In an effort to reflect the recent focus on software and other digital products in various product legislation, the Commission has asked for evidence on what the public considers important when overhauling the so-called “New Legislative Framework” (NLF).
APELL has submitted two important suggestions to the Commission:
Reflect Open Source business models
In recent legislation focussing on software as products and products containing software, the Commission has made efforts to reflect the specificities of software into established concepts like “product”, “placing on the market”, or “making available on the market”. However, Open Source technology differs significantly from tech developed by proprietary vendors.
During the trilogue negotiations between Parliament, Council, and the Commission, the legislator has reflected for example that Open Source projects are developed on public platforms – and that such publications should not already constitute commercial acting or placing on the market of a product. We highlight the need to take into account the specific needs of the Open Source development model also in future legislation (then based on an updated new legislative framework).
Build on established industry terms
“Open Source” as a term was established just under three decades ago. The often synonymously used term “Free Software” even predates it and goes back to 1986. Both terms are established industry terms in the ICT sector today, and the value created in Free and Open Source Software is estimated to amount to between $4.15 billion and $8.8 billion globally in 2024.
Not only for the Open Source development and business ecosystem, but also for all users and integrators of Open Source in other products: relying on the tested, established industry terms is necessary for legal certainty.
You can find our submission online on the Commission’s website, and download it here (PDF).
