Norwegian consumer law makes all new electronics sold, required to have 5 years of software and app support

[LordFlipFlap]

Summary

 Norwegian consumer law,  as of the 1. of january 2024, has been updated. It now requires all new products that requires an app, or has built in software to have at least 5 years of updated software support. Norwegian consumer law has allways been strict, and every product sold in norway has a 2 or 5 year warenty. Where the 5 year warrenty covers things that is made to last. Consumer electronics (Phones, TV's, smart watches, appliances, ect.) is coverd by the latter 5 year warrenty that now also includes app support and software updates from the time of purchase. 

 

Quotes

This is a Norwegian article, and not the main focus of the story, but rater a summary of what is changing in the law. I have looked for other sources but can't seem to find any news sources that have piced up on this story.

Quote

• Appar som trengst for at elektroniske produkt skal fungera, blir no sett på som ein del av kjøpet.

• Forbrukaren har krav på oppdateringar, slik at både maskinvare og programvare skal halda i minst fem år. Produsentar av elektroniske produkt, som til dømes smart-klokker og TV, kunne før kutta oppdateringar på eldre modellar.

Translation:

• Apps that are required for electronic devices to work will now be seen as part of the purchase process
• The consumer have a right to get updates, so that both hardware and software will last al least five years. Poducers of electronic products, for example smart watches and TV, could before stop updates on older models. 

 

 

My thoughts

 This is huge news. Norway is not really a big market, but still a big consumer of electronics. This newest law change sets huge pressure on manufacturers to keep old tech allive and not kill support if a product fails. This in theory also maens that if you buy for example an older phone it is not 5 years of software sopport from when the product is launced, but the way the law is worded it means it is 5 yeas of software support from the time of delivery/purchase. This means that stuff realistically needs at least 6-7 years of software support, as stores sell the same product over a 1-2 year period.

If the requrements are not met the manufacturer is legally required to fix or replace the product, and i dont think any manufacturer is ready to take the L on having to replace all of the products in a country, becase they did not want to do an extra software update. 

If anyone is wondering, it is really hard for manufacturers to get out of these cases. Personally i have had 2 panel replacements on my LG B9 OLED Tv becase of dead pixels, and i know that a lot of samsung fold owners get free scrren replacments when they start to crack from the folding of the screen. I have hight hopes that this can be pretty big for electronics being built to last.

 

Sources

 https://www.nrk.no/vestland/butikkane-far-faerre-sjansar-til-a-retta-feil-1.16693150

[Lunar River]

That's amazing... but good luck to them.

[dizmo]

Sorry for your tech desert, Norwegians. At least you can still import from other countries, just at a higher cost. 

[wanderingfool2]

7 hours ago, LordFlipFlap said:

This is huge news. Norway is not really a big market, but still a big consumer of electronics. This newest law change sets huge pressure on manufacturers to keep old tech allive and not kill support if a product fails. This in theory also maens that if you buy for example an older phone it is not 5 years of software sopport from when the product is launced, but the way the law is worded it means it is 5 yeas of software support from the time of delivery/purchase. This means that stuff realistically needs at least 6-7 years of software support, as stores sell the same product over a 1-2 year period.

This could go south very quickly.  While I do think many will do the 6 years of support, I do think what could happen is that companies will stop selling them when their next phone comes out (the yearly cycle)...so if it's based on when the retailer stops selling them then they will have to pull all the stock off the shelf essentially yearly (no buying last years model).  If the retailers can't sell their excess stock, then that means they would have to pass the price onto the consumers (making it up with the newer phones) or just have less inventory.

 

This would then lead to having less choices by consumers.  The last few times I bought the previous model when it went on sale because they were effectively clearing it out.  (While yes I get a year or two less support I also got it at like half price).

[RejZoR]

Everyone saying like Norway will get abandoned by tech giants. It's more likely that entire EU region will adopt this. Then it's near half a billion people market. Try abandoning that... Apple already doesn't have to worry about it, neither does Samsung and now also Google. Just maybe, everyone else should step up their lazy software support.

