FSFE/fsfe-website
25
31
Fork 91
Code Issues 65 Pull Requests 12 Wiki Activity

Alex feedback: arts

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
lucas.lasota
2022-08-25 17:35:05 +02:00
parent 0b47f7c397
commit dc61f9ca42
1 changed files with 47 additions and 151 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

198
activities/dma/dma.en.xhtml
View File

@@ -73,12 +73,12 @@
<p>
<a href="/activities/deviceneutrality/devices.html">Device Neutrality</a> is
a policy concept aimed to deal with big tech's unbalanced power over digital devices.
Free Software has a central role in breaking monopolies to re-establish
market dynamics that are more favourable to end-users. In this page we
a policy concept aimed to deal with unbalanced power over digital devices.
Free Software has a central role to re-establish fair competition
and market dynamics that are more favourable to end-users. In this page we
will learn how digital markets can benefit from strict rules for
regulating the economic activity of such big companies. The Digital Markets
Act (DMA) is an example of such rules. With proper enforcement, the law has
regulating the economic activity of such companies. The Digital Markets
Act (DMA) is an example of such regulation. With proper enforcement, the law has
the potential to facilitate access to Free Software in devices.
</p>
@@ -94,11 +94,9 @@
<p>
Device Neutrality translates in the DMA as stricter consent rules for
pre-installed apps, safeguards against vendor lock-in, and data interoperability.
The right for end-users to use their own device and operating system is an
important factor to guarantee access of Free Software operating systems to
dominant platforms. As a daily reality for many users, this option enlarges
the audience for Free Software adoption. However, the future holds
challenges for the practical implementation of the DMA rules and
Such regulatory elements represent in a powerful mechanism to safeguard a better
access and usage of Free Sofware in devices by end-users. Nevertheless, the enforcement
of these rules holds challenges for the practical implementation of such principles, and
ultimately Device Neutrality.
</p>
@@ -149,22 +147,12 @@
Gatekeepers are those companies with "significant impact on the EU
internal market", which "control an important gateway for business users
to reach end-users", and enjoy an "entrenched and durable position in the
market".
market". The DMA presumes the criteria is met when the company is extremely
large with an average market capitalisation of ≥ EUR 75 billion and more than
45 million monthly active end-users.
</p>
<p>
The DMA presumes the three-criteria test is met when a provider of CPS is
above some thresholds for a certain period (in general 3 years), which are
lay down in Art. 3(2). The company should present an annual EU turnover ≥
EUR 7.5 billion, or an average market capitalisation or equivalent fair
market value ≥ EUR 75 billion and the CPS should be provided in at least 3
Member States. For the provided CPS, a reach of more than 45 million
monthly active end-users in the EU and ≥ 10,000 in the last financial
year. The Commission can designate gatekeepers not necessarily that meet
these requirements, but fall under the criteria of Art. 3(1).
</p>
<module id="banner-subscribe" />
<module id="banner-subscribe" />
<h3 id="dma-device-neutrality-rules">Device Neutrality rules in the DMA</h3>
@@ -193,139 +181,47 @@
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>
The DMA presents a list of "hard" and "soft" obligations For each of
the gatekeeper’s core platform services that are designated by the
Commission in Arts. 5-7, coupled with corrective mechanisms
(Arts. 8-13). The provisions related to Device Neutrality are:
in Arts. 8-13. These include <a
href="https://download.fsfe.org/device-neutrality/art-dma-dn.pdf">
several provisions related to Device Neutrality</a>.
</p>
<p>
In relation to <strong>software freedom</strong>, gatekeepers
are required to allow end-users to uninstall any pre-installed
software in devices (Art. 6(3)), as well as enable the installation
and use of third-party apps or app stores on devices (Art. 6 (4)).
</p>
<p>
The DMA includes several provisions to enhance the <strong>protection
against vendor lock-in</strong>. Gatekeepers cannot prohibit app developers
to set different prices and conditions for their apps in alternative stores
(e.g. F-Droid) (Art. 5(3)). Gatekeepers cannot make software developers
and end-users register or sign-in for a service or app conditional to
other gatekeeper's service or app (Art. 5(7)). Besides,
they should allow end-users to access and use third-party apps, content,
subscriptions, features or other functionalities (Art. 5(5)). Finally,
Gatekeepers cannot restrict the ability of end-users to switch between and
subscribe to different apps and services that are accessed via the operating system
or app store (Art. 6(6)).
</p>
<p>
<strong>Interoperability and control over data</strong> was also contemplated
as an important factor against lock-in. Gatekeepers should provide the same
