The standards are not secret, they are merely behind a paywall. The assumption has always been that the companies who have to (or want to) implement those standards can afford the expense. However, one point addressed by the Advocate General’s present Opinion is that it should be possible for citizens to check whether the relevant standards are being obeyed, which means that citizens need to have access to those standards, not just the entities implementing the standards. In addition, an important part of the current court case is about whether copyright (the basis on which fees are charged) can apply to standards that are effectively part of the law.

Not all companies are big, old industry dinosaurs. Sometimes people try to start new companies, and they don't have a lot of money.

Charging for standards is a way to prevent competition.

I think "bad" is understatement: the secrecy of the law undermines the principle of transparency that makes law work.