[Monkey Dust]

2 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Everyone saying like Norway will get abandoned by tech giants. It's more likely that entire EU region will adopt this. Then it's near half a billion people market. Try abandoning that... Apple already doesn't have to worry about it, neither does Samsung and now also Google. Just maybe, everyone else should step up their lazy software support.

Yes, I can see the EU picking this up. E-waste is a huge problem, and devices with an artificially short life due to support being dropped, are a big part of that problem. 

[Kilrah]

3 hours ago, RejZoR said:

It's more likely that entire EU region will adopt this.

100%, but the point is that until then it's just a negligible drop in the ocean.

[wanderingfool2]

9 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Everyone saying like Norway will get abandoned by tech giants. It's more likely that entire EU region will adopt this. Then it's near half a billion people market. Try abandoning that... Apple already doesn't have to worry about it, neither does Samsung and now also Google. Just maybe, everyone else should step up their lazy software support.

Except they sort of do have to worry about it (or at least on the retailer side).

The Pixel has a 7 year security update, from time of production not the time of end user sale.  So that means after 2 years every single retailer who has stock of that Pixel will now have to clear it out.  I think it will potentially create a situation where retailers will now be clearing out the older devices sooner or pass the cost of essentially not selling them onto the user.

 

Here's a good example, my phone provider is trying to clear out their inventory of their > 2 year old phones.  Based on the Norway rule they wouldn't be able to sell me the phone as it doesn't have the required software support...but at the same time, I just have to "lock" into my current contract for 2 years and I can get the phone for $5/month extra (so $120)...not to bad for a flagship phone from slightly over 2 years ago...even if it will only get 4.5 years of support.  I'd rather spend $120 to get an outdated phone, than my current rates where I have to pay $800 for 7 years of support (and that assumes I purchase it upon release instead).

 

That's why I could see the adoption of this by the EU being problematic in that it could lead stores essentially dumping the merchandise before they normally would (increasing overall costs, or just having less merchandise available). 

 

 

 

 

Now where I stand on this topic, I think a more impactful thing should be on every box, every ad and every product page if it's required a phrase like "Guaranteed software support until at least 20xx", where the packaging has to be on the front and a minimum % of the total box size (i.e. they can't hide it).  That way it's right there in your face and it starts to become a marketing issue if you have something that will only last 3 years.  At that stage you have manufacturers who will start pushing longer support times just to make their product more marketable (as it's now a forced marketability term). 

[hishnash]

3 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

That's why I could see the adoption of this by the EU being problematic in that it could lead stores essentially dumping the merchandise before they normally would (increasing overall costs, or just having less merchandise available). 

 

Most EU laws only apply to new products, not existing products that have already been created/imported.  See USB-C on phones. Even after this comes into effect phones that were released before the start date with non USB-C will still be able to be sold.  Just new products coming to market will need to comply with the rules. 

[Kilrah]

1 minute ago, hishnash said:

Most EU laws only apply to new products, not existing products that have already been created/imported.  See USB-C on phones. Even after this comes into effect phones that were released before the start date with non USB-C will still be able to be sold.  Just new products coming to market will need to comply with the rules. 

That only pushes the same problem a couple years down the line.

[LordFlipFlap]

14 hours ago, Kilrah said:

That only pushes the same problem a couple years down the line.

I dont think that this will push manufacturers to force things of the shelves. I expect that if becomes a big law, manufacturers will have to make extra software updates. The law does not sy it needs the latest update of android x.x.x or wathewer, just that the software is secure and supported so that the devices are usable and secure for a time period that should match the durability of the hardware. 

[Beskamir]

This is an anti-competition law pretending to be a pro-consumer one. The effect of this will be that large existing tech companies with the resources to provide 5 years of software support will happily comply and support this law. Meanwhile new or smaller companies that are unable to guarantee software support for that long will no longer be allowed to sell their products in Norway. Starting a hardware company is already difficult enough that very few companies try and this will lower the amount of those companies even further.

