3 ms·
In Europe, and this is well known, companies must comply with the intent of the law, especially on something related to customers and compatibility. This is ver
by pfortuny 4y ago
In Europe, and this is well known, companies must comply with the intent of the law, especially on something related to customers and compatibility. This is very very different from the US legal system, which can be tricked “ad nauseam”.
Apple may well do what they please but there will be fines, and even prohibition of sales. Because the EU “knows” that it can be done without much burden and “sees” it as a benefit for the citizens. I agree in this case on both things.
- filoleg 4y agoThis is a nice fantasy and all, but how did that whole "In Europe [...] companies must comply with the intent of the law" work out for GDPR? As far as I am aware, all the big tech companies that were used as the primary reason for creating GDPR are still doing the exact same things (that people were upset about) they were doing back then (just in a legally compliant™ way now according to "the intent of the law"). Not trying to take a dig at GDPR with this, it definitely made some tech companies to make some small concessions, like being able to export your data easier. But it would be difficult to argue that companies comply with GDPR according to the intent of the law, and not according to the letter of the law instead.
- pfortuny 4y agoWell, ok. I specify: in hardware matters.
- filoleg 4y agoI mean, "in EU, law interpretation tends to follow the intent of the law when it comes to hardware, but it tends to follow the letter of the law when it comes to software" feels like an extremely strange and unrealistic statement. Both software and hardware are tightly related areas (i.e., tech), and I cannot imagine why the baseline of the law interpretation would be radically opposite.