Activities of Anne-Sophie PELLETIER related to 2020/2015(INI)
Shadow opinions (2)
OPINION on Intellectual property rights for the development of artificial intelligence technologies
OPINION on intellectual property rights for the development of artificial intelligence technologies
Amendments (13)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomNotes the ambitCommission's affirmed by the Commissmbitions in its communications of 19 February 20201 in the area of AI artificial intelligence (AI) and data; _________________ 1(COM(2020)0064, COM(2020)0065, COM(2020)0066 and COM(2020)0067).hopes that the Commission will put itself in a position to fulfil its AI ambitions by opting for a European data strategy enabling complete sovereignty in this area;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Reiterates the importance of the open source model as this model provides for more consumer choice and can prevent lock-in by a single company;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that disruptive technologies such as AI offer both small and large companies the opportunity to develop market-leading products; considers that all companies, developers and creators should benefit from equally efficient and effective IPR protection;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that IP protection strategies will constantly evolve over time as AI evolves, and that it will be necessary to take account of issues such as flexible copyright, patent protection or even trade secrets rules, and to consider what route will provide innovators with the broadest and most robust means of IP protection while ensuring total protection for whistleblowers;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Recalls that the freedom to warn and inform must take precedence over business secrecy;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses the importance of protecting IPRs, including trade secrets, in any regulatory framework for AI, in particular as regards any detailed requirements for the narrow set of applications deemed ‘high-risk’, stresses that the protection of trade secrets should in no way hinder whistleblowers in addressing the potential dangers of high- risk applications;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to evaluate the possibility and relevance for companies of obtaining patents based on software or algorithms with a view to ensuring both the protection of innovation and the need for transparency required for trustworthy AI as well as the public availability of algorithms used for public purposes;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that the challenge of assessing AI applications requires the development of new methods; notes, for instance, that adaptive learning systems may recalibrate following each input, making certain ex ante disclosures ineffective;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that where AI applications are certified, they should demonstrate transparency, explainability and adherence to ethical standards, but notes that this aim is not necessarily achieved only, or at all, through simple disclosure of the algorithm or codeethical standards beyond legal obligations on data protection, transparency, non-discrimination and explainability; disclosure and understandable explanation of algorithm codes should be obligatory;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Welcomes the Commission’s aim of creating a single European data space with investment in standards, tools and infrastructure; supports in particular the establishment of a common European mobility data space in strict compliance with European GDPR rules;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to addresstake action on the question of data and intellectual property protectionprotecting personal data and safeguarding intellectual property and whistleblowers; stresses the need to opt for an ambitious data relocation policy in Europe;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the future establishment of an enabling and flexible legislative framework for the governance of common European data spaces, as well as the Commission’s willingness to foster business-to-government and business-to- business data sharing, which must be anonymised, and to limit mandatory access to data under FRAND conditions to the cases where specific circumstances so dictate;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to pay special attention to access for SMEs to anonymised, GDPR-compliant data that could boost their activity; adds that such access should be limited to the sectors in which they operate;