 

Of course, I don't think it's okay to make a hardware product with a major software component with the expectation that it won't be supported after some number of years, but I don't think there should be an expectation that it will be supported either.

[Donut417]

To me 5 to 7 years of support is reasonable. I mean the battery in most battery powered devices would be dead by then, this gives an option for people like myself who like to keep devices until they no longer suit my needs. Still using an iPhone XR for example, maybe upgrade when the 16 comes out .

[Kilrah]

1 hour ago, LordFlipFlap said:

I dont think that this will push manufacturers to force things of the shelves. I expect that if becomes a big law, manufacturers will have to make extra software updates.

The thing is that tying it to the date of purchase could mean not 5, but 6, 8 or 10.

 

Apple does 7 years from date of release which is good, but I can still buy new 2021 iPads, which with that would now be illegal to sell unless they add at least one more year of support. At some point it may be more economical to ditch the unsold inventory.

 

But more generally in addition to favoring the big players this has the potential of shrinking/removing the low end market which isn't great either. The big guys selling $800-1k+ phones likely can add a year or 2 of suppport, but there probably won't be a sub-$300-400 phone anymore to buy on the market (whether current but cheap or more high end but older model) if it has to have the same level of long-term support.

[wanderingfool2]

4 hours ago, LordFlipFlap said:

I dont think that this will push manufacturers to force things of the shelves. I expect that if becomes a big law, manufacturers will have to make extra software updates. The law does not sy it needs the latest update of android x.x.x or wathewer, just that the software is secure and supported so that the devices are usable and secure for a time period that should match the durability of the hardware. 

A question would be, why do you think that the manufacturers would do that?

 

Extra software updates to the manufacturers means more resources to create those updates on platforms that are no longer making them money and adds to the liability if one of those updates happens to go a bit south.  The majority of the money they make will be within the first year of sales from the device, where leading into the second year they would likely be clearing out their inventory to the retailers (which is why you start getting lower prices).

 

I do think the manufacturer would choose to keep status quo because I don't see this really effecting their bottom line; instead it would just be pushed to the retailers then to get rid of their inventory before the time comes...which could mean that outdated phones either stay at a higher price to make up for the inventory which will end up going into the landfill (because every device not sold will end up there) or they will have a reduced inventory, making it harder to find phones (making it so you have to purchase it from the manufacturer instead).

[Donut417]

8 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Extra software updates to the manufacturers means more resources to create those

While that is a valid point. In my opinion if they 3 years of feature updates and just finished off the support window with security updates that would be cool. Also, I think we need to get rid of annual release cycles and move it to at least every two years.

[mr moose]

I'd be more interested in devices physically lasting 5 years rather than tacit software services that usually do anyway.   

[tikker]

Why are people so quick to claim manufacturers will just abandon ship and never sell in that country or EU again should it pass whenever there's a legal change in the news? Has this actually happened? I would not think dropping a country to be such an easy nor desirable choice to make.

 

On 1/4/2024 at 12:27 PM, Kilrah said:

100%, but the point is that until then it's just a negligible drop in the ocean.

I agree with the sentiment that it may not do a whole lot unless withoud wider adoption, but going "what if it doesn't work? Better not try it at all" guarantees that nothing will change. Someone has to try something every now and then no?

 

I do think it's an interesting tactic to say the least due to another aspect of the change:

Quote

• The seller's right to rectify defects has been narrowed. There will now be a rule of one rectification attempt for each item, compared to previously two attempts for each fault. The new rules on a rectification attempt apply regardless of whether it is the same deficiency or new deficiencies that arise. It is still the case that several attempts can be made if it is reasonable, but the seller does not get more attempts without further ado.

I guess the thought is that it would be expensive for them to replacing units and thus spur them to make more durable ones instead, but that also sounds a bit counterproductive in keeping products going. In that sense I'm partially glad we can have a sort of testing grounds now and see how it turns out in practice.

