1745 Amendments of Marcel KOLAJA
Amendment 47 #
2023/2130(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Notes with satisfaction the successfulthe organisation of mid-term elections in 2022 of the President, Vice- Presidents and the Quaestors in a remote format, as decided by the Conference of Presidents; acknowledges the importance of the plenary remote voting system in the successful running of such a sensitive and complex secret vote;
Amendment 159 #
2023/2130(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 99 a (new)
Paragraph 99 a (new)
99a. Recalls the added-value of free and open source software in improving security since they make it possible for Parliament to identify and fix weaknesses, keep control over the data by hosting in its servers and designing solutions according to its own specifications, while being able to avoid vendor lock-in effects;
Amendment 160 #
2023/2130(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 99 b (new)
Paragraph 99 b (new)
99b. Recalls its preference for free and open source software solutions as against proprietary ones when considering new internal applications; asks for situations to be reported to the ICT governing bodies when open source solutions are not chosen;
Amendment 1 #
2023/2019(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls the crucial importance of the film and audiovisual sector for the EU at both economic and cultural level, and considers this sector vital for safeguarding the EU’s cultural and linguistic diversity and media pluralism; stresses that majority of European films receives EU and state fundings1aaimed to boost European and national culture, as a general principle, EU consumers should have access to art works financed with public funds; _________________ 1a https://rm.coe.int/fiction-film- financing-in-europe-2022-edition-m- kanzler/1680aa189b
Amendment 5 #
2023/2019(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls the results of the European Audiovisual Observatory’s study on Circulation on European Films on VOD and in cinemas; regrets that of all the films released over the last twenty years, less than 60% is currently available via streaming platforms in Europe and a vast majority of the titles are still not circulated outside their national market1a; _________________ 1a https://rm.coe.int/circulation-of- european-films-on-vod-and-in-cinemas- in-europe-2021-edi/1680a5779d
Amendment 15 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the Geo-blocking Regulation must be considered in the context of the overall e-commerce package of measures, in particular regarding cross- border parcel delivery services, the revision of the Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation and the revision of the directive on audio-visual media services, and reinforces its impact to boost the potential for cross-border e-commerce in Europe, as a prerequisite for the full functioning of the digital single market;
Amendment 16 #
2023/2019(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises the key financing principles of the sector, notably the indispensable territorial and exclusive allocation of licensing rights and contractual freedomat every European citizen should have a right to consume and enjoy culture and entertainment in their own language, while exercising their right to move and reside freely across the EU;
Amendment 19 #
2023/2019(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Amendment 20 #
2023/2019(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Recalls the European Citizens Initiative Minority SafePack, which collected more than millions of signatures among European citizens, calling for abolishing geo-blocking across the EU, which is harming the rights of linguistic minorities; stresses the need to ensure that minority language concerns are taken into consideration in future regulations;
Amendment 20 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines the remaining untapped potential for cross-border economic activities that couldmust be encouraged by the removal of all geo-blocking barriers and the continued promotion of the free movement of products and services in line with the principles of the Geo-blocking Regulation;
Amendment 21 #
2023/2019(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes, in this regard, the Commission’s first short-term review of Regulation (EU) 2018/302 (the Geo- blocking Regulation) which upholds the continued exclusion of audiovisual services from the scope of the regulation; proves that demand for cross-border access to audiovisual services is steadily growing; stresses that 20% of young people (age 15- 25 years) tried accessing cross-border audiovisual content1a; _________________ 1a Flash Eurobarometer 477b, Cross border access to content online, June 2019
Amendment 24 #
2023/2019(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Reiterates the fact that the current system of exclusive territorial licensing ensures the sustainable financing of films and audiovisual content, and is crucial to ensuring both content diversity and a wide range of distribution business models, which ultimately benefit EU consumerunjustified and ineffective geo-blocking practices significantly undermine a flow of European cultural art pieces and prevent strengthening of harmonised Digital Single Market, which harms EU citizens;
Amendment 26 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines the importance of the Geo-blocking Regulation in building a more robust, coherent and, accessible and fair internal market for all citizens and businesses in the EU, regardless of their nationality, place of residence or establishment; stresses that further steps need to be taken to achieve the full potential of the Regulation, including by strengthening the legal framework supporting the cross- border exchange of goods and services, and by including audio-visual services in the scope of the Regulation;
Amendment 31 #
2023/2019(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that the inclusion of audiovisual services, videogames and ebooks in the scope of the Geo-blocking Regulation would result in a significant loss of revenue, putting investment in new content at risk, while eroding contractual freedom and reducing cultural diversity in both content production and distributionstrengthening of the European identity and would secure flow of European cultural artworks across the EU;
Amendment 35 #
2023/2019(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 37 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recognises that the Commission carried out its first review prior to the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, which means that changes to both consumer and trading behaviour triggered by the pandemic were therefore not reflected in the 2020 Commission report; recalls the changes in consumer habits and the rising preference for onlinepurchasing goods and services online that were additionally strengthened by the COVID-19 pandemic; underlines, therefore, the need to draw further conclusions based on the new data in this area, as and to consider introducing complementary measures for reducing market fragmentation, also taking into account that 12 % of EU businesses10 started or increased efforts to sell goods or services online due to the pandemic; __________________ 10 Eurostat, ‘Online sales efforts on the rise due to the pandemic’, 11 April 2022.
