Comment by londons_explore 3 days ago
People would have said the same 100 years ago about forcing food companies to reveal their ingredients list. Yet now it is required in almost every country, and doesn't appear to have been that detrimental to the food industry.
Hardware schematics and full source code doesn't tell you everything about how a piece of hardware is made either.
How was the hardware tested? How was it calibrated? How was it assembled?
An ingredients list tells 90% of the story about how food is made, and in most cases an expert could guess the remaining 10% to get a decent result. Likewise, hardware design+code tells 90% and an expert could figure out the remaining 10%.
The government could totally require all consumer products have published source code. (published source code != a license for others to use the code)
Even just knowing all the components would be a step in the right direction.
I agree with the sentiment, but:
To what level would the "source code" have to be published? Chip-level? Should I expect HDL code that allows me to reproduce the microcontroller? If not, expect a bunch of gadget companies to pay cypress or whoever to make "custom" chips with their firmware burned in. After all, what's the difference at that point between HDL and firmware?
If yes, expect most companies to simply refuse, and not authorize their chips for sale in the US. International IP / licensing agreement would make it literally impossible for them to comply without being sued into oblivion by the Taiwanese company they licensed the IP from.
I think stuff like design files and source code should be held in escrow by the government. If you continue to provide replacement parts to customers, the information remains protected. Once you stop providing reasonably priced replacements ("reasonably priced" = less than the cost of the product), the information gets published so others can reproduce it.
Ingredients listing don't tell everything about how it is made, etc.
A closer analogy might be detailed API specs.