5 ms·

EU proposes 5 years of security and 3 years of OS updates for all phones

23 points by elorant 4y ago

JAA1337 4y ago
- smoldesu 4y ago
  Yeah, but we frankly should have seen this coming the moment we let the free market start making phones. The silver lining is that we've now got an opportunity to write the tech regulation we've always needed. If we start with no-brainers like required software support lifespans, hopefully we'll feel more comfortable addressing topics like unethical advertising and alternative app distribution channels.
  - mwint 4y ago
    > the moment we let the free market start making phones. Egads, are you suggesting we shouldn’t have done this? Sent from my OnlyTenYearsLate (™) Boeing GovPhone, now with 8-bit color! Starts at $19,995 for approved citizens.
aborsy 4y ago
Does EU have a right to impose such arbitrary rules on others? If you don’t want an offer, don’t buy it. Or build your own better product, or provide extended support for android yourself. EU doesn’t appear to be a fair economic player in the world. Foreign products are heavily taxed and crippled, where I live. If you impose your arbitrary rules on other countries, others do it too, there will be problems.
- ahartmetz 4y ago
  The EU is not imposing anything on others, i.e. companies that don't sell in the EU. There is already a ton of laws about selling goods in any given jurisdiction, so this is business as usual.
  - aborsy 4y ago
    The regulations are meant to address externalities, prevent abuse of and damage to customers, and block unfair business practices with respect to competitors. Beyond such matters, if countries impose arbitrary subjective rules on other nations, others could retaliate and there will be problems with international trade (an important part of the economy from which everyone benefits) Like I ban the purchase of your beef because it doesn’t meet my unreasonable local safety standards (eg, there are invisible flies in it). So I find an excuse to restrict competition and promote local industry.
    - ahartmetz 4y ago
      This is exactly addressing externalities - the environment, one of the most common externalities. Also network security, which depends on all machines being secure (the five years of security updates).
      - aborsy 4y ago
        Sure, which is why I provide 3 years of OS support, according to my business capability. That’s my contribution. Like, you can’t force me 15 years of product support (EU will demand it!). For that, we sit and come up with a joint international trade agreement under which the contribution of each party to addressing the externality in question is specified. The common rules of the play are found in a joint agreement, not unilateral punitive measures. This approach can be expanded on and on. Like, the phones are too expensive, they must be below this price point that I have determined, etc.
        commoner 4y ago
        A requirement to provide security and OS updates for 3-5 years affects EU-based companies just as it affects non-EU companies, so I don't see your point. Many phones sold by both EU and non-EU manufacturers don't meet this requirement. These new rules apply equally to all manufacturers, and would not give a special advantage to EU-based ones. Any government has the authority to regulate commerce in its own jurisdiction, and nobody is proposing price caps for anything. If you are a phone manufacturer that steadfastly refuses to provide security and OS updates for 3-5 years for any of your phones, then you are free to not sell them in the EU.
- commoner 4y ago
  Of course the EU can impose rules within its jurisdiction. The EU already has other consumer-friendly rules, such as requiring retailers to provide a 2-year guarantee (warranty) on products sold. If you don't live in the EU, you aren't subject to these consumer-friendly rules.
Canada 4y ago
Why? Why not just let people choose devices based on the reputation of the vendors for updates?
- ahartmetz 4y ago
  Because that has been observed not to work.
  - Canada 4y ago
    I'm looking around at everyone enjoying their phones all around me, and thinking that it's working quite well.
    - zamalek 4y ago
      Enjoying your phone is different to enjoying your secure phone.
      - Canada 4y ago
        The only people with reasonably secure phones are those who buy the expensive, well supported ones. Whatever the EU or other government says will not change this. I don't think any good will come from government regulation like this.
- Tagbert 4y ago
  That assumes that there is a free market with significantly different options. in this case most of the manufacturers provide much shorter support timelines and there is no benefit of switching from one to another as they are all limited. The closest to a standout would be Apple and for someone on Android, that would entail a significant switching cost.
  - Canada 4y ago
    There is a free market currently with significantly different options. Currently Apple and Google offer longer support, and then you have a bunch of other options that offer less, but also generally cost less. Imposing this requirement will mean you can choose from Apple or Google and that's it.
lakomen 4y ago
Not enough. Those phones are so expensive it should be 10 years for security and 8 for OS updates. Especially considering they remove core features like a headphone mic jack or embed batteries.

