23 Amendments of Romeo FRANZ related to 2018/2855(RSP)
Amendment 1 #
Citation 10 a (new)
– having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Justice of 5 June 2018 in Case C-210/16 Unabhängiges Landeszentrum für Datenschutz Schleswig-Holstein v Wirtschaftsakademie Schleswig-Holstein GmbH1; 1 http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/do cument.jsf;jsessionid=5522B7F15AF3745 3910B44DDFCB98621?text=&docid=202 543&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode= lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=225147
Amendment 7 #
Citation 13 e (new)
– having regard to Commission Recommendation of 12.9.2018 on election cooperation networks, online transparency, protection against cybersecurity incidents and fighting disinformation campaigns in the context of elections to the European Parliament;
Amendment 11 #
Recital C
C. whereas these personal data breaches occurred before the application of the new General Data Protection Regulation and for an extended period of time; whereas the companies concerned were however in breach of EU data protection law applicable at that time, particularly Directive 95/46/EC and Directive 2002/58/EC;
Amendment 13 #
Recital D
Amendment 14 #
Recital H
H. whereas the chairs of the political groups in the European Parliament held an in-camera first exchange of views with the CEO and founder of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg on 22 May 2018 and this meeting resulted in the request by the Conference of Presidents for the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, in association with the Committees on Constitutional Affairs, Legal Affairs and Industry, Research and Energy, to hold in-depth follow-up hearings;
Amendment 31 #
Paragraph 1
1. Expects all online platforms to ensure full compliance with Union data protection law, namely the GDPR and Directive 2002/58/EC (e-Privacy) and to help users understand how their personal information is processed in the targeted advertising model, and that effective controls are available, which includes greater transparency in relation to the privacy settings, and the design and prominence of privacy notices, and separate consent or other legal bases for different purposes of processing;
Amendment 38 #
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that the digital age requires electoral laws to be adapted to this new digital reality and suggests Member States introduce an obligatory system of introduce an obligatory system of digital imprints for electronic campaigning and advertising. Any form of political advertising should include easily accessible and understandable information on the publishing organisation and who is legally responsible for spending so that it is clear who sponsored campaigns, similar to existing requirements for printed campaign materials currently in place in various Member States; insists that transparency should also include complete information about the criteria for selecting the target group of the specific political advertising and the expected size of the target group;
Amendment 41 #
Paragraph 7
7. Recommends all online platforms dalls that the processing of personal data for political advertistingu ish political uses of their online advertising products a different purpose and therefore requires a separate legal basis such as consent from thei one for commercial usesadvertising;
Amendment 44 #
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that the requirement to verify the identity, location and sponsor of political advertisements recently introduced by Facebook in the US is a good initiative which will increase transparency and contribute to the fight against election meddling by foreign actors; urges Facebook to introduce the same requirements for political advertisements in Europe; calls on the Member States to adjust their electoral laws to this effect;
Amendment 46 #
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that profiling for political and electoral purposes and profiling based on online behaviour that may reveal political preferences, such as interaction with political content, insofar, as, pursuant to EU data protection law, it refers to political or philosophical opinions, should be prohibited and is of the opinion that social media platforms should monitor and actively inform authorities if such behaviour occurs; also believes that profiling based on other data, such as socio-economic or demographic factors, for political and electoral purposes, should be prohibited;
Amendment 53 #
Paragraph 11
11. Considers election interference to be a great challengehuge risk for democracy which requires a joint effort involving service providers, regulators and political actors and parties; welcomes the intention of the Commission to provide recommendations in this regard;
Amendment 61 #
Paragraph 14
14. Notes the actions undertaken by Facebook to counter data misuse, including the disabling or ban of applications suspected of misusing user data; expects Facebook to act swiftly on reports regarding suspicious or abusive applications and to prevent such applications from being allowed on the platform in the first place;
Amendment 63 #
Draft motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses that social media platforms are not mereonly passive platforms that only group user generated content but highlights that technological developments have widened the scope and role of such companies by introducing algorithm based advertising and content publication, concludes that this new role should be reflected in the regulatory field;
Amendment 68 #
Paragraph 17
