suitable for continuous immersion in water under conditions which the manufacturer shall specify
The Apple “conditions” include this choice quote:
resistant to accidental spills from common liquids
And this one:
Splash, water and dust resistance are not permanent conditions and resistance might decrease as a result of normal wear. Liquid damage is not covered under warranty
I think it would be hard for Apple to argue handling “accidental spills” meets the EU requirement for the device to be “regularly subject to splashing water”. Especially when “normal wear” can decrease the water resistance and it’s not covered under warranty.
If, on the other hand, Apple actually makes a phone I can use to record my kids swimming underwater… heck yeah that sounds awesome. I’d totally sacrifice a user replaceable battery. Bring it on.
To ensure the safety of end-users, this Regulation should provide for a limited derogation for portable batteries from the removability and replaceability requirements set for portable batteries concerning appliances that incorporate portable batteries and that are specifically designed to be used, for the majority of the active service of the appliance, in an environment that is regularly subject to splashing water, water streams or water immersion and that are intended to be washable or rinseable. This derogation should only apply when it is not possible, by way of redesign of the appliance, to ensure the safety of the end-user and the safe continued use of the appliance after the end-user has correctly followed the instructions to remove and replace the battery. Where the derogation applies, the product should be designed in such a way as to make the battery removable and replaceable only by independent professionals, and not by end-users.
(emphasis mine)
I dont think it would be acceptable to argue a regular consumer phone would fall into that exception.
This article is clickbait. There are exceptions for devices that are “waterproof” or have batteries that last a certain number of cycles.
This isn’t going to change a thing (especially it EU judges allow IP68 to be considered “waterproof.”)
IP68 is defined as:
The Apple “conditions” include this choice quote:
And this one:
I think it would be hard for Apple to argue handling “accidental spills” meets the EU requirement for the device to be “regularly subject to splashing water”. Especially when “normal wear” can decrease the water resistance and it’s not covered under warranty.
If, on the other hand, Apple actually makes a phone I can use to record my kids swimming underwater… heck yeah that sounds awesome. I’d totally sacrifice a user replaceable battery. Bring it on.
Does it though? https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2023-0237_EN.html#title1:~:text=(39) To,by end-users. does say
(emphasis mine)
I dont think it would be acceptable to argue a regular consumer phone would fall into that exception.