After we published our breakdown of the "hook email" that often precedes a Prop 65 notice, the most common question we received was some version of: how do I make these people go away?
The honest answer is: you can't. And understanding why you can't is the first step toward the only strategy that actually works.
Bounty hunters are a feature, not a bug
California's Proposition 65 was written with private enforcement built in. Any private individual or law firm can serve a 60-day notice and pursue penalties "in the public interest" — and the law deliberately lets the filing party keep a share of civil penalties, on top of attorney's fees recovered in settlements. That bounty share is not a loophole; it is the enforcement engine the statute was designed around. The state Attorney General's office publishes annual settlement summaries showing tens of millions of dollars flowing through this system every year.
Because the incentive is structural, professional filers will exist for as long as the law does. No warning label, no lawyer's letter, and no marketplace policy will remove the economics. What a seller controls is something different: how attractive a target they are.
How professional filers choose targets
The public filing record shows that noticing parties work in campaigns: a chemical and a product category that has settled well before, then dozens of similar products across the marketplace. Within a category, the economics favor targets where the case is cheap to build and likely to settle quickly — sellers with no test data, no warning where one is arguably required, and message threads full of written speculation about what their products contain.
Flip each of those around and you have the strategy. Four points:
1. Have the paperwork before anyone asks
Supplier material declarations and accredited-lab test reports for your products are the documents that actually answer a composition question. A seller who can produce them on request is a fundamentally different proposition from one who has to start asking their factory after a notice arrives — the 60-day window is short, and testing takes time. Collect declarations when you onboard a supplier, and commission testing for products in categories with filing activity, not after the fact.
2. Warn correctly where a warning is required
The core theory of a Prop 65 claim is exposure to a listed chemical without the required warning. A compliant warning — including the short-form warning where its conditions are met — removes that theory for the products it covers. Two cautions: whether a warning is required at all is normally a question answered by test data, and California's regulator (OEHHA) has publicly discouraged unsupported "just in case" over-warning. Getting the warning decision and its wording right is exactly the kind of question to resolve with test results and professional advice — but where a warning is required, having a compliant one in place is the single biggest change in your risk profile.
3. Never speculate about composition in writing
As the hook-email case showed, one written sentence — "products of this type can contain trace amounts of DEHP" — can hand a filer the acknowledgment their claim was missing. Marketplace threads are permanent records. Composition questions are answered by the documents in point 1, not by guesses in a chat window. This is not about being evasive; it is about not making evidence-grade factual claims you have no data to support.
4. Watch the public record while the window is open
Every 60-day notice is public from the day it is served, and the notice period is precisely the time in which a seller can still act on solid information. A free watchlist on your brand, company, and shop names — plus the noticing parties active in your category — means you hear about a filing that may reference you while that window is open, instead of after it closes. You can also search California Prop 65 60-day notices for free right now to see the filing activity in your product category.
The point is not invulnerability
None of this makes a seller unnoticeable or immune. It changes the economics: a seller with documentation on file, correct warnings where required, a clean written record, and early awareness of filings is expensive to pursue and unlikely to settle out of fear. Professional filers, like anyone running a volume business, prefer the easier file on the pile.
This article is general information, not legal advice. Whether a warning is required for a specific product, and anything involving a served notice, settlement, or defense, is the territory of a licensed attorney experienced with Prop 65.