Re: [hrpc] 'Technical Standards Bodies are Regulators'

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

On Sun, Nov 5, 2023 at 9:34 AM Vittorio Bertola <vittorio.bertola=
[e-mail]> wrote:

>
>
> Il 04/11/2023 17:52 CET Mallory Knodel <mknodel=[e-mail]>
> ha scritto:
>
> Another example is “the Wikipedia test”, that I talked about in the wake
> of the Digital Services Act. If a regulation negatively impacts a global
> public good like Wikipedia, that regulation got it wrong on some
> fundamental level.
>
> Only as far as there is agreement on the assessment that the impact is
> negative, which you'll almost never have, because the proponents of the
> regulation will argue in good faith that the impact is actually positive
> for the public interest, even if it creates additional burden or requires
> changes in the way the resource operates. The Cyber-Resilience Act is
> another current case of this issue, with the open source industry arguing
> that regulation will make life impossible for small-scale, hobbyist open
> source projects up to the point of making them disappear, and the
> proponents replying "that is exactly what we deem necessary for the good of
> the general public".
>

Hi Vittorio,

To be clear, are you saying that the proponents of the CRA think that
eliminating small open source products is good? Do you by any chance have a
link to some places where the have said that?

-Ekr


> --
>
> Vittorio Bertola | Head of Policy & Innovation, Open-Xchange
> [e-mail]
> Office @ Via Treviso 12, 10144 Torino, Italy
>
> _______________________________________________
> hrpc mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://mailman.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
>