An article on Cnet says:

The Nov. 18 ruling, by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, said the state was not justified in requiring Web sites to have a real-estate broker's license in order to publish real-estate advertising and other information while allowing newspapers to do so.

Imagine! The audacity! Allowing newspapers to publish real estate listings, but not the Internet unless the site owner has a real-estate broker's license. That's just crazy in my humble opinion.

Another article by Declan McCullagh Hands off of Net shopping, claims "the federal government is fighting against tax-happy state legislators. The latter are becoming increasingly worried about their residents buying cheaper products over the Internet--and not paying state sales taxes or funneling purchases through local campaign-contributing businesses."

Regardless of whether it is the wine industry, real estate, or government, the Internet is progressively becoming a serious contender for the consumer dollar, and sales are being lost off-line in favor of shopping online. This means it is time for more brick and mortar businesses to examine their working business model and learn to adapt....

These businesses need to learn to compete. They need to aggressively market their websites (for those that have one) and do a better job of getting their customers permission to send them electronic offers. It's no surprise that most off-line businesses are failing at this. Pushing the government to set prohibitions on online sales is the wrong way to compete. Any judge who would rule in favor of such tactics needs to be removed from his position. He is obviously living in some other century then the 21st.