Amendment 42 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Member States to fully apply and enforce the Geo-blocking Regulation and to act decisively against entities that deprive consumers of all the benefits offered by the single market, also by securing proper enforcement tools and enhancing cross-border cooperation, including through a reinforced Consumer Protection Cooperation (CPC) network; urges the Commission to step up efforts on coordination and to steer and monitor the cooperation in the CPC network, in order to ensure effective enforcement of the Geo-blocking Regulation; calls on the Commission to provide additional guidance on the enforcement of the Regulation and to strengthen equal enforcement and to initiate and follow-up on infringement procedures in order to avoid the fragmentation of the rules;
Amendment 44 #
2023/2019(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls on the Commission to conduct updated study on demand on cross-border access to audiovisual services;
Amendment 46 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Acknowledges the wide range of applicable minimum and maximum fines both across and within Member States; calls on the Commission to monitor more closely if such discrepancies could harm the effectiveness of the Regulation and if the introduction of harmonised sanctions is needed;
Amendment 48 #
2023/2019(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Calls on the Commission to take all necessary steps to abolish geo-blocking practices within the Digital Single Market;
Amendment 49 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Is concerned that a full-scale evaluation, that should be carried out and presented by the Commission in 2025, will face challenges due to the delay in application and a lack of data; notes, however, that the progress in the digitalisation of trade in goods and services should by its nature ease cross-border access and promote competition among different EU businesses to the benefit of consumers;
Amendment 51 #
2023/2019(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Calls on the Commission to explore possibilities of establishing unitary European copyright with a goal to eradicate licensing barriers within the EU;
Amendment 55 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that one third of all complaints received by responding competent authorities were not actually covered by the Regulation, including, among other things, copyright-protected content and insurance services, which shows that consumers perceive Geoblocking as particularly problematic in these areas; is concerned by the fact that consumers are still unaware of the coverage of the Regulation and calls on the Commission and on the Member States to improve efforts on awareness raising campaigns;
Amendment 63 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recognises that certain price differences canstill exist for cross-border customers, which can; notes that these differences could only be justified if based on different value added tax (VAT) rates andor higher costs for cross-border delivery and running business operations; believes, however, that consumers should not be blocked from accessing competitive offers made available across the single market by the same or other providers;
Amendment 79 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Deplores the fact that some unjustified obstacles persist with regard to registration and payment methods online, so that cross-border customers are often not able to register on websites requiring registration, or pay for the requested service without presenting an address or payment method linked to Member State specific banks, Member State specific payment systems or to an address in the local country, thus diminishing the objective of the Regulation to ‘shop like a local’;
Amendment 86 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the progress made in terms of the cross-catalogue availability of music, e-book, video game and software products and services, both in subscription and transaction-based models; regrets the limited improvements regarding the cross- catalogue availability of video content and live sports events, which contribute to consumers’ perception that the audiovisual services sector is applying the highest level of geo-blockingand calls on the Commission to abolish geo-blocking practices concerning audiovisual services and to ensure that such services are also covered by the Regulation;
Amendment 93 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes the popularity of different tools among consumers used to avoid geo- blocking restrictions, especially for audiovisual content; considers it important to recognise that the steady modernisation and adaptation of theis convinced that this popularity shows the increasing demand to access cross-border audiovisual contents by consumers, which is also confirmed by the Eurobarometer, according to which 20% of young people (age 15-25 years) tried accessing cross- border audiovisual serviccontent; stres sector to new consumer expectations might be more effective than undermining the effective use of such tools that this demand should be duly taken into account by the Commission, which should propose prohibiting geo-blocking practices of audiovisual services, thus making unnecessary the use of tools to avoid geo-blocking restrictions;
Amendment 97 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Stresses that discrimination based on nationality, residence and location in relation to access to audiovisual content is an existing problem in the EU; recalls the report from the European Commission confirming that consumers in Greece have access to 1.3% of all the titles available in all EU Member States, while consumers in Germany have access to 43.1% of all film titles available in all Member States;
Amendment 103 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15 b. Recalls the European Citizens Initiative Minority SafePack, which collected more than millions of signatures among European citizens, calling for abolishing geo-blocking across the EU, which is harming the rights of linguistic minorities; stresses the need to ensure that minority language concerns are taken into consideration in future regulations;
Amendment 108 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Believes that the Portability Regulation12 delivered substantial benefits to consumers who expect to receive continued access to their services when they are temporarily present in another Member State; welcomes the Commission’s ongoing stakeholder dialogue on access to and the availability of audiovisual content across the EU; emphasises, however, that further clarity is needed on the services covered by the Portability Regulation and that further actions are needed to meet consumers expectations concerning the cross- catalogue availability of and cross-border access to sports events via streaming services; calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Member States to carefully assess all options that will reduce, in order to give them not only the possibility to ‘shop like a local’ but also to ‘watch like a local’; calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Member States to carefully assess all options, including adapting to the potential viewers within the EU market the agreement between the economic operators involved in the audiovisual sector, in order to abolish the unjustified and discriminatory geo- blocking barriers for access to audiovisual services and sports events, without harming the different actors in the supply chain and while taking into account the potential impact on diversity and the available financing of the creative sector; reminds the Commission to present Parliament with the outcome of its stakeholder dialogue on possibly extending the scope of the Geo-blocking Regulation to audiovisual content; __________________ 12 Regulation (EU) 2017/1128 of 14 June 2017 on cross-border portability of online content services in the internal market, OJ L 168, 30.6.2017, p.1.
