Is the @MediaBox Facing Market Withdrawal? CE Compliance Under Scrutiny by Regulatory Authorities

A current case of insufficient product safety has drawn the attention of the Market Surveillance Authority at the Austrian Federal Office of Metrology and Surveying. The authority is investigating the “@MediaBox,” which was reported to the authorities by a court-appointed and certified expert. According to their initial assessment, the device shows significant deficiencies that fail to meet European sales regulations, particularly due to missing essential labels and documentation required within the EU.

The manufacturer claims that the “@MediaBox” holds CE certification and is compliant with European directives for Electromagnetic Compatibility (2014/30/EU), Low Voltage (2014/35/EU), as well as the Ecodesign Directive (2009/125/EC) and Regulation 107/2009. These regulations mandate that the product or its documentation must clearly display a unique identification number, the manufacturer’s name, and a complete address. Additionally, an instruction manual with safety information in the local language is required.

However, the appointed expert found neither a unique identification number nor a manufacturer or type designation on the “@MediaBox” device. The only marking present on the product is a MAC address, which does not meet EU product requirements. The instruction manual also contains major omissions and does not align with EU standards.

Translation of the e-mail:

“Dear Sir or Madam,

I have been informed of a product ‘@MEDIA’ which I assume should not be lawfully placed on the market within the EU.

Due to its nature and the functionality described, a conformity assessment is to be carried out for this product; a CE marking is present on the product. The product falls under at least the Directives 2014/30/EU of 26 February 2014 (electromagnetic compatibility), 2014/35/EU of 26 February 2014 (low ), 2009/125/EC (Ecodesign), as well as the Regulations 107/2009 (Requirements for the environmentally sound design of set-top boxes) of 4 February 2009.

The directives and the regulation require that a type/batch/serial number or other identification mark is affixed to the product or user documentation and that the name of the manufacturer/trade name/trade mark and the postal address are indicated. Furthermore, it is required that operating instructions with safety information in the respective national language are enclosed with the equipment.

The product has neither an identification mark (with the exception of a MAC address) nor a manufacturer’s name/type designation, nor are there any operating instructions worth mentioning.

Due to the labelling and documentation deficiencies, the product should be refused market access within the EU.

I request that the market surveillance authority verify the facts, request the documents on which the CE conformity assessment is based, and sanction the manufacturer/importer; attached you will find photos of the device, the ‘operating instructions’ and a white paper on the marketing concept.

I am happy to answer any questions and would appreciate being informed of the next steps in this matter.

graduate engineer

Sworn and court-certified expert“

In their statement, the expert calls for the regulatory authorities to thoroughly investigate the matter, verify the product’s CE compliance, and, if violations are found, impose sanctions on the manufacturer or importer. This incident once again raises the question of how products lacking adequate labeling and documentation can reach the European market. Responsibility now rests with the surveillance authorities to ensure that European safety standards are upheld.

Signs of trouble were already evident at the official “@MediaBox” kickoff event on July 27 in Graz, where the first devices were distributed to Austrian marketers for testing until the end of September. It remains puzzling why another test round was necessary after a testing phase in Italy in 2022.

The promise of the @MediaBox sounds tempting: simply switch on the TV, watch ads and get paid for it – an idea that seems almost too good to be true and is supposed to make up for the lack of clarity in the CE marking. Whether the @MediaBox ultimately meets the EU requirements remains to be seen – the market surveillance authorities have yet to make their decision.

And as always, those affected are welcome to comment on this, or if someone has more or different information, they are welcome to share it with us. We are not interested in making false claims and our primary goal remains the provision of complete documentation.