The EU has enacted new regulations to protect developers operating in the App Store and Play Store from Apple and Google (let’s be real here – that’s who this is aimed at).
Platforms will have to provide 30 days notice to publishers before removing content from stores, allowing them time to appeal or make changes to their software. So no immediate and opaque bans (article 4).
The regulations (in article 5) will force stores to be more transparent in how their ranking systems work, letting publishers understand how ‘trending’ apps are being chosen for instance.
Article 7 follows similar themes, with storefronts having to disclose any ‘differentiated treatment’ it may give one seller of goods over another, which should put paid to any real (or imagined) preferential treatment for larger publishers – or at least make it clear to everyone how and when the playing field isn’t even.
The rules also demand access to third party mediation in case of disputes. This seems like a set of reasonable rules that should’ve been in place ages ago.
I am a bit worried that this could cause malware to stay in store 30 days after disclosure…
So, google and overpriced fruit seller will be forced to be more careful with what they let into the store. I say it’s a good thing.
I think most of the malware peddlers are not from the EU.
Missing detail from original set of rules:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32019R1150
“The various exceptions to the 30-day notice period can in particular arise in connection with illicit or inappropriate content, the safety of a good or service, counterfeiting, fraud, malware, spam, data breaches, other cybersecurity risks or suitability of the good or service to minors.”
How about protecting me, the customer? If I buy a paid game today from the Play Store, for how long I am entitled to have it?
It’s already a case where old games (such as Asphalt 6 and Need For Speed Hot Pursuit for Android) won’t appear in your Play Store collection and you have to dig them out from the desktop version of the Play Store and “install to phone”. Also, games purchased directly from the developer (like Asphalt 5) are nowhere to be found.
Then on Windows there is this other question: If I buy a DVD game that needs activation, for how long I am entitled to a working activation service? Same for Adobe CS6 activation. For example, the activation and login servers for Test Drive Unlimited 2 are already down, and Need For Speed Undercover won’t work when bought from EA’s own Origin service (they offer the download but it fails to activate), but the Steam version will work. So for how long exactly am I entitled to a working activation service?
Don’t get me wrong, as a gamer with a gaming-capable laptop I like the fact I don’t have to carry dozens of optical discs around (or have to look around for cracks even for purchased games, the most realistic option for non-digital games), I just wished I knew where my rights as a customer stand in this new digital world.
kurkosdr,
I think the state of DRM/activation/SAAS is going to necessarily produce major gaps in history. The software of the 80s and 90s will live on for generations on original hardware, FPGA, emulation, etc. But a lot of today’s titles will become increasingly unrunable because unlike software of earlier generations it is designed to fail without centralized servers. Sometimes, as in the simcity debacle, there’s zero technical justification to require always online game-play, it was done for the sake of DRM. Even multiplayer games used to work without centralized servers. Decentralization is clearly possible, but for better or worse more software and operating systems are adding server side controls.
Users have been complaining that macos has gotten slower with 10.15. It turns out it’s contacting apple servers behind the scenes when you run software – even your own.
https://sigpipe.macromates.com/2020/macos-catalina-slow-by-design/
I’m concerned this sort of “notarization” may create more roadblocks for compiling & running software in the future.
The state of DRM/activation/SAAS is not going to produce major gaps in history (of software), it has ALREADY produced major gaps in history (of software).
As I said in my previous message, it’s not possible to run Test Drive Unlimited 2 the official way anymore. You need an unofficial “launcher” which has been built around a crack, which cannot be hosted on several “permanent” platforms for the usual copyright reasons, so some digging is required. And to re-instate the DLC you need a massive 1GB unofficial patch. Again not easily hostable. Since Test Drive Unlimited 2 was a major instalment in the street racing genre, there is your major gap in history already.
Which brings the question of what exactly we are paying for here. Are we “renting” a service or buying content? And if we are renting for how long are we renting? And how does the Library of Congress or equivalent keep a permanent copy of whatever we are renting, as they should be doing? (just having a copy of the optical disc won’t do) The current answer seems to be “nobody knows”. Not even the developers, as activations/login servers can be decommissioned unintentionally when shutting down old systems.
Now that’s something that regulation could be beneficial for. Once the EU bureaucrats are done regulating ranking algorithms (haha, good luck with that) maybe they can deal with it.
kurkosdr,
Fair enough.
With SAAS, I think that falls squarely in the “renting” category. Take adobe products these days, I’d boycott that crap. The problem with boycotts is that everyone needs to participate, but that rarely happens and people just take it.
For instances where people supposedly own proper copies, no after-sale restrictions should be tolerated. I wish the law would make it explicit. But that’s not the world we live in and if anything we have less control than ever. This is the new norm.
I wish we didn’t have to put our eggs in the EU bucket. Why aren’t countries around the world solving this? I think politicians are doing a disservice to their countries by putting large corporate interests ahead of the people.
“With SAAS, I think that falls squarely in the “renting” category.”
If it’s clear SAAS, then it’s fair enough. Problem is, I bought an optical disc, I had no idea I was buying SAAS. BTW I think your remarks are correct, any software that needs activation is in the renting and SAAS category, even if it comes on a disc and runs locally 99.99% of the time.
“I think politicians are doing a disservice to their countries by putting large corporate interests ahead of the people.”
But… the AppEconomy(tm). Can’t mess with that.
As regards the actual news, good luck to the EU for trying to regulate the unregulateable, I am sure it will work just as well as those annoying GDPR prompts. But a much better option would to not have “default” app stores in OSes, and for the case of Apple not have default and mandatory app stores. OS vendors simply have too much power: Default browser, default app stores (mandatory sometimes), default music services, default video services, default backup services, default email services, default search engines, just give me the damn OS and let me choose the rest. Now that’s a piece of regulation that could actually work.
kurkosdr,
That’s what I was thinking too. Sure, making the process more transparent is better, but it seems to focus mostly on procedure rather than giving owners or developers real rights. Apple & others remain free to apply heavy handed control & censorship so long as they do it by the book and give everyone 30 days notice.
I said it before, apple has the right to set the rules for its store, however it should not have the right or ability to block competition and force owners to use it’s store. I’d rather regulators looked at this since it’s anti-competititve as hell and continues to be detrimental to the software industry.
The EU is a joke.
larkin,
Maybe, but who else is going to do it? There aren’t many governments left that aren’t under the control of big corporations.
When it comes to technology regulation, I am willing to give EU the benefit of the doubt. Tech megacorps and Silicon Valley techbros have a specific dystopian vision about the future, and they are agile enough to achieve it, while organizations like the EU are naturally slow-moving and have to tread carefully (unintented consequences etc). It will be a while before we get any useful regulation.
Remember that the different divisions of Vodafone have been charging member state citizens through the nose for EU roaming since the early 2000s (despite all these divisions being part of the same parent company!), and just recently we got that nonsense regulated.