The answer is no. It’s not phrased like that. But it’s all about ensuring free competition in digital markets. The sole purpose of Google’s move here is to hinder competition in their own digital market, and to keep control over it.
So the law does not have a paragraph stating that “unsigned software must be allowed”, but it has a bunch of other paragraphs that can be used to strike down on monopolistic behaviour.
Google are aware of the law, and will try to find a loophole by designing a system that they believe technically complies with it. Then someone will sue them, it will end up in the European court, and the European court will in all likelyhood tell Google to get fucked.
It seems american tech companies think they can get away with anything because that’s how it works in the US. We are repeatedly seeing that this is not how it works in Europe: the Court of Justice tends to care deeply about the intention of the law, as well as the perceived consequences of their rulings. And they don’t seem to care all that much about American capitalists.
But to answer your question very simply: No, it doesn’t. But thankfully that doesn’t matter at all.
I feel like there should independent signing authorities that the major platforms honor. But that’s its own can of worms. Who runs them, is it the government? A non-profit? How do we prevent corruption of that entity, etc.
And yeah, the tech companies have raced ahead of comprehension. At least the comprehension that reasonable and good lawmakers have. At the same time, it’s increasingly looking like the terrible people in power know just how far ahead tech is. (Thiel)
Google is clearly trying to find a loophole here. Their loophole clearly sucks.
In all likelihood it’ll end up in front of the Court of Justice of the European Union. And in all likelihood Google will lose again.
The Court of Justice generally seems unimpressed by American lobbyists, so the strategy of finding a dumb loophole is probably doomed to fail.
That didn’t answer my question. M
The answer is no. It’s not phrased like that. But it’s all about ensuring free competition in digital markets. The sole purpose of Google’s move here is to hinder competition in their own digital market, and to keep control over it.
So the law does not have a paragraph stating that “unsigned software must be allowed”, but it has a bunch of other paragraphs that can be used to strike down on monopolistic behaviour.
Google are aware of the law, and will try to find a loophole by designing a system that they believe technically complies with it. Then someone will sue them, it will end up in the European court, and the European court will in all likelyhood tell Google to get fucked.
It seems american tech companies think they can get away with anything because that’s how it works in the US. We are repeatedly seeing that this is not how it works in Europe: the Court of Justice tends to care deeply about the intention of the law, as well as the perceived consequences of their rulings. And they don’t seem to care all that much about American capitalists.
But to answer your question very simply: No, it doesn’t. But thankfully that doesn’t matter at all.
I feel like there should independent signing authorities that the major platforms honor. But that’s its own can of worms. Who runs them, is it the government? A non-profit? How do we prevent corruption of that entity, etc.
And yeah, the tech companies have raced ahead of comprehension. At least the comprehension that reasonable and good lawmakers have. At the same time, it’s increasingly looking like the terrible people in power know just how far ahead tech is. (Thiel)