang expressions.)

Adopt-A-Highway signs, like other apparent counterexamples like LOGO signs, are really exceptions that prove the rule.  Identification of the person or business only is allowed (no other advertising content) and the identification must fit within a message space of fixed dimensions.  Adopt-A-Highway signs have the additional requirement that the identification must be in a standard typeface on all signs.  Moreover, there are strict eligibility criteria, and the administering entity has the right to refuse persons or businesses it considers unsuitable (e.g., hate groups).

would subjecting license plates to similar typographic considerations (perhaps in the name of efficiency?) be commercially viable?  i.e. a major soft drink company may buy the right to display the 9-character string "COCA COLA" in place of the standard serial number, at times when the vehicle is driving over 5 mph.  

[agentsteel53]

then again, I take a fairly laissez-faire attitude towards offensive advertising.  If I can put up with one side of the Prop 8 debate being publicly aired, then I can put up with the occasional white separatist message.  

As long as they're not openly advocating violence, I really don't care.

[corco]

Governments have plenty of experience in dealing with advertising. The USPS advertises for certain companies in change of address mailers, for example. City buses, almost always operated by a government run entity, generally have advertisements on them. I go to a public state university and in the Student Union Building there is an advertisement for McDonald's.

I'd suspect whatever standards in place for, say, bus advertising (which is the most parallel) could easily be rolled over into license plate distribution.

I also suspect license plate advertising will come at quite a high price, which in itself acts as a barrier to entry that will keep things like adult stores from even being able to afford to buy ad space. It would be a total waste to buy advertising on 5 cars, for example, because if Jeff's Flower Shop in Temecula buys advertising on five cars very few people will see it, there is no guarantee that the cars are being driven, and the cars very well could be usually located out of state or in Redding or something. If they don't offer any sort of regional specification (and it would be very interesting to see how they'd sort that out without putting tracking devices in cars, which opens another privacy hole that probably won't be openable by something as strange as this), that will behoove only national or statewide companies to buy ad space, and those large companies are usually non-offensive to the majority of the public.

[agentsteel53]

only national or statewide companies to buy ad space, and those large companies are usually non-offensive to the majority of the public.

Church of Scientology, anyone?  One of the larger, more offensive companies in the state of California.

[J N Winkler]

Not sure about that.  Wikipedia says Scientology has an estimated annual turnover of $500 million.  In comparison, Procter & Gamble (protagonist of the moon-man logo which in the 1980's many suspected was a Satanist symbol) has annual turnover of $79.3 billion.  Kraft has turnover of $40.4 billion.  If you take operating profit as the relevant measure, on the assumption that Scientology, being a fraud, takes almost 100% of its revenue as profit, those other two companies are still much bigger--$13 billion in the case of P&G, $5.5 billion for Kraft.

Corco's point about the lack of geographical specificity in license plate advertising is a good one.  But bus advertising can be controversial.  See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheist_Bus_Campaign

[Scott5114]

I am fairly sure though that there are multiple precedents for hate groups (KKK, various neo-Nazi organizations) being refused lengths under the Adopt-A-Highway program.

Actually, there was a case a few years ago where the Klan applied to adopt a segment of I-55 in southeast Missouri. When MoDOT refused the application, the Klan sued, and the courts upheld the Klan's right to free speech and forced MoDOT to allow the adoption and fully sign the sponsorship. In retaliation, the legislature named the affected segment of freeway after Rosa Parks.

It all turned out to be a publicity stunt, however. After about a year, MoDOT terminated the Klan's sponsorship, because they had done minimal maintenance to the right of way, violating the program's rules, and the KKK signs came down.

[corco]

Actually, there was a case a few years ago where the Klan applied to adopt a segment of I-55 in southeast Missouri. When MoDOT refused the application, the Klan sued, and the courts upheld the Klan's right to free speech and forced MoDOT to allow the adoption and fully sign the sponsorship. In retaliation, the legislature named the affected segment of freeway after Rosa Parks.

On that subject, just north of my hometown of McCall on US-95 for as long as I can remember (at least since 1998), the highway has been adopted by Yahweh's 666 Warning Assembly. I don't recall much controversy about that, but it has always been curious to drive by and see that signed.

[agentsteel53]

I'd always thought that was entertaining, too.  When I first drove past it (2am on some June morning in 2006) I had to turn around and get a picture!

[Scott5114]

Always trust the religion hosted on tripod!

[agentsteel53]

Always trust the religion hosted on tripod!

damn right.

Warning to all mankind, all races of people, all religions of man and all the Nations. YAHUWEH and His Son YAHUSHUA, the only Self-existent One's have a controversy with you.

later:

YAHUSHUA IS THE ANTICHRIST, HE IS THE SON OF YAHUWEH.

getting things a bit confused, are we?

[Scott5114]

I would suggest getting a tripod and coming up with a completely ridiculous religion using the 1948 MUTCD as its holy book, but I'd be afraid it'd go horribly wrong and we'd end up with some sort of weird Scientology with cutout shields.

[agentsteel53]

Scientology

that's bad.

with cutout shields.

that's good.

the cutouts are laced with potassium benzoate.

..

that's bad.