 

On 1/4/2024 at 7:02 PM, wanderingfool2 said:

The Pixel has a 7 year security update, from time of production not the time of end user sale.  So that means after 2 years every single retailer who has stock of that Pixel will now have to clear it out.  I think it will potentially create a situation where retailers will now be clearing out the older devices sooner or pass the cost of essentially not selling them onto the user.

On 1/5/2024 at 2:00 PM, Kilrah said:

Apple does 7 years from date of release which is good, but I can still buy new 2021 iPads, which with that would now be illegal to sell unless they add at least one more year of support. At some point it may be more economical to ditch the unsold inventory.

From the article (using Google Translate) it doesn't sound like selling older devices would be illegal to me. The most direct mention is in the "Changes in the Consumer Act" section, which OP quoted as well:

Quote

• Apps that are needed for electronic products to work are now seen as part of the purchase.

• The consumer has a right to updates, so that both hardware and software will last for at least five years. Manufacturers of electronic products, such as smart watches and TVs, could previously cut updates on older models.

I don't see a mention if it being illegal to sell older devices, just that devices need longer support. I would imagine it would act on some sort of EoL date and not imply the situation you describe, but rather that it means Pixels would have 12 years of support, for example (7 of the normal one + 5 after the EoL, assuming for simplicity they are considerded EoL after 7 years), but I'd gladly see more resources that clarify this about the new law. If not then I agree it's a counterproductive aspect.

On 1/5/2024 at 5:58 PM, wanderingfool2 said:

Extra software updates to the manufacturers means more resources to create those updates on platforms that are no longer making them money and adds to the liability if one of those updates happens to go a bit south.  The majority of the money they make will be within the first year of sales from the device, where leading into the second year they would likely be clearing out their inventory to the retailers (which is why you start getting lower prices).

True, it will increase their cost, but will it hurt them that much? Especially with the mentioned examples that Google and Apple already showing that it is perfectly possible to support things for 7 years? Playing the other side, Windows 11 officially only supporting 8th-gen Intel, which was already 4-5 years old at the time of release, was almost seen as a proverbial war crime against PC users. Is it really that problematic to try and twist manufacturers hands the other way in providing that longer support?

[Kisai]

On 1/4/2024 at 10:02 AM, wanderingfool2 said:

 

That's why I could see the adoption of this by the EU being problematic in that it could lead stores essentially dumping the merchandise before they normally would (increasing overall costs, or just having less merchandise available). 

 

 

I think the more likely scenario is the EU picks a stronger version that requires manufacturers to buy back unsold inventory that doesn't meet the requirements as well. 

 

The problem always hinges on e-waste. Rubbish products generate far more e-waste than high end luxury products, but that isn't a linear graph, it's more of a bell curve, where the cheapest products aren't meant to last, and the most expensive products aren't sold in a high enough quantities to justify making spare parts for.

 

Like all these potshots at the mobile phone manufacturers are really a lot of self-owns, because what would likely happen is the chinese-market and india-market phones that are super-cheap would be illegal to import. So that would basically leave EU market with only Apple and some some high end samsung and google phones and not much else.

[StDragon]

Abstraction - Chinese made hardware will just be sold to small shell companies as OEM devices for their branded crap to be loaded and labeled. Eventually that HW will be laundered to another shell company after the initial dissolves to wipe and reload with their stuff next in line. And so the cycle would repeat. 

[wanderingfool2]

8 hours ago, Kisai said:

I think the more likely scenario is the EU picks a stronger version that requires manufacturers to buy back unsold inventory that doesn't meet the requirements as well. 

If they did though you would end up with then a higher price as the manufacturers tries making back the money they are losing out on.  The thing to remember is that a lot of companies these days are revenue growth driven and profit growth driven...so anything that forces the manufacturers to pay will be generally passed onto the consumers.