hardware and software features accessed or controlled via the operating system
to third-party developers (Art. 6(7). This includes data interoperability
(also called real-time data portability (Art. 6(9) and
interoperability among messaging apps (Art. 7).
</p>
<ul>
<li>
<strong>Art. 5(3)</strong>: Gatekeepers cannot prohibit business users
(e.g. app developers) to set different prices and conditions for their
apps in alternative stores (e.g. F-Droid).
</li>
<li>
<strong>Art. 5(4)</strong>: Gatekeepers cannot prohibit business users
(e.g. app developers) to conclude contracts with consumers outside
the gatekeeper' app store, so that they are not required to use the app
store's payment system.
</li>
<li>
<strong>Art. 5(5)</strong>: Gatekeepers should allow end-users to access
and use through a business user’s app (e.g. a third-party pp) any
content, subscriptions, features or other functionalities, even when
these have been acquired outside the gatekeeper’s CPSs (e.g. using a
subscription acquired outside the gatekeeper's app).
</li>
<li>
<strong>Art. 5(7)</strong>: Gatekeepers cannot require business users to
subscribe to any other core platform service. For instance, gatekeepers
cannot make access to their app stores conditional upon app developers
integrating a "Sign in with ...." function into their apps.
</li>
<li>
<strong>Art. 5(8)</strong>: Gatekeepers cannot make business and
end-users register or sign-in for a service or app conditional to other
gatekeeper's service or app.
</li>
<li>
<strong>Art. 6(3)</strong>: Gatekeepers are requested to allow and
technically enable end users to uninstall any pre-installed software in
devices excluding those essential to the functioning of the operating
system or device, and which cannot be offered by third parties on a
standalone basis. Besides, gatekeepers must also allow and technically
enable end-users to change those default settings on the operating
system, as long as they do not endanger the integrity of its operating
system or hardware.
</li>
<li>
<strong>Art. 6(4)</strong>: Gatekeepers are requested to allow and
technically enable the installation and use of third-party apps or app
stores on its operating system. They must allow these apps and app
stores to be accessed via side-loading. Gatekeepers cannot prevent these
third-party apps and app stores from prompting users to decide whether
the downloaded app (store) should be the default. However, gatekeepers
can take strictly necessary and proportionate measures to ensure that a
third-party app (store) does not endanger the integrity of its operating
system or hardware or to enable end-users to effectively enable
security.
</li>
<li>
<strong>Art. 6(5)</strong>: Gatekeepers cannot prefer their own products
and services more favourably in ranking and search results, or in their
own app stores.
</li>
<li>
<strong>Art. 6(6)</strong>: Gatekeepers cannot restrict the ability of
end-users to switch between and subscribe to different apps and services
that are accessed via the operating system or app store.
</li>
<li>
<strong>Art. 6(7)</strong>: Gatekeepers should allow business users
(service providers and hardware providers) free and effective
interoperability with the same hardware and software features accessed
or controlled via the operating system. However, gatekeepers can take
strictly necessary and proportionate measures to ensure interoperability
does not undermine the integrity of their operating system and hardware.
</li>
<li>
<strong>Art. 6(9)</strong>: Gatekeepers should provide end-users (and
third parties authorized by end-users) with effective "real time data
portability" (data interoperability) of data provided or generated by
these end-users.
</li>
<li>
<strong>Art. 6(12)</strong>: Gatekeepers should provide business users
(third party software developers) fair, reasonable and
non-discriminatory access conditions to their app stores, search engines
and operating systems.
</li>
<li>
<strong>Art. 7</strong>: Gatekeepers of messaging apps
(number-independent interpersonal communication service in the language
of the law) make basic functionalities of this service interoperable
with other messaging apps from other providers by providing the
necessary technical interfaces or similar solutions upon request and
free of charge. This obligation has been further specified in the law:
<ol>
<li>
Immediately after gatekeeper designation: End-to-end text messaging
and the sharing of images, voice messages, videos and other attached
files between two individual end users should be implemented
immediately after the EC designating the gatekeeper.
</li>
<li>
2 years of designation: End-to-end text messaging within groups of
individual end users and the sharing of images, voice messages,
videos and other attached files between a group chat and an
individual end-user.
</li>
<li>
Within 4 years of designation: End-to-end voice and video calls
between two individual end users and between a group chat and an
individual end user.
</li>
</ol>
</li>
</ul>
<h3 id="dma-enforcement-mechanisms">Enforcement mechanisms</h3>