Amendment 113 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. In this context, urges the Commission to propose, at the latest by September 2024, the comprehensive revision of Geoblocking Regulation, consisting, in particular, of the inclusion of audiovisual services in the scope of this Regulation, and the deletion from Article 4(1)(b) of the exclusion of electronically supplied services, the main feature of which is the provision of access to or use of copyright-protected works or other protected subject matter;
Amendment 128 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Amendment 129 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20 b. Calls on the Commission to explore possibilities of establishing unitary European copyright with a goal to eradicate licensing barriers within the EU;
Amendment 130 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 c (new)
Paragraph 20 c (new)
20 c. Calls on the Commission to take all necessary steps to abolish geo-blocking practices within the single market, including in relation to audiovisual services;
Amendment 131 #
2023/2019(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Urges for a full assessment of possible synergies with other measures of the digital single market strategy, such as Regulation (EU) 2018/644 on cross- border parcel delivery services, that should help increasing the transparency of cross-border tariffs, and the changes in the area of VAT for cross- border e- commerce that entered into force on 1 July 2021 and, which are supposed to reduce compliance costs for traders with cross- border operations and, hence, encourage more traders to deliver goods or services cross-border, and Regulation (EU) 2018/64413 on cross-border parcel delivery services that should help increase the transparency of cross-border tariffstresses that, although not directly addressed by the Regulation, delivery limitations in cross-border online sales still affect more than 50% of shopping attempts, frustrating consumer expectations; __________________ 13 Regulation (EU) 2018/644 of 18 April 2018 on cross-border parcel delivery services, OJ L 112, 2.5.2018, p. 19.
Amendment 29 #
2022/2082(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 c (new)
Paragraph 25 c (new)
25c. Welcomes the proposal from the Secretary-General to enable the Bureau to debate draft decisions on important matters and decide on those at its following meeting; invites the Bureau and Quaestors to implement that practice;
Amendment 100 #
2022/2082(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62 a (new)
Paragraph 62 a (new)
62a. Calls on the Parliament to actively encourage Members and Parliamentary staff not to hold any meetings or participate in lobby activities with organisations, which are not registered in the EU Transparency Register and do not publish annual accounts, as well as the legal persons financing its activities;
Amendment 112 #
2022/2082(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65 a (new)
Paragraph 65 a (new)
65a. Considers roll call votes (RCV) to be a key instrument for transparency and accountability towards the Union’s citizens; calls for introducing automatic RCV to any final vote except for secret ballots, and for increasing the number of RCV that are possible for a political group to ask for per part-session in Rule 190-2, or exempting legislative files from that limitation;
Amendment 134 #
2022/2082(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 75 a (new)
Paragraph 75 a (new)
75a. Highlights the Parliament’s dependence for communications on social media on platforms with main establishment outside the EU, with poor track records with regards to data protection, privacy, freedom of information and freedom of expression; recalls in particular the 2018 Facebook- Cambridge Analytica scandal, the YouTube recommendation algorithm promoting extremist content, and the 2022 Twitter scandal regarding the suspension of journalists and the swift and opaque changes of verification policies; calls the Parliament to champion and support alternative social media, which are more in line with the European values, such as open-source, decentralised and interoperable networks;
Amendment 202 #
2022/2082(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 112 a (new)
Paragraph 112 a (new)
112a. Recalls that in 2019 the Parliament launched a project to automate the registration of attendance with biometric technology in the central attendance register and signed a contract for this project at the end of 2020; stresses that the large-scale processing of biometric data should be avoided; again asks the Bureau to develop an alternative solution that does not involve the processing of biometric data and ensures that only Members entitled to the daily subsistence allowance actually receive it; regrets that this project is still being pursued despite the European Data Protection Supervisor’s adverse opinion at the end of March 2021 and reiterated in its Annual Report 2021, where it was stated that Parliament should consider less intrusive alternatives with regard to data protection;
Amendment 1 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the latest revision of Directive 2010/13/EU, adopted on 28 November 2018, provided a framework for strengthening the country of origin principle and improving the protection of consumers, in particular minors and persons with disabilities, in the online world; whereas the significantly delayed transposition of the Directive by Member States undermines its effectiveness;
Amendment 5 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines the importance of the proper implementation of the Directive; regrets that not all Member States have done this and encourages them to do so urgently; regrets that diverging national transpositions can increase fragmentation, erect barriers to the free movement of audiovisual-related goods and services in the internal market and create obstacles in providing pan- European media services, thus harming media pluralism in Europe;
Amendment 10 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights the importance of the strengthened country of origin principle that helps providers to abide by the rules and to facilitate the cross-border provision of services by providing legal certainty and a better understanding of the rules they must comply with; points out that undermining the country of origin principle increases fragmentation of the single market and administrative burdens for cross-border services;
Amendment 15 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that media service providers must ensure, in line with Article 7 of the Directive, that audiovisual services are continuously and progressively made more accessible to peoplersons with disabilities; regrets, however, that substantial differences exist between Member States with regard to the implementation of such obligations for linear and non-linear service providers, as well as for public and private broadcasters and with regard to the nature of the content; is concerned that, due to delays and differences in transposition, Member States will not properly address the needs of peoplersons with disabilities;
Amendment 23 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls the Directive’s key provisions to protect minors, including those on commercial communications; urges the Commission to secure the strict implementation and proper enforcement of these rules; warns against abusing the provisions to protect minors to censor LGBTIQ content in certain Member States and urges the Commission to proceed with infringement procedures in such cases;
Amendment 41 #
2022/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights the importance of a well functioning internal media market; underlines thatwelcomes the proposed European media freedom act aimsing to further enhance cooperation between the national regulators by establishing a European media board; stresses that independence and adequate financial and human resources must be guaranteed in order to fulfil these new responsibilities; insists on the importance of avoiding overlaps between the two instruments in order to preserve their effectiveness.;
Amendment 61 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Council Directive 85/374/EEC39lays down common rules on liability for defective products with the aim of providing compensation for damage suffered by natural persons caused by defective products and with the aim of removing divergences between the legal systems of Member States that may distort competition and affect the movement of goods within the internal market, and that entail a differing degree of protection of the consumer against damage to health or property caused by such products. _________________ 39 Council Directive 85/374/EEC of 25 July 1985 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products (OJ L 210, 7.8.1985, p. 29).