 

Again, I think the better approach is effectively forcing them to list the date a product is min. supported...that way it works on their marketing material and the way to keep market share would be to extend the support to reasonable levels.

 

12 hours ago, tikker said:

I don't see a mention if it being illegal to sell older devices, just that devices need longer support.

...if they aren't allowed selling devices without extending support then yea, it's illegal to sell a device like he stated without extending the support.

 

That's the issue that we are talking about, that it would make them extend support if they wanted to sell the device for lets say 3 years...so for them it's more likely they will just completely stop selling those before that point (which can create higher costs)

 

12 hours ago, tikker said:

True, it will increase their cost, but will it hurt them that much? Especially with the mentioned examples that Google and Apple already showing that it is perfectly possible to support things for 7 years?

Google and Apple offer 7 years...so since Apple sells things like the 2021 products still they would actually have to add an extra 2 years of support (10 years total).  Will it hurt their bottom line by a whole lot?  Maybe not, but the ROI might mean they just stop selling models earlier then.

[Quackers101]

yeah not working with everything. unless I guess less established products/brands have their trial period before some of it?
good but 5 years can mean nothing in some markets, some product NEED +10y not 5 as putting it similar to its hardware warrenty, other than that would be fun to see what the EU does.

 

but nice its from the day of being purchased/sold with 5 years.

[tikker]

3 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

...if they aren't allowed selling devices without extending support then yea, it's illegal to sell a device like he stated without extending the support.

 

That's the issue that we are talking about, that it would make them extend support if they wanted to sell the device for lets say 3 years...so for them it's more likely they will just completely stop selling those before that point (which can create higher costs)

 

16 hours ago, tikker said:

True, it will increase their cost, but will it hurt them that much? Especially with the mentioned examples that Google and Apple already showing that it is perfectly possible to support things for 7 years?

Google and Apple offer 7 years...so since Apple sells things like the 2021 products still they would actually have to add an extra 2 years of support (10 years total).  Will it hurt their bottom line by a whole lot?  Maybe not, but the ROI might mean they just stop selling models earlier then.

I think that is reasoning from the perspective that the the law is incompatible with the currently offered support time, with by e.g. Apple's number of years being the immutable factor. I think it's the other way around. That scheme is incompatible with the law, but the company's support guidelines are not the immutable factor; the law is. What you say is of course a possible they can make. I'm just not that convinced yet that e.g. Google or Apple will simply opt to stop selling after two years to fit in the 5 year span. In a way that could even be a fairer option. I don't know the time frame within which Google takes phones of the market, but for example, if Google says support until 2030, is it really fair to consumer to still sell that phone as new in 2029, knowing you'll stop supporting it in less than a year?

[Kisai]

8 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

If they did though you would end up with then a higher price as the manufacturers tries making back the money they are losing out on.  The thing to remember is that a lot of companies these days are revenue growth driven and profit growth driven...so anything that forces the manufacturers to pay will be generally passed onto the consumers.

 

My point was that manufacturers should not be permitted to continue to "dump" garbage products on a market. 

 

If the long term consequences are that only flagship devices get sold in the EU, then that is fine, that will just encourage people to import the cheaper devices themselves at higher individual import tariffs and no support.

[wanderingfool2]

6 hours ago, tikker said:

I'm just not that convinced yet that e.g. Google or Apple will simply opt to stop selling after two years to fit in the 5 year span

They will have made the majority of their money on that platform already.  Why would Apple or Google want to extend their support even longer for a platform where they have already sold the majority to other vendors.

 

It's like my example above, I can buy a 2+ (less than 3 year) year old flagship phone under a cell contract for effectively $120...that's a pretty good deal.  Yes I get under 5 years of support for it, but at that price who cares.  It's a lot harder already to find 3+ year old phones on the market.

 

Which brings me back to my point, publicly traded manufacturers will try minimizing costs while maximizing profits...which means legislation like this will just push up cost (since they can't sell as long so have to reduce stock or increase revenue).