17. Takes note of the privacy improvements that Facebook has undertaken after the Facebook/ Cambridge Analytica scandal, but recalls that Facebook promised to hold a full internal audit of which the European Parliament has not yet been informed and recommends that Facebook make substantial modifications that win order to become fully compliant with the GDPR and to prevent any impact of targeted political advertising on elections; takes note that this could also affect the core business model and the structure of its platform;
Amendment 71 #
Paragraph 18
18. Urges Facebook to allow and enable ENISAnational data protection authorities and the EDPB to carry out a full and independent audit of its platform investigating data protection and security of user personal data and to present the findings of such an audit to the EC, EP and national parliaments; such an exercise should also be carried for other major platforms;
Amendment 74 #
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on all online platforms providing advertising services to political parties and campaigns to include expertise within the sales support team who can provide political parties and campaigns with specific advice on transparency and accountability in relation to how to prevent that personal data is used to target users; calls on all online platforms that allow buyers of advertising to make certain selections to provide legal advice on the responsibilities of those buyers as joint controllers of the data, following the judgment of the CJEU in case C-210/16;
Amendment 75 #
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on all online platforms to urgently roll out planned transparency features in relation to political advertising, which should include consultation and evaluation of these tools by national authorities in charge of electoral observation and control; insists that such political and electoral advertising should not be done on the basis of individual user profiles; regrets that the Commission in its Recommendation from 12 September 2018 only focuses on transparency and not on a clear ban on individually targeted political advertising;
Amendment 77 #
Paragraph 23
Amendment 82 #
Paragraph 24
24. Takes the view that data protection authorities should have the same, if not more technical expert knowledge as those organisations under scrutiny. Suggests this objective could be reached by introducing funding by a levy on the sector concerned;
Amendment 86 #
Paragraph 26
26. Recalls its Resolution of 5 July 2018 on the Adequacy of the protection afforded by the EU-US Privacy Shield and, in view of the acknowledgement by Facebook that major privacy breaches occurred; calls on the US authorities responsible for enforcing the Privacy Shield to act upon such revelations without delay in full compliance with the assurances and commitments given to uphold the current Privacy Shield arrangement and, if needed, to remove such companies from the Privacy Shield list; welcomes, in this regard, the removal of Cambridge Analytica from the Privacy Shield in June 2018; calls also on the competent EU data protection authorities to investigate such revelations and, if appropriate, suspend or prohibit data transfers under the Privacy Shield; expects the FTC, as the responsible US authority to provide the Commission with a detailed summary of its findings once it has concluded its investigation into the data breach involving Facebook and Cambridge Analytica and to take appropriate enforcement action against the companies involved to provide an effective deterrent;
Amendment 89 #
Paragraph 27
27. Notes that the misuse of personal data affects the fundamental rights of billions of people around the globe; considers that the GDPR and the e-Privacy Directive provide for the highest standards of protection; regrets that Facebook decided to move 1.5 billion non-EU users out of the reach of the protection of the GDPR and the e-Privacy Directive; questions the legality of such a move; urges all online platforms to apply the GDPR standards (and the e-privacy) to all their services, regardless of where they are offered, as high standard of protection of personal data is increasingly seen as a major competitive advantage;
Amendment 91 #
Paragraph 28
28. Calls on the European Commission to upgrade the competition rules to reflect the digital reality and to look into the business model of social media platforms and their possible monopoly situation, taking into due account the fact that such a monopoly could be present rather due to the specificity of the brand and the amount of personal data that is held rather than an traditional monopoly situation and to take the necessary measures to remedy this; calls on the Commission to propose amendments to the European Electronic Communications Code that also require over-the-top communications providers to interconnect with others, in order to overcome the lock-in effect for their users;
Amendment 93 #
Paragraph 29
29. Requests the European Parliament, the Commission, the Council and all other European Union institutions, agencies and bodies to verify that the social media pages and the analytical and marketing tools used on their respective websites should not by any means put to risk the personal data of citizens; suggests them to evaluate their current communication policies in that perspective which may result in considering closing their Facebook accounts as a necessary condition to protect the personal data of every individual contacting them; instructs its own communications department to strictly adhere to the EDPS Guidelines on the protection of personal data processed through web services provided by EU institutions1; 1 https://edps.europa.eu/sites/edp/files/publ ication/16-11- 07_guidelines_web_services_en.pdf