10 Amendments of Brando BENIFEI related to 2020/2017(INI)
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the Commission has proposed to rapidly deploy products and services that rely on AI in areas of public interest and the public sector; emphasises that in the education sector, this deployment should involve educators, learners and wider society and take their needs, especially of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged, and the expected benefits into account in order to ensure that AI is used purposefully, lawfully and ethically;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to include the education sector in the regulatory framework for high-risk AI applications given the importance of ensuring that education continues to contribute to the public good and given the high sensitivity of data on pupils, students and other learners; underlines that data sets used to train AI should be reviewed to avoid reinforcing gender stereotypes and other biaseof the highest quality and they should be reviewed to avoid reinforcing biases and discrimination based on gender, race and other personal characteristics;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Highlights the increasing need to ensure mutual recognition of a minimum level of professional qualifications on AI skills across the EU, as several member states are upgrading their educational offer with AI-related skills and putting in place specific curricula for AI developers; stresses the need for them to be in line with the assessment list of the Ethical Guidelines for Trustworthy AI; calls on the Commission to build on its own proposal in the White Paper on AI, in order to put forward a framework in this sense;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Urges Member States which have not done so to modernise their education systems with a stronger emphasis on STEAM subjects in order to secure schoolchildren with the minimum necessary skills needed in an increasingly digital society;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Expresses its concern that schools and other public education providers are becoming increasingly dependent on educational technology services, including AI applications, provided by just a few technology companiesjust a few technology companies are providing educational technology services, including AI applications, that schools and other public education providers are becoming increasingly dependent on; stresses that this may lead to unequal access to data and limit competition by restricting consumer choice; calls for this data to be shared with the relevant public authorities so it can be used in the development of curricula and pedagogical practices (in particular since these services are purchased with public money or offered to public education providers for free, and because education is a common good);
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Urges the Commission to combat market practices resulting in unjustified monopolisation of data collection and restrictions on data access in the field of educational technology services; calls on the Commission to ensure fair access to data for all companies, in particular SMEs and cultural and creative companies, which play an essential role in sustaining social cohesion and cultural diversity in Europe as well as democratic values;
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses the importance of putting in place a proper framework for the public procurement of such services for the public sector, including for education providers, to ensure consumer choice and the respect of fundamental rights; stresses the need for public buyers to take into account specific criteria, such as non-discrimination and data privacy, the highest standards of privacy and data protection, accessibility for learners with special needs, and, specifically when purchasing services for public education providers, the involvement of educators and learners;
Amendment 88 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines the unreliability of the current automated means of removing illegal content from online platforms on which audiovisual content is shared; calls for a ban on generalised moderation and automated content filters;Recalls that there should be no general monitoring of audiovisual content, in line with Article 15 of the E-Commerce Directive1a; _________________ 1aDirective 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (‘Directive on electronic commerce’) (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1).
Amendment 102 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls for recommendation algorithms and personalised marketing on audiovisual platforms, including video streaming platforms and news platforms, and on platforms disseminating cultural and creative content, to be transparent, in order to give consumers and users insight into these processes and ensure that personalised services are not discriminatory; stresses the need to guarantee and properly implement the right of users to easily and reversibly opt out from recommended and personalised services.
Amendment 115 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Points out to the fact that creations made by AI, if marketed, could create distortions in the cultural and creative sector, affecting pricing and remuneration to the detriment of human creators.