Amendment 63 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) A revision of Directive 85/374/EEC is also needed in order to ensure coherence and consistency with product safety and market surveillance legislation at Union and national level. In addition, a revision is necessary to complement Union and national laws on extra-contractual liability, providing for compensation and a high level of protection for persons injured by damage caused by defective products. Furthermore, there is a need to clarify basic notions and concepts to ensure coherence and legal certainty and to reflect recent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Amendment 68 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) In order not to hamper innovation or research, this Directive should not apply to free and open-source software supplied outside the course of a commercial activity, including its source code and modified versions, that is openly shared and freely accessible, usable, modifiable and redistributable. However, where free and open-source software supplied in exchange for a price or personal data is used other than exclusively for improving the security, compatibility or interoperability of the software, the Directive should apply.
Amendment 70 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order to create a genuine internal market with a high and uniform level of consumer protection, and to reflect the case law of the Court of Justice, Member States should not be, in respect of matters within the scope of this Directive, maintain or introduce more, or less, stringent provisions than those laid down in this Directive. However, the high risk of serious damages linked to medicinal products, medical devices and health technologies would require a higher level of consumer protection. Also taking into account that the use or consumption of these products is highly conditioned by the prescriptions of doctors and specialists of the medical sector and patients do not have the necessary competences and knowledge in order to understand if such products could be defective and could cause damage. Therefore, Member States should be able to maintain or introduce more stringent provisions compared to those laid down in this Directive where the damage is caused by medicinal products, medical devices and health technologies.
Amendment 77 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Products in the digital age can be tangible or intangible. Software, such as operating systems, firmware, computer programs, applications or AI systems, is increasingly common on the market and plays an increasingly important role for product safety. Software is capable of being placed on the market as a standalone product and may subsequently be integrated into other products as a component, and is capable of causing damage through its execution. The risk of damage is proportionate to the extent to which a software is essential to the functioning of a product into which it is integrated or inter-connected with, and in how far it contributes to one or more of the function of the essential product, or in how far its absence would prevent the product from performing one or more of its core functions. In particular where software that ordinarily and of itself does not pose a significant risk of damage is included in a product with higher safety expectations, such as in case of life- sustaining medical devices within the meaning of article 2(1) Regulation (EU) 2017/745, or payment services within the meaning of article 4(3) of Directive (EU) 2015/2366, the assessment of defectiveness leading to damage should take the original intent of the software producer into account. In the interest of legal certainty it should therefore be clarified that software is a product for the purposes of applying no- fault liability, irrespective of the mode of its supply or usage, and therefore irrespective of whether the software is stored on a device or accessed through cloud technologiesa communication network, cloud technologies, or supplied through a software as-a-service model . The source code of software, however, is not to be considered as a product for the purposes of this Directive as this is pure information. The developer or producer of software, including AI system providers within the meaning of [Regulation (EU) …/… (AI Act)], and including deployers that make substantial modifications to a software, should be treated as a manufacturer.
Amendment 80 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) It is necessary to clarify that software in its own right, when specifically intended by the manufacturer to be used for one or more of the medical purposes set out in the definition of a medical device, qualifies as a medical device, while software for general purposes, even when used in a healthcare setting, or software intended for life-style and well-being purposes is not a medical device. The qualification of software, either as a device or an accessory, is independent of the software's location or the type of interconnection between the software and a device.
Amendment 81 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 b (new)
Recital 12 b (new)
(12b) Individual natural persons typically employed in the context of a non- personal professional activity in the development, manufacturing, production or design of a product, that do not exert control over the manufacturing, integration, placing on the market or putting into service of the product should not be considered manufacturers in the sense of this Directive. The occasional refurbishing of products and placing on the market or putting into service by an individual in a non-professional capacity should not be considered commercial acting.
Amendment 82 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
Amendment 89 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Digital manufacturing files, which contain the functional information necessary to produce a tangible item by enabling the automated control of machinery or tools, such as drills, lathes, mills and 3D printers, should be considered as products, in order to ensure consumer protection in cases where such files are defective. For the avoidance of doubt, it should also be clarified that raw materials and electricity is aare products.
