Have you heard of the new Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation? The regulation, out of the European Commission, aims to establish a framework that would create requirements for energy-related products that would reduce their impact on the environment throughout their lifecycle. ACT | The App Association is proudly pro green tech, but we are concerned some software provisions in this regulation could potentially complicate things for software developers.

For months, we held meetings with MEPs, conveyed industry letters, and provided feedback on the proposals. We were pleased that in a vote held earlier this month, the European Parliament did not include the software requirement amendments we’ve been concerned about in their vote. While this is a great win for software developers, it is important to note that this regulation would have also applied to ourmembers who design or manufacture internet of things (IoT) devices. To learn more about the regulation and how the European institutions were thinking about software, check out our breakdown below.  

What is ecodesign?

The Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation is meant to establish a framework for setting eco-design requirements for energy-related products, reducing their impact on the environment throughout the entire life cycle. This regulation is a crucial part of the EU’s efforts to achieve energy efficiency, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and promote the circular economy. While these are goals we fully support and applaud, misguided amendments added after the initial drafting would have included software provisions that only added confusion and complications for both developers and end users with absolutely no benefit to the environment.

How did the Commission intend to regulate software and why was it concerning?

Our biggest concerns were in Articles 5 and 33 of the regulation, where tabled amendments aimed torestoring previous software updates of an operating system. We had three key concerns with the articles:

1) Introducing obligations for businesses to downgrade or reinstall older updates and upgrades of software, apps, or operating systems (OS) upon consumers’ request (a central aspect of Article 5) will not help our members to provide better, more advanced, and sustainable services or technologies. Small and medium-sized entities (SMEs) would then face the difficult choice of either refraining from providing an app on previous OS versions, or providing the app as required by this regulation, and thereby diminishing the quality of the software. This practice would harm our members’ ability to thrive in the European market and compete globally, while also hindering the overall success of the ambitious goals set by Europe’s Digital Decade Strategy. A twin transition, green and digital, could only happen if businesses, especially smaller ones, have all the incentive to innovate, offer better services, and create new technologies.
2) If the user has the option to reject a newer version of an OS as part of the Sustainable Products Initiative (something Article 33 would have required), their device will become more vulnerable to cyber threats, and significantly increase the risks of being hacked, as well as the costs for the consumer and the business user. Any European legislation promoting the ‘retrograding’ or allowing users to reject upgrades that would make their device more secure, endangers the cybersecurity of electronic devices and puts consumers at risk. These provisions also greatly increase costs for SMEs, not only in terms of direct development costs, but the likely harm to overall consumer trust in digital products and services, limiting our members’ ability to compete in the global app economy. Updates and upgrades are essential to maintain secure software and prevent cyber threats for SMEs and users. Software updates, both functionality updates and security updates, keep our devices secure and efficient.
3) Given that many aspects of ecodesign are already addressed in other proposals being considered by the Commission, adding additional rules with which SMEs will be expected to comply merely increases the financial burdens for SMEs and slows their path to compliance.

What happens next?

As we mentioned before, the good news is that the articles containing software provisions were not included in the European Parliament Environment Committee’s vote earlier this month. That said, we fully support the European effort to reduce energy inefficiencies, improve the sustainability of goods and life cycles of products, as well as harmonise such initiatives across the EU, to better help SMEs, consumers, and the environment, and the path for this regulation isn’t quite over. The next step forward will be the final vote in the European Parliament’s Plenary Session on12 July and the final political agreement on the regulation after the interinstitutional negotiations between the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, something we’re expecting to see in the fall.

Stay tuned for updates!