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

[Mallory Knodel <[e-mail]>]

On Sun, 5 Nov 2023 at 18:34, 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".
>

Wikipedia is vocal about the negative impacts the DSA will have on its work
and it’s community.

-Mallory

>