Amendment 91 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) It is becoming increasingly common for digital services to be integrated in or inter-connected with a product in such a way that the absence of the service would prevent the product from performing one of its functions, for example the continuous supply of traffic data in a navigation system. The relevant functions that should be considered are those that have been ascribed to the product by its manufacturer or the functions that an average person would reasonably expect in light of the description of the product provided by the manufacturer. While this Directive should not apply to services as such, it is necessary to extend no-fault liability to such digital services as they determine the safety of the product just as much as physical or digital components. Such related services should be considered as components of the product to which they are inter-connected, when they are within the control of the manufacturer of that product, in the sense that they are supplied by the manufacturer itself or that the manufacturer recommends them or otherwise influences their supply by a third party.
Amendment 93 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15a) Related services and other components, including software updates and upgrades, should be considered to be within the manufacturer's control where they are integrated, inter-connected or supplied by the manufacturer itself or where the manufacturer authorises or consents, whether explicitly or implicitly, to their supply by a third party. In addition, once a product has been placed on the market, it should be considered to be within the manufacturer’s control in so far as the manufacturer retains the ability to supply software updates or upgrades, or to authorise or consent to their supply by a third party.
Amendment 94 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) In recognition of the growing relevance and value of intangible assets, the loss or corruption of data, such as content deleted from a hard drive, should also be compensated, including the cost of recovering or restoring the data. As a result, the protection of consumers requires compensation for material losses resulting not only from death or personal injury, such as funeral or medical expenses or lost income, and from damage to property, but also for loss or corruption of data when consumers cannot access data the way they could before the damage and they have to pay a price for recovering or restoring that data. However, when consumers have negligently contributed to the cause of the damage, including when they do not install the updates provided by the manufacturer, or has not performed appropriate backups, they should not be compensated or they should be partially compensated. As a result, the protection of consumers requires compensation for material losses resulting not only from death or personal injury, such as funeral or medical expenses or lost income, and from damage to property, but also for loss or corruption of data. In compensating consumers for the loss or corruption of data, due account should be taken of the distribution model of the software, for example whether it was supplied in the context of a commercial activity or in the non-professional capacity of an individual natural person. Compensation should be proportionate to the level of incurred damages by consumers and not have detrimental effects to the ecosystem of usfl and consumer-friendly software provided free of charge over the internet, and in particular under free and open-source licences. Nevertheless, compensation for infringements of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council41, Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council42, Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council43and Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council44is not affected by this Directive. _________________ 41 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 42 Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37). 43 Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA, OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 89. 44 Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2018 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and Decision No 1247/2002/EC, OJ L 295, 21.11.2018, p. 39.
Amendment 103 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) While Member States should provide full and proper compensation for all material losses resulting from death, or personal injury, or damage to or destruction of property and data loss or corruption, rules on calculating compensation should be laid down by Member States. Furthermore, this Directive should not affect national rules relating to non-material damage. Member States should ensure that their national rules on calculating compensation allow for injured persons to obtain full and proper compensation from the economic operator who is ultimately attributable, or from any relevant party.
Amendment 108 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18 a (new)
Recital 18 a (new)
(18a) Member States should provide full and proper compensation for non- material damage under the conditions provided by this Directive.
Amendment 111 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) This Directive should apply to products placed on the market or, where relevant, put into service in the course of a commercial activity, whether in return for payment or free of charge, for example products supplied in the context of a sponsoring campaign or products manufactured for the provision of a service financed by public funds, since this mode of supply still has an economic or business character. Neither the collaborative development of free and open-source software nor making them available on open repositories should constitute a placing on the market or putting into service. A commercial activity, within the understanding of making available on the market, might however be characterised by charging a price, with the exception of transactions between micro enterprises for a free software component but also by charging a price for technical support services, by providing a software platform through which the provider monetises other services, or by the use of personal data for reasons other than exclusively for improving the security, compatibility, interoperability or interoperability of the software. Occasional supplies by charities or hobbyists should not be considered as taking place in a business related context.
Amendment 115 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In order to protect the health and property of consumers, the defectiveness of a product should be determined by reference not to its fitness for use but to the lack of the safety that the public at large is entitled to expect. The assessment of defectiveness should involve an objective analysis and not refer to the safety that any particular person is entitled to expect. The safety that the public at large is entitled to expect should be assessed by taking into account, inter alia, the intended purposereasonably foreseeable use, the presentation, the objective characteristics and the properties of the product in question as well as its expected lifespan, security features, and the specific requirements of the group of users for whom the product is intended. In addition, the compliance with relevant product safety requirements laid down in Union and national law should also be taken into account, in particular if such a non-compliance enhanced the risk of causing harm of the relevant type suffered by the injured person and that risk has materialised. However, the economic operator should not be liable if it proves that the harm suffered by the injured person would have also been caused if it would have complied with the relevant mandatory requirements under Union and national law. Some products, such as life- sustaining medical devices, entail an especially high risk of damage to people and therefore give rise to particularly high safety expectations. In order to take such expectations into account, it should be possible for a court to find a product defective without establishing its actual defectiveness, where it belongs to the same production series as a product already proven to be defective.
