Note that this is essentially already the case under the GDPR for anything that's tied to a natural person.
> * There is no clause indicating you can charge a fee for the sharing of the data
Quite the opposite; There's a clause mandating it be free of charge. Chapter II, Article 4:
> Where data cannot be directly accessed by the user from the connected product or related service, data holders shall make readily available data, as well as the relevant metadata necessary to interpret and use those data, accessible to the user without undue delay, of the same quality as is available to the data holder, easily, securely, free of charge, in a comprehensive, structured, commonly used and machine-readable format and, where relevant and technically feasible, continuously and in real-time. This shall be done on the basis of a simple request through electronic means where technically feasible.
There are rules pertaining to B2B relations, where there's some restrictions on how fees may be charged. (Article 9, where fees may cover costs but must not discriminate and must be "reasonable")
> Easier to just eliminate any attempt at malicious compliance by interpreting 'reasonable' unreasonably.
The "reasonable" clauses exist to pre-empt this. EU courts generally aren't very amused by companies pulling stunts like setting fees to 'Math.infinity'.
A good case study for this has been Apple's legal fights around the DMA & App Store monopoly. Which mostly consists of Apple trying to be "clever" and the European Commission telling them that no, their clearly unreasonable fees are unreasonable.
Note that this is essentially already the case under the GDPR for anything that's tied to a natural person.
> * There is no clause indicating you can charge a fee for the sharing of the data
Quite the opposite; There's a clause mandating it be free of charge. Chapter II, Article 4:
> Where data cannot be directly accessed by the user from the connected product or related service, data holders shall make readily available data, as well as the relevant metadata necessary to interpret and use those data, accessible to the user without undue delay, of the same quality as is available to the data holder, easily, securely, free of charge, in a comprehensive, structured, commonly used and machine-readable format and, where relevant and technically feasible, continuously and in real-time. This shall be done on the basis of a simple request through electronic means where technically feasible.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/2854/oj/eng
There are rules pertaining to B2B relations, where there's some restrictions on how fees may be charged. (Article 9, where fees may cover costs but must not discriminate and must be "reasonable")
> Easier to just eliminate any attempt at malicious compliance by interpreting 'reasonable' unreasonably.
The "reasonable" clauses exist to pre-empt this. EU courts generally aren't very amused by companies pulling stunts like setting fees to 'Math.infinity'.
A good case study for this has been Apple's legal fights around the DMA & App Store monopoly. Which mostly consists of Apple trying to be "clever" and the European Commission telling them that no, their clearly unreasonable fees are unreasonable.