Technology

59589 readers

2962 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Software and product repairs to be subject to product liability in the EU (www.consilium.europa.eu)

submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by timroerstroem@feddit.dk to c/technology@lemmy.world

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

EU brings product liability rules in line with digital age and circular economy

Today [2024-10-10] the Council adopted a directive to update the EU’s civil liability law. The new liability rules better take into account that nowadays many products have digital features and that the economy is becoming increasingly circular.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] anytimesoon@feddit.uk 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Given other comments in this thread and the reactions I've seen on mastodon, people are freaking out, but I just don't understand why. Can someone more intelligent please take the time to ELI5?

[–] timroerstroem@feddit.dk 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

My understanding is that this would allow for lawsuits along the lines of "Your poorly written software caused [our business to lose this giant contract|thousands of consumers left with bricked devices|my washing machine to eat my dog]. Now pay up!"

Essentially, software vendors (vendor being the operative word here) would become liable for damage caused by their faulty products, just like manufacturers of air compressors or toys or fireworks.

[–] metiulekm@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

IANAL nor intelligent, but after skimming the text of the directive I felt like the definition of damage is very limited. In particular, if I understand correctly:

our business to lose this giant contract

would not be covered by this directive, this directive is only about a human being hurt in some way,

thousands of consumers left with bricked devices

would be covered in case of "your game installs a kernel-level anticheat and the anticheat breaks PCs", but not in the case of "you uploaded an upgrade to a firmware of the washing machine you produced and it bricked the machines"; the directive is not about a product breaking, but about the product breaking your health, other property or data,

my washing machine to eat my dog

is basically the exact case this directive covers.

[–] timroerstroem@feddit.dk 1 points 1 month ago

Thank you for the corrections, I think I maybe skimmed the text back when it went through the EP, so I was mostly going from (poor) memory.

[–] anytimesoon@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

That sounds like a good thing.

I must admit that I can't think of any examples of this ever being a problem though. It might also be because I'm just so used to crappy software breaking things that I've just come to accept it as normal