Amendment 118 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) In order to reflect the increasing prevalence of inter-connected products, the assessment of a product’s safety should also take into account the reasonably foreseeable effects of other products on the product in question. The effect on a product’s safety of its ability to learn after deploymentit is placed on the market or put into service should also be taken into account, to reflect the legitimate expectation that a product’s software and underlying algorithms are designed in such a way as to prevent hazardous product behaviour. In order to reflect that in the digital age many products remain within the manufacturer’s control beyond the moment at which they are placed on the market, the moment in time at which a product leaves the manufacturer’s control should also be taken into account in the assessment of a product’s safety. A product can also be found to be defective on account of its cybersecurity vulnerability.
Amendment 122 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) The protection of the consumer requires that any manufacturer involved in the production process can be made liable, in so far as their product or a component supplied by them is defective. Where a manufacturer integrates a defective component from another manufacturer into a product, an injured person should be able to seek compensation for the same damage from either the manufacturer of the product or from the manufacturer of the component. Due to the nature of software made available under free and open- source licences, the developer of a free and open-source software should not be made liable for a defect except to the extent the developer has placed it on the market or put it into service. Free and open-source software is often integrated in products whose ultimate use and purpose are very different from the ones initially designed by the developers. Potential defects and damages could have not been foreseen by the developers, but only by the economic operator that integrated the free and open-source software into a product or that has deployed it. That economic operator should be made liable in front of the injured person.
Amendment 129 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Online selling has grown consistently and steadily, creating new business models and new actors in the market such as online platforms. [Regulation 2022/2065 […/…] on a Single Market for Digital Services (Digital Services Act)] and [Regulation […/…] on General Product Safety] regulate, inter alia, the responsibility and accountability of online platforms with regard to illegal content, including products. When online platforms perform the role of manufacturer, importer or distributor in respect of a defective product, they should be liable on the same terms as such economic operators. When online platforms play a mere intermediary role in the sale of products between traders and consumers, they are covered by a conditional liability exemption under the Digital Services Act. However, the Digital Services Act establishes that online platforms that allow consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders are not exempt from liability under consumer protection law where they present the product or otherwise enable the specific transaction in question in a way that would lead an average consumer to believe that the product is provided either by the online platform itself or by a trader acting under its authority or control. In keeping with this principle, when online platforms do so present the product or otherwise enable the specific transaction, it should be possible to hold them liable, in the same way as distributors under this Directive. That means that they would be liable only when they do so present the product or otherwise enable the specific transaction, and only where the online platform fails to promptly identify a relevant economic operator based in the Union within one month of receiving the request.
Amendment 130 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) In the transition from a linear to a circular economy, products are designed to be more durable, reusable, reparable and upgradable. The Union is also promoting innovative and sustainable ways of production and consumption that prolong the functionality of products and components, such as remanufacturing, refurbishment and repair.47. In addition, products allow for modifications through changes to software, including upgrades. When a product is modified substantially outside the control of the original manufacturer, it is considered to be a new product and it should be possible to hold the person that made the substantial modification liable as a manufacturer of the modified product and subject to the same obligations of a manufacturer, since under relevant Union legislation they are responsible for the product’s compliance with safety requirements. Whether a modification is substantial is determined according to criteria set out in relevant Union and national safety legislation, such as modifications thatHowever, these requirements should only apply with respect to the modified part of the product, provided that the modification does not affect the product as a whole. Therefore, the liability of the person that made the substantial modification should be limited to the modified part of the product when the modification does not have an impact on the product as a whole. Whether a modification is substantial is determined according to criteria set out in relevant Union law, including under [Regulation […/…] on General Product Safety] and Regulation (EU) ..../... (Cyber Resilience Act, and national safety legislation. Modifications are considered substantial, for instance, if they change the original intended functions or affect the product’s compliance with applicable safety requirements. In the interests of a fair apportionment of risks in the circular economy, an economic operator that makes a substantial modification should be exempted from liability if it can prove that the damage is related to a part of the product not affected by the modification. Economic operators that carry out repairs or other operations that do not involve substantial modifications should not be subject to liability under this Directive. _________________ 47 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, A new Circular Economy Action Plan for a cleaner and more competitive Europe, COM/2020/98 final.
Amendment 133 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 29 a (new)
Recital 29 a (new)
(29a) In particular the provision of third-party software updates or upgrades after a manufacturer has ceased to provide support for a product, can have very positive effects for the environment by contributing to the reparability and longevity of such products, and should not be disproportionately and negatively affected by this Directive.
Amendment 138 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) It is therefore necessary to facilitate potential claimants’ access to evidence to be used in legal proceedings, while ensuring that such access is limited to that which is necessary and proportionate, and that confidential information and trade secrets are protectedtrade secrets are protected in line with Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council. Such evidence should also include documents that have to be created ex novo by the defendant by compiling or classifying the available evidence.
