alt Hacker NewsAside from the security issue, it seems like an awful idea for a government (or governments, in this case) to say 'hey, you need to follow this standard for invoicing. But also, you have to pay to see the entire standard'.. almost feels like extortion a bit
Replies
DIN is not a government; CEN is an NGO, too.
But yes, for commercial offers, presumption of conformity mean you have to pay for norms to adhere to law. Big fail.
Especially since non-commercial but persistent and public, not "for profit", is still surmised in e.g. warranty laws. (E.g. geschäftsmäßige Nutzung / usage with said two terms, even for F/LOSS)
To be clear: The ones who need to follow the standard (companies that create invoices) do not need access to the standard, only some supplier does. And there are a lot of things that the government requires that costs money - you could see it as another tax.
That said, I actually agree with you - it's crazy that we need to pay for a stupid standard document.
The right to access standards that have been incorporated-by-reference into law is still being established by various countries' court systems.
For example, in the USA https://www.rcfp.org/briefs-comments/astm-v-upcodes-inc/
This is an especially hot topic in the EU in medical device regulations: https://www.bsigroup.com/en-GB/insights-and-media/insights/b...