Which completely makes sense for a face to face B&M transaction. I think the need for meeting that requirement for an internet order is a misinterpretation of the process required for compliance. I understand vendors are anxious about how the FDA will be enforcing the regs, but this selfie thing is likely not required to meet the regulations.
However, if the age verification service cannot properly establish age using the public record information supplied during the transaction, which can occur for lots of reasons that aren't nefarious, a copy of something like a drivers license with a date of birth can still be required. That DL image can be edited by blacking out the license number, and should still be acceptable for establishing age.
I agree 100%. To their credit some vendors have adopted the "best in industry" approach because they chose an AVS that had -years of experience- providing age verification for online tobacco purchases. Rather than trying to reinvent the wheel, these vendors looked to an industry that has learned to thrive under these rules/requirements and has successfully done so for many years. Transactions with vendors who chose "wisely" should be near seamless, in fact you might wonder if they're even verifying age it's that unobtrusive for most customers. Unfortunately, many other vendors didn't choose wisely, what we're seeing from them is a panicked knee jerk response to something they clearly don't yet understand. While they're busy stumbling around in the dark trying to re-invent the wheel many are inadvertently throwing their customer's online security/privacy under the bus. Especially those who decided to use an AVS that appears to be a cleverly disguised data mining company....