The law on selling online filed. Risk reduction got stronger as a constraint. No path named.

Headline. Standing job is other recon, not stop. This hour read the public rules that govern how anything is sold or ordered through a website or an email — the Electronic Commerce (EC Directive) Regulations 2002 — and not a re-read of Octopus Ventures or the unfair-trading rules from this morning. I have not named a market. A rulebook is not a customer. P (company position toward $2.5–5bn) has not moved.

Why this hour. Toward the $2.5–5bn company the first-customer cut stays parked (63e813ea); path candidates still cannot be compiled on the live gate (compile 0; blocker still reach — how a first professional hour is found and sold); the last two recon hours read reach hosts (SafeLives, Octopus Ventures) and the 14:55 fire was your direction ask, so this hour reads the law that sits on the selling mechanism itself, which can be read without inventing a buyer. Hold = no invention, not no recon.

What it does to the live doll gate. Nothing that opens it. Path candidates still cannot be compiled. Compile stays 0. It does sharpen the shape of the blocker: "how the first hour is sold" is not a blank page — the moment a paid hour is offered, priced, emailed or ordered through a website, the mechanism is already regulated before any money moves. That is a constraint on how, not a named how. It did not compile a candidate and did not install the productised-menu bucket as a path.

Grade. Got stronger (as a constraint on the reach mechanism only). Stayed thin as a path. Honesty: it is not a path. Who / why they would pay / how FYJ reaches them / what sits next are all still missing.

Latest. These are the 2002 rules for what the law calls an "information society service" — in plain terms, selling or contracting through a website, an app or email. They are still live: the government amended them on 7 May 2026, stripping out the old internal-market scaffolding, and the parts that matter to selling were left untouched. What they require, in your language: you cannot sell from a surface that hides who you are (name, a real geographic address, an email that reaches you quickly, the register and company number, VAT number where it applies — all permanently accessible); a price has to say clearly whether tax and delivery are included; a marketing message has to be obviously a marketing message, has to say who it is from, and any discount or offer has to carry its conditions where they can actually be read; an unsolicited commercial email has to be identifiable as one the moment it lands. If an order is placed on a page, you also owe the buyer the steps to conclude the contract, whether it will be filed, a way to spot and fix input errors, the languages offered, terms they can store, and an electronic acknowledgement without undue delay. There is a sharp fork worth knowing: a first hour agreed purely by email is switched out of the order-flow duties but still carries the identity, labelling and price duties, while a first hour ordered through a page pulls in the acknowledgement and error-correction duties — and if the error-correction means are missing, the buyer can rescind. Enforcement is not only regulators: any recipient, business or consumer, can sue for damages. Two honesty notes. The regulations still point at a 2001 enforcement instrument that has itself been revoked, and the only live government guidance naming them is an old PDF that is visibly out of date, so the collective-enforcement route is not something I can evidence from primary text yet. And a sibling check on the 2015 company-disclosure rules confirmed a company must show its registered name on its websites, and its registered number, home nation and registered office on business letters, order forms and websites — with an offence and a daily fine for officers in default. One line: 63e813ea is live (parked).

Open the file. 3 Sep 15:55 research · Agent View evidence file

P unchanged. p-evidence.md stays empty so the score cannot be faked. market-paths.md still starts No path named yet.

Cut still parked (63e813ea). The customer cut is the first-customer milestone / north star, not the live job. Not unparked this hour. Contract 63e813ea is live (parked).

Walk. Destination ($2.5–5bn) → first-customer gate (parked, 63e813ea) → live gate (path candidates still cannot be compiled; compile 0; blocker still reach) → this route (Risk reduction / the law on selling through a website or email, a constraint on the reach mechanism, not a named path; the original six buckets are Agent View labels only) → this hour's finding (stronger as a constraint, thin as a path) → does not name a customer, does not move P, does not unpark the cut.

This page sits under Evidence. It is a dated record. It does not move heading. The working file — every URL, status code and byte size, the regulation-by-regulation text, and the two unreconciled gaps — stays on Agent View. Hermes parked. This hour worked a constraint that sits directly on the reach blocker, not "which of the original six".

08:55 skipped (no reply by 10:25) — not re-asked. 14:55 direction window is open until 16:25 and your reply is still pending — not re-asked this hour, not logged as skipped. Previous hour 14:55 EXISTS (decision ask only) — not FAIL.

Pushback invited — decide or criticise

Working set, not exhaustive. Criticism of this recon — deepen, drop, or change perimeter — not "name a market so the hour has a title" and not "which of the original six".
1. This is the first constraint filed that sits on the selling mechanism rather than on the company or the workforce. Is that the right perimeter to keep working while no path is named, or is one filing enough?
2. The email-only versus page-order fork is the one live decision this hour surfaced that touches reach. Do you want the next hours to keep mapping how a first hour may lawfully be sold, or is that premature until you name who it is sold to?
3. The collective-enforcement route (Enterprise Act 2002 Part 8) is only evidenced by stale guidance right now. Worth one hour on the primary text, or is that depth we do not need?
4. Named unused alternatives for the next hour: Money Laundering Regulations 2017, Companies Act 2006 Part 15 accounts duties, or a switch of category entirely (Balderton, LocalGlobe, MMC Ventures on companies in the space). Which — or something you name instead?

Confirmation

Contract UUID 26e4abb6-3b66-4a66-a4f7-d4c065ad9233 is live. Hold = no invention, not no recon. Standing work is recon until end-to-end paths emerge and value-forming is visible. No path named. P unchanged. Customer cut parked.
One line: 63e813ea is live (parked).
e834b2f2 compile still 0; blocker still reach. 58cd58c1 Founder View is the story. 06657cd0 pages shareable. f7c2a04e voice walk. c7b2e14a short Evidence. Hermes parked. Slot unchanged. Layer unchanged (Peer toggle: Founder View ↔ Agent View).
08:55 skipped (no reply by 10:25) — not re-asked. 14:55 window open until 16:25; reply pending; not re-asked. Previous hour 14:55 EXISTS — not FAIL. Automation for 15:55 fired ~16:01 London.