|
|
|
|
|
|
by _davide_
22 days ago
|
|
|
> This is very literally what already happens, it's called a EULA.
Yes, but they "reserve the right" to update whenever, making it pointless > "In favor of the customer over anything else" is not a legally viable clause.
I'm sure that legislators could put the principle down in a much clearer way. What's lacking is the will. |
|
|
That's precisely the problem here. You're "sure" that a problem you don't actually fully understand is trivially solved in a simple manner, when the reality is that this sort of thing is incredibly complicated, and there's a multitude of reasons and competing interests that have resulted in the current equilibrium.
This is the sort of change that requires a country's laws to have to be rewritten from the ground-up, because it invalidates so many assumptions. It's the sort of thing you typically need a constitutional amendment (or at least, a novel interpretation of the existing text) for.
So, yeah, they're lacking the political will for that.