Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EU fines Temu €200M for allowing sale of illegal products

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 423 posts

Re: EU fines Temu €200M for allowing sale of illegal products

#91

Post by throw_a_grenade »

gib444 wrote: post #2

> Temu has until 28 August 2026 to submit an action plan to the Commission, as required by Article 75 of the DSA. The plan must set out measures to remedy the breach of its risk-assessment obligations. The European Board for Digital Services will have one month from receipt of the plan to issue its opinion. The Commission will then have a further month to adopt its final decision and set a reasonable period for imple…

It's actually both: they handed one-time fine for past behaviour (about 200 M€, not final, can and most likely will be appealed and paid in like 10 years or so; cf. Apple tax breaks in Ireland); and threatening more fines if they don't play along in the future. One of the kinds of punishment that Commision can slap (subject to court oversight, ofc) is „daily fines”, which is a fine that accumulates with constant daily rate up to the date the company complies, or some pre-set maximum, which usually calculates to several months, and need to be reissued afterwards (which is an opportunity to double the daily amount, and again, can be appealed to a court).

Re: EU fines Temu €200M for allowing sale of illegal products

#92

Post by boondongle »

TheJoeMan wrote: post #34
big85 wrote: post #3

> Evidence from a mystery shopping exercise included in the Commission's investigation shows that a very high percentage of the selected chargers failed basic safety tests, while a high percentage of tested baby toys posed safety risks of medium to high severity, as they contain chemicals exceeding legal safety limits or pose suffocation hazards due to detachable parts. > Under the DSA, designated Very Large Online P…

I'd be curious to see a breakdown between the "toxic chemicals" and "suffocation hazards" categories, as my intuition says it's mostly the latter and often bunk. The other day I was watching the TV above the Walmart customer service desk that displays product recalls, and multiple recalled products were a motorized bassinet, but the wireless remote control has a battery compartment that could be opened and then the b…

People forget many of US's regulations were written in blood because the US already had it's industrialization period. They left behind signposts that people could use to sue.

The US seems burdensome because some US Entrepreneur already tried not caring and something happened. A good comparison is China cars which don't pass US standards for import. It's also a reason US Makes can't iterate as quickly as they aren't allowed to do the same things that China Makes can to iterate fast.

Whether or not it needs to stay that way is really the only question. I think most reasonably intelligent people read things like suffocation warnings and go, "well obviously don't do that." But the regs are written for the people who aren't that bright who will do it anyway.

Re: EU fines Temu €200M for allowing sale of illegal products

#93

Post by bonzini »

embedding-shape wrote: post #35
bonzini wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"compared to Temu that does not give a damn by design" would be more accurate.

I mean the same goes for most US companies, every time they first arrive in Europe they stumble around breaking laws and what not until they get fined to act properly, happened a bunch of times before, most famous examples being Uber and AirBnb, but Amazon been in trouble for the same thing in the past too.

I'd still say Temu and Wish are in a whole other league compared to other predecessors (AliExpress, Banggood, miniinthebox, etc.).

Re: EU fines Temu €200M for allowing sale of illegal products

#94

Post by throw_a_grenade »

bcjdjsndon wrote: post #17
mdrzn wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you won't be able to sell in the EU market anymore

Say they carry on.... How does EU actually stop people ordering from their website and getting items posted to their house?

They'll put them on naughty list that will be enforced by financial institutions, i.e. it will be an infraction for credit card operators to process such a payment. Financial operators have well oiled compliance facilities and the payment won't clear. If Temu won't get the money, they won't ship the parcel. And if they won't ship, then there will be a bit less carcinogens in EU. Good stuff.

Re: EU fines Temu €200M for allowing sale of illegal products

#95

Post by mc32 »

lokar wrote: post #85
GJim wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are you suggesting opening every package to check for a CE? In the old days, when an importer purchased Chinese goods in bulk and resold them, import checks were commonplace.... AND the importer was legally responsible for paying import duties and selling goods to the public that were legal and met safety standards. Now that any individual can order direct from China (with cheap subsidised postage!), the floodgates…

Require the recipient affirm the package meets all legal requirements, and personally assume liability for any violation.

That’s unworkable: asking a recipient unfamiliar with producers to know whether producer is reputable or not in advance and if the producer is unscrupulous you expect every affected buyer to follow up or be in violation of importation laws?

Re: EU fines Temu €200M for allowing sale of illegal products

#96

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

manoDev wrote: post #56

Isn't there some kind of law to disallow imports without a CE / RoHS / etc label? Why allow it to enter the EU, and then fine the seller afterwards?

With a few exceptions, those labels do not mean that the product has actually been tested or actually complies with the standard. They are a self-certification: CE means “I promise this complies with European norms”, but the entity deciding to print that on a product may not be honest. Small fly-by-night operations on the other side of the planet have little incentive to be honest.

Generally speaking, international direct-to-consumer e-commerce is a problem for trying to enforce these kinds of rules. The whole model of checks at the border works well for massive bulk shipments, which not only are few enough in number that customs have a chance of doing a proper job on them, but there's also a commercial importer taking a large financial risk on the shipment and therefore 1) having an incentive to ensure they import something safe to begin with, 2) they can be practically fined/sued by authorities if they screw up. But when you have myriad tiny operations selling direct to consumers, the consumer is the importer, and there's no local representative for the manufacturer that you can actually sue. It's effectively a quite lawless area. Being able to do direct imports is an important freedom, and this kind of laxity is inevitable, but it's understandable the EU wants to do something about the flood of poor-quality goods that are terrible for fair competition, the environment, and health and safety.

Re: EU fines Temu €200M for allowing sale of illegal products

#97

Post by QuantumNomad_ »

leni536 wrote: post #89
amelius wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah they have the CE mark, but it means "Chinese Export". You can recognize it by the C and E being closer together.

There is no such thing as "Chinese Export". https://cemarkingassociation.co.uk/latest-news/ce-marking-an...

There is such a thing. The Chinese Export one was specifically created to intentionally be confusable with the real CE marking (Conformité Européenne). And it works exactly as intended. People see “CE” and think it’s the real CE one but it’s the intentionally confusable one.

https://www.kimuagroup.com/news/differences-between-ce-and-c...

https://starfishmedical.com/resource/conformite-europeenne-m...

Post reply on HN