FTC urged to make smart devices say how long they will be supported

Alphane Moon@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.world – 16 points –
FTC urged to make smart devices say how long they will be supported
arstechnica.com
11

I'd be a fan of a law that companies who drop support of their product would have to release code that lets 3rd parties or users themselves offer alternative support. If you want to fully abandon a product opensource it. If you're a big company that doesn't want to do that release a feature for users to self host before you cut ties. I know it's not a simple thing to do in the current world but if laws mandated it then tech would have no choice but to adapt.

Effective [some future date], in order to sell any device connected to the Internet (or Bluetooth, or whatever), you must register your entire codebase and all internal documentation with the FTC, and keep it updated, along with any signing keys to lock bootloaders. The day you abandon support, if you haven't provided everything required for end users to take complete control of their device, your code base and any other IP enters the public domain, and the FTC uses their discretion on release of keys.

It would take new laws, and you'd have to be careful with language and structure to prevent abuse of "third party" code and abuse of corporate structure to try to prevent old devices from being usable, but you could do it.

I’d like to see a requirement that products and devices which have been deemed by their manufacturer to be end of sale/support/repair/life are required to be unlocked, with technical schematics and repair documentation made freely available, upon request of the owner.

Software open-sourced, too.

Would be nice, but I'd be happy with instructions on how to flash FOSS firmware onto it, and a description of the API surface so individuals could make their own compatible firmware.

5 year minimum and the are forced to open source every abandoned project

A big problem is things tied unnecessarily to an internet service. We need to educate people that there may be alternatives and we need our purchasing decisions to support that. For example, most home automation stuff should NOT require or use any internet.

The article calls it “software tethering”. If any support commitments encourage manufacturers to stop that, we’ll all be better off. Let’s start with requiring users be clearly notified of software tethering, so they know what they’re buying

At least make it required to not brick at EOS if it's a device that would otherwise run. Like a laundry machine.

There’s no reason a laundry machine requires an internet connection

  • if an internet connection provides additional functionality such as notification, it easier to have the machine work normally without notifications
  • there’s no reason a machine requires an internet connection, especially with the release of the Matter/Thread standard to unify home automation local protocols

When I got new machines about five years ago, I briefly considered connected machines. It would be really nice to get notifications on my phone but how can it possibly cost that much and why does the only option depend on a cloud service?

I agree. But the people who have one should not need to buy new machines just because support ended. And it's my understanding that it's currently the case with several brands.

Perhaps more important is to have devices start or fall open... if the OEM has lost interest in it, let others support the device. Make ewaste valuable and avoidable.