23 points by elorant 4y ago

smoldesu 4y ago
Yeah, but we frankly should have seen this coming the moment we let the free market start making phones. The silver lining is that we've now got an opportunity to write the tech regulation we've always needed. If we start with no-brainers like required software support lifespans, hopefully we'll feel more comfortable addressing topics like unethical advertising and alternative app distribution channels.
- mwint 4y ago
  > the moment we let the free market start making phones. Egads, are you suggesting we shouldn’t have done this? Sent from my OnlyTenYearsLate (™) Boeing GovPhone, now with 8-bit color! Starts at $19,995 for approved citizens.

Does EU have a right to impose such arbitrary rules on others? If you don’t want an offer, don’t buy it. Or build your own better product, or provide extended support for android yourself. EU doesn’t appear to be a fair economic player in the world. Foreign products are heavily taxed and crippled, where I live. If you impose your arbitrary rules on other countries, others do it too, there will be problems.

ahartmetz 4y ago
The EU is not imposing anything on others, i.e. companies that don't sell in the EU. There is already a ton of laws about selling goods in any given jurisdiction, so this is business as usual.
- aborsy 4y ago
  The regulations are meant to address externalities, prevent abuse of and damage to customers, and block unfair business practices with respect to competitors. Beyond such matters, if countries impose arbitrary subjective rules on other nations, others could retaliate and there will be problems with international trade (an important part of the economy from which everyone benefits) Like I ban the purchase of your beef because it doesn’t meet my unreasonable local safety standards (eg, there are invisible flies in it). So I find an excuse to restrict competition and promote local industry.
  - ahartmetz 4y ago
    This is exactly addressing externalities - the environment, one of the most common externalities. Also network security, which depends on all machines being secure (the five years of security updates).
    - aborsy 4y ago
      Sure, which is why I provide 3 years of OS support, according to my business capability. That’s my contribution. Like, you can’t force me 15 years of product support (EU will demand it!). For that, we sit and come up with a joint international trade agreement under which the contribution of each party to addressing the externality in question is specified. The common rules of the play are found in a joint agreement, not unilateral punitive measures. This approach can be expanded on and on. Like, the phones are too expensive, they must be below this price point that I have determined, etc.
      - commoner 4y ago
        A requirement to provide security and OS updates for 3-5 years affects EU-based companies just as it affects non-EU companies, so I don't see your point. Many phones sold by both EU and non-EU manufacturers don't meet this requirement. These new rules apply equally to all manufacturers, and would not give a special advantage to EU-based ones. Any government has the authority to regulate commerce in its own jurisdiction, and nobody is proposing price caps for anything. If you are a phone manufacturer that steadfastly refuses to provide security and OS updates for 3-5 years for any of your phones, then you are free to not sell them in the EU.
commoner 4y ago
Of course the EU can impose rules within its jurisdiction. The EU already has other consumer-friendly rules, such as requiring retailers to provide a 2-year guarantee (warranty) on products sold. If you don't live in the EU, you aren't subject to these consumer-friendly rules.

Canada 4y ago

Why? Why not just let people choose devices based on the reputation of the vendors for updates?

ahartmetz 4y ago
Because that has been observed not to work.
- Canada 4y ago
  I'm looking around at everyone enjoying their phones all around me, and thinking that it's working quite well.
  - zamalek 4y ago
    Enjoying your phone is different to enjoying your secure phone.
    - Canada 4y ago
      The only people with reasonably secure phones are those who buy the expensive, well supported ones. Whatever the EU or other government says will not change this. I don't think any good will come from government regulation like this.
Tagbert 4y ago
That assumes that there is a free market with significantly different options. in this case most of the manufacturers provide much shorter support timelines and there is no benefit of switching from one to another as they are all limited. The closest to a standout would be Apple and for someone on Android, that would entail a significant switching cost.
- Canada 4y ago
  There is a free market currently with significantly different options. Currently Apple and Google offer longer support, and then you have a bunch of other options that offer less, but also generally cost less. Imposing this requirement will mean you can choose from Apple or Google and that's it.

lakomen 4y ago

Not enough. Those phones are so expensive it should be 10 years for security and 8 for OS updates. Especially considering they remove core features like a headphone mic jack or embed batteries.