The European Commission wants to create consumer protections for software code that are similar to the consumer protections found on physical products. This means that software companies would be liable for effectiveness and security of their software.
Commissioner Meglena Kuneva, one of the writers of this proposal, thinks that software makers need more accountability for the quality of their products. She says, “If we want consumers to shop around and exploit the potential of digital communications, then we need to give them confidence that their rights are guaranteed. That means putting in place and enforcing clear consumer rights that meet the high standards already existing in the main street. [The] internet has everything to offer consumers, but we need to build trust so that people can shop around with peace of mind.”
At first glance, this proposal seems like good thing. I am all for consumer protection against companies trying to turn a profit from unsafe and faulty products. However, this proposal attempts to attach liability to an intangible object, software code.
Since software is not a physical product, companies cannot control the environment it is deployed in. This severely limits the ability of software manufactures to anticipate potential uses of their software, including modifications and updates to their original product.
Most major software companies release patches, fixes and updates to their original software, free of charge. This is the nature of software code. After new software is released, hackers find vulnerabilities, hardware environments change, and bugs come to light in most every single piece of code produced today. Software companies cannot be held liable for these rapidly changing conditions under which their code operates.
Recent history has clearly proven that no single piece of software can be designed to be completely secure. There is always a way to exploit any software program. It is simply unreasonable for a government to expect a software company to only release bug free, secure software.
The software industry is based on self-regulation. If a piece of code doesn’t work like it should, no one will implement it, let alone pay for it. Most manufacturers let consumers try their products for extended periods before they have to pay for them. Imagine being able to take home a new television for 60 days without having to pay for it in any way. This doesn’t happen for obvious reasons, but it just proves that software is unlike any other consumer good.
Software companies already have to deal with the theft of their products on a scale that is unrivaled in most other industries. If this regulation is imposed on them in Europe, prices will go up substantially to cover the cost of future litigation. This will promote more illegal pirating of proprietary software. It will also stifle the industry’s ability to make money, and push more software into the open-source realm.
This proposal would ironically lead to less regulation of the industry and create lower quality software, due to the fact that more and more software would be released under an open-source license. It would also cause smaller software companies to go out of business, causing good paying jobs to evaporate.
The only way to ensure consumer protection in the software industry is to provide open markets where good manufactures can thrive. When it comes to consumer liability, the software industry can and always will be able to regulate itself.