Amendment 141 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) In respect of trade secrets within the meaning of Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council48, national courts should be empowered to take specific measures to ensure the confidentiality of trade secrets during and after the proceedings, while achieving a fair and proportionate balance between the interest of the trade-secret holder to secrecy and the interest of the injured person. This should include at least measures to restrict access to documents containing trade secrets or alleged trade secrets and access to hearings to a limited number of people, or allowing access to redacted documents or transcripts of hearings. When deciding on such measures, national courts should take into account: (i) the need to ensure the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial; (ii) the legitimate interests of the parties and, where appropriate, of third parties; and (iii) any potential harm for either of the parties, and, where appropriate, for third parties, resulting from the granting or rejection of such measures. _________________ 48 Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure (OJ L 157, 15.6.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 147 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) It is also necessary to alleviate the claimant’s burden of proof provided that certain conditions are fulfilled. Rebuttable presumptions of fact are a common mechanism for alleviating a claimant’s evidential difficulties, and allow a court to base the existence of defectiveness or causal link on the presence of another fact that has been proven, while preserving the rights of the defendant. In order to provide an incentive to comply with the obligation to disclose information, national courts should presume the defectiveness of a product where a defendant fails to comply with such an obligation. Many legislative and mandatory safety requirements have been adopted in order to protect consumers and the public from the risk of harm, including under [Regulation […/…] on General Product Safety] and Regulation (EU) ..../... (Cyber Resilience Act). In order to reinforce the close relationship between product safety rules and liability rules, non-compliance with such requirements should also result in a presumption of defectiveness. This includes cases in which a product has not affixed a mandatory CE marking or where a product is not equipped with the means to log information about the operation of the product as required under Union or national law. The same should apply in the case of obvious malfunction, such as a glass bottle that explodes in the course of normal use, since it is unnecessarily burdensome to require a claimant to prove defectiveness when the circumstances are such that its existence is undisputed.
Amendment 155 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) In order to maintain a fair apportionment of risk, and to avoid a reversal of the burden of proof, a claimant should nevertheless, in order to benefit from the presumption, be required to demonstrate, on the basis of sufficiently relevantprima facie evidence, that it is likely that, where the claimant’s difficulties relate to proving defectiveness, the product was defective, or that, where the claimant’s difficulties relate to proving the causal link, its defectiveness is a likely cause of the damage.
Amendment 159 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) The possibility for economic operators to avoid liability by proving that a defect came into being after they placed the product on the market or put it into service should also be restricted when a product’s defectiveness consists in the lack of software updates or upgrades necessary to address cybersecurity vulnerabilities and maintain the product’s safety. Such vulnerabilities can affect the product in such a way that it causes damage within the meaning of this Directive. In recognition of manufacturers’ responsibilities under Union law for the safety of products throughout their lifecycle, such as under Regulation (EU) 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of the Council49, manufacturers should also be liable for damage caused by their failure to supply software security updates or upgrades that are necessary to address the product’s vulnerabilities in response to evolving cybersecurity risks. Such liability should not apply where the supply or installation of such software is beyond the manufacturer’s control, for example where the owner of the product does not install an update or upgrade supplied for the purpose of ensuring or maintaining the level of safety of the product. _________________ 49 Regulation (EU) 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2017 on medical devic, insofar this can be reasonably expected by the owner in terms of their technical capabilities, amending Directive 2001/83/EC, Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 and Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 and repealing Council Directives 90/385/EEC and 93/42/EEC (OJ L 117, 5.5.2017, p. 1)nd the knowledge required to be able to perform such update or upgrade.
Amendment 162 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) In the interests of a fair apportionment of risks, manufacturers should also be exempted from liability if they prove that the state of scientific and technical knowledge, determined with reference to the most advanced level of objective knowledge accessible and not to the actual knowledge of the manufacturer in question, while the product was within their control was such that the existence of defectiveness could not be discovered. However, this exemption should not apply in case of medicinal products, medical devices and health technologies, since these products entail a risk of rare but serious adverse reactions by their very nature. These reactions could not be foreseen even by the most advanced scientific and technical knowledge, and can only be evidenced after the product has been marketed and used by consumers. In such cases, consumers would need to be protected and they should have the right to request compensation for damages.
Amendment 164 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Situations may arise in which two or more parties are liable for the same damage, in particular where a defective component is integrated into a product that causes damage. In such a case, the injured person should be able to seek compensation both from the manufacturer that integrated the defective component into its product and from the manufacturer of the defective component itself. In order to ensure consumer protection, all parties should be held liable jointly and severally in such situations, with compensation mechanisms allowing the injured person to recover for the total relevant damage. However, the liability of the manufacturer of the defective component should be limited to the chain of commercial transactions. It should therefore cover only situations where the manufacturer has integrated a software into its product, that was placed on the market or put into service.
Amendment 165 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) Situations may arise in which the acts and omissions of persons other than a potentially liable economic operator contribute, in addition to the defectiveness of the product, to the cause of the damage suffered, such as a third party exploiting a cybersecurity vulnerability of a product. In the interests of consumer protection, where a product is defective, for example due to a vulnerability that makes the product less safe than the public at large is entitled to expect, the liability of the economic operator should not be reduced as a result of such acts or omissions. However, it should be possible to reduce or disallow the economic operator’s liability where injured persons themselves have negligently contributed to the cause of the damage, including when the injured person does not install updates or upgrades provided by the economic operator, that would have mitigated the defect, where this can be reasonably expected from the owner of the product in terms of their technical capabilities and the knowledge required to be able to perform such update or upgrade.
