Digital Networks Act: the FSFE calls for strong and consistent
protection of Router Freedom
For more than a decade, the Free Software Foundation Europe has worked to protect Router Freedom in Europe. The European Union is about to reform the telecom sector with the proposed Digital Networks Act. We call for a clear and harmonised approach that upholds this freedom across all Member States
Router Freedom is
the right of users to choose and operate their own routers / modems and
other equipment used for internet connection. It is important for user
autonomy, competition, and privacy as it would enable users to run Free
Software operating systems on their routers and modems of choice. Router
Freedom is understood in a broader context as a crucial element of Device
Neutrality, and it requires that network operators must allow
end-users to run Free Software on their devices.
For over ten
years, the Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) has been
successfully advocating for this freedom across Europe with successes
in Finland, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Greece, and Belgium.
The proposed Digital
Networks Act (DNA) aims to reform the telecommunications sector in
the European Union (EU). In the previous iteration (2018-2020) of
regulation of routers, the EU introduced
several technical rules that fragmented the implementation of Router
Freedom by allowing national regulators to exclude this right from
determined network topologies when “objective necessities” were in
place. Unfortunately, many member states used this opportunity to
exclude Router Freedom from fibre networks. Now, the DNA presents an
opportunity to close this fragmentation gap by securing Router Freedom
in a consistent and effective manner across the European Union.
Fragmented regulatory framework
Router Freedom is formally
recognised in EU law; however, the practical implementation depends
largely on how the Network Termination Point (NTP) is defined. The NTP
marks the boundary between the provider’s network and the user’s
terminal equipment. If this point is defined, for example, behind a
provider-supplied router, users are effectively prevented from using
their own devices, even if Router Freedom is nominally guaranteed. For
Router Freedom, ensuring that the NTP is clearly defined at the
appropriate access point is therefore essential.
Only the designation of the NTP at the passive physical point where
the public network connects to the end-user's premises guarantees Router
Freedom for all European users.
Although BEREC, the European telecom regulatory body, issued
guidelines setting Router Freedom as the default for all network
topologies, it allowed national authorities to set exclusions. Recent
examples illustrate this fragmentation. In
Austria, regulatory decisions have weakened Router Freedom by
allowing interpretations of the NTP that restrict users’ ability to
replace provider-supplied routers. In
Italy, the regulatory framework has shifted back and forth over
time, creating uncertainty and instability for users, manufacturers, and
internet service providers (ISPs). These divergent approaches show that
non-binding guidance alone has not been sufficient to ensure consistent
protection of Router Freedom across the EU.
You should control your router, not the ISP
This fragmentation of rules across member states has led to limited
oversight on how ISPs treat customers who use their own equipment for
internet connection. In the most
comprehensive study the FSFE has conducted to date, the following
issues were identified:
- Limitations to freedom of choice.
Some ISPs restrict end-users from connecting their routers and modems to
the public network. This is observed more intensively in countries where
the position of the NTP is not regulated in a configuration favourable
to end-users.
- ISP’s lock-in. Some ISPs impose
other restrictions that increase switching costs by end-users, like
charging for provided equipment and imposition of fines when end-users
use their own equipment. Lock-in is significantly more notable on fibre
networks and in countries where Router Freedom is not established by
legislation.
- Provision of proprietary devices.
The routers, modems and optical fibre devices provided by ISPs are
generally proprietary. End-users cannot inspect their firmware or
install an alternative operating system. This is especially problematic
with fibre connections, since many contracts prohibit end-users to
change the optical equipment imposed by ISPs.
- Unlawful commercial and technical
practices. Even where Router Freedom has been
established by legislation, ISPs can still hamper end-users’ ability to
choose and use their own routers and modems. Some ISPs make it
cumbersome to replace the ISP's equipment, take a long time to provide
login data or other access credentials, fail to offer technical support
for the network, or threaten end-users who use personal routers with
contract termination or fines.
This situation undermines not only user rights, but also the internal
market of the EU. If you pay the electricity to power your router, it
should be as much under your control as your own coffee machine or
laptop, not something dictated by your internet provider. Different
national rules on where the network ends and the user’s equipment begins
create barriers for device manufacturers, complicate cross-border
offerings, and erode trust in EU-level protections.
What
FSFE calls for in the DNA: Router Freedom should be secured at the EU
level!
The position of the FSFE is that the Digital Networks Act (DNA) must
move beyond fragmented national rules and establish a clear, operational
framework ensuring effective and uniform protection of Router Freedom.
This requires setting a harmonised default across the EU that properly
reflects the interests of end-users and consumers. Any deviation due to
network topology should remain the exception, not the rule, and must be
transparently justified.
Several regulators have already supported this approach. Germany’s
national authority has rejected many of the arguments raised by internet
service providers against Router Freedom, confirming users’ right to
choose their own terminal equipment in fibre networks as well.
Similarly, in 2023, Belgium
formally introduced Router Freedom covering all network types, including
fibre. Finland
implemented Router Freedom as early as 2014 and reaffirmed its
commitment in 2021. In the same year, the Dutch
Authority for Consumers and Markets published rules confirming
Router Freedom for consumers in the Netherlands.
In order to protect Router Freedom and make sure that a harmonised
approach across the EU is implemented, amendments in Recital 14, Article
69, and Article 125 of the proposed text are necessary. The changes are
needed to consolidate the identification of the NTP at the passive
physical point of the network, by default.
"With the upcoming legislative discussions on the Digital Networks
Act, we call on EU policymakers to establish Router Freedom as a clear
and enforceable principle across the Union, guaranteeing all European
consumers the right to use their own terminal equipment, no matter the
network topology, and putting a definitive end to regulatory
fragmentation", states Lucas Lasota, FSFE's Legal Programme Manager
Today, we have submitted our position on Router Freedom to the European
Commission’s consultation on the Digital Networks Act. You can read it
here.
Support FSFE’s work on Router Freedom
The engagement of the FSFE in European and national policy processes
requires sustained effort, including participation in meetings,
consultations, and in-person discussions with policymakers and
regulators across Europe. If you value Router Freedom and want to
support our work, please make a donation. Your contributions help cover
essential costs such as travel and coordination, enabling the FSFE to
continue advocating effectively for users’ rights in the Digital
Networks Act and beyond.
Become an FSFE
supporter now!
Support FSFE
