BLAMEHOBBS.COM
IssuesVeto LedgerVeto BlogReceipts

BLAMEHOBBS.COM

Share this page

NicoPAC
Political Advertisement
Paid for by NicoPAC

10% of funds from out-of-state contributors.
Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

Sources include Arizona Legislature bill records, LegiScan session dumps, and published veto letters. Bill numbers cited throughout.

← The Veto Ledger

Vetoed June 19, 2026 · 57th Legislature, 2nd Regular Session

HB2010

digital goods; seller's requirements; enforcement

BLAME HOBBS!

Government & transparency

THE CONTEXT: A person is guilty of a class 3 misdemeanor for engaging in fraudulent advertising practices, which include: 1) knowingly and with the intent to sell to the public real or personal property or services, or to induce the public to acquire an interest therein, makes and publishes an advertisement, either printed or by public outcry or proclamation, or otherwise, containing any false, fraudulent, deceptive or misleading representations in respect to such property or services, or the manner of its sale or distribution; or 2) publishes, circulates or disseminates any statement or assertion of fact concerning real e...

WHAT THE BILL DID: The final vetoed version would prohibit a seller of a digital good from using a term, such as buy or purchase, in the sale or advertisement that would lead a person to believe grants them an unrestricted ownership interest or an option for a time-limited rental, unless: a; at the time of each transaction the seller makes available specified information to, and receives acknowledgement from, the purchaser relating to the license of the digital good; or b; before executing each transaction, the seller provides the purchaser with a clear and conspicuous statement that the purchase of the digital good is a license and a digital manner of accessing the terms and conditions for the license, require any affirmative acknowledgement from the purchaser of notices made at or before the time of transaction by the seller to be distinct and separate from any other terms and conditions of the transaction, and direct the seller to provide notice to the purchaser and offer a prorated refund, for digital goods purchased for $20 or more, if the terms of the license change in a way that impacts the purchaser's access and does not provide alternative access to similar content.

WHY IT MATTERED: The practical reason for this bill was to give the people who rely on the rule clearer information and a defined reporting process. It would prohibit a seller of a digital good from using a term, such as buy or purchase, in the sale or advertisement that would lead a person to believe grants them an unrestricted ownership interest or an option for a time-limited rental, unless: a. at the time of each transaction the seller makes available specified information to, and receives acknowledgement from, the purchaser relating to the license of the digital good; or b. before executing each transaction, the seller provides the purchaser with a clear and conspicuous statement that the purchase of the digital good is a license and a digital manner of accessing the terms and conditions for the license, and would also require any affirmative acknowledgement from the purchaser of notices made at or before the time of transaction by the seller to be distinct and separate from any other terms and conditions of the transaction, rather than leave the current rule unchanged.

Legislature recordOfficial bill summaryVeto letter

Share this page

Related vetoes

HB2086

vaccination mandates; masks; prohibition

2026 · Government & transparency

HB2113

public service corporation; rates; intervenor

2026 · Government & transparency

HB2118

mobile food vendors; licensure

2026 · Government & transparency

HB2133

sexual material; consent; synthetic depiction

2026 · Government & transparency

HB2140

treasurer; investment; bullion

2026 · Government & transparency

HB2311

artificial intelligence service; disclosures; requirements

2026 · Government & transparency