Amendment 169 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) The objective of consumer protection would be undermined if it were possible to limit or exclude an economic operator’s liability through contractual provisions. Therefore no contractual derogations should be permitted. Free and open source software, where the source code is openly shared and users can freely access, use, modify and redistribute the software or modified versions thereof, can contribute to research and innovation on the market. This software relies on public licenses that guarantee the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve software. In order to ensure that such innovation is not hindered, this provision should not impact the use of such licenses. For the same reason, it should not be possible for provisions of national law to limit or exclude liability, such as by setting financial ceilings on an economic operator’s liability.
Amendment 172 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) Given that products age over time, and that higher safety standards are developed as the state of science and technology progresses, it would not be reasonable to make manufacturers liable for an unlimited period of time for the defectiveness of their products. Therefore, the liability should be subject to a reasonable length of time, that is 10 years following placing on the market, without prejudice to claims pending in legal proceedings. In order to avoid unreasonably denying the possibility of compensation, the limitation period should be 1520 years in cases where the symptoms of a personal injury are, according to medical evidence, slow to emerge.
Amendment 174 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) In order to facilitate harmonised interpretation of this Directive by national courts, Member States should be required to publish relevant court judgments on product liability. Furthermore, the Commission should set up and maintain a publicly available database containing such judgments as well as judgments delivered by the Court of Justice of the European Union in relation to proceedings launched pursuant to this Directive.
Amendment 180 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Directive lays down common rules on the liability of economic operators for damage suffered by natural persons caused by defective products and ensures that such persons are entitled to compensation.
Amendment 182 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive shall apply to products as defined in Article 4 placed on the market or put into service after [OP, please insert the date: 12 months after entry into force].
Amendment 186 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. This Directive shall not apply to free and open-source software offered by the manufacturer under a free and open- source licence, where the consumer does not pay a price and personal data provided by the consumer are exclusively processed by the manufacturer for the purpose of improving the security, compatibility or interoperability of that specific software.
Amendment 190 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point b
Amendment 200 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘product’ means all movables, even if integrated into or inter-connected with another movable or into an immovable. ‘Product’ includes electricity, digital manufacturing files and softwar, raw materials and software subject to the conditions laid down in this Directive;
Amendment 201 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
(1a) ‘artificial intelligence system’ means an artificial intelligence system as defined in Article 3 of Regulation (EU).../... of the European Parliament and of the Council to lay down a uniform legal framework in particular for the development, marketing and use of artificial intelligence in conformity with EU values (Artificial Intelligence Act);
Amendment 203 #
2022/0302(COD)
(2) ‘digital manufacturing file’ means a digital version or a digital template of a movable, which contains the functional information necessary to produce a tangible item by enabling the automated control of machinery or tools ;
Amendment 206 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 3
(3) ‘component’ means any item, whether tangible or intangible, including raw materials, or any related service, that is integrated into, or inter-connected with, a product by the manufacturer of that product or within that manufacturer’s control;
Amendment 215 #
2022/0302(COD)
(5) ‘manufacturer’s control’ means that the manufacturer of a product authorisesperforms or, with respect to the actions of a third party explicitly authorises or consents to a) the integration, inter-connection or supply by a third party of a component including software updates or upgrades, or b) the modification of the product, including substantial modifications;
Amendment 220 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Amendment 239 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 9
(9) ‘making available on the market’ means any supply of a product for distribution, consumption or use on the Union market in the course of a commercial activity, whether in return for payment or free of charge. The collaborative development of free and open-source software or making them available on open repositories shall not constitute placing on the market;
Amendment 240 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10
(10) ‘putting into service’ means the first use of a product in the Union in the course of a commercial activity, whether in return for payment or free of charge, in circumstances in which the product has not been placed on the market prior to its first use. The collaborative development of free and open-source software or making them available on open repositories shall not constitute a putting into service;
Amendment 242 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)
(10a) ‘substantial modification’ means a modification, or a series of modifications, to a product after it has been placed on the market or put into service: (a) that is considered substantial under relevant Union or national rules on product safety; or (b) where relevant Union or national rules lay down no threshold on what should be considered a substantial modification, that: (i) changes the product’s original performance, purpose or type, without this being foreseen in the manufacturer’s initial risk assessment; and (ii) changes the nature of the hazard, creates a new hazard or increases the level of risk.
Amendment 243 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 11
(11) ‘manufacturer’ means any natural or legal person who develops, manufactures or produces a product or has a product designed or manufactured, or who markets that product under its name or trademark thereby presenting itself as a manufacturer, or who develops, manufactures or produces a product for its own use;
Amendment 246 #
2022/0302(COD)
(11a) ‘deployer’ means any natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body using a product under its authority except where the product is used in the course of a personal non- professional activity;
Amendment 248 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12
(12) ‘authorised representative’ means any natural or legal person established within the Union who has agreceived a written mandate fromwith a manufacturer to act on its behalf in relation to specified tasks;
Amendment 250 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 15
(15) ‘distributor’ means any natural or legal person in the supply chain, other than the manufacturer or the importer, the importer or the authorised representative, who makes a product available on the market;
Amendment 251 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 16
(16) ‘economic operator’ means the manufacturer of a product or component, the provider of a related service, the authorised representative, the importer, the fulfilment service provider or the distributor, the distributor or any other natural or legal person who is subject to obligations in relation to the manufacture of products, making them available on the market, putting them into service or maintaining them in accordance with the relevant Union harmonisation legislation;
Amendment 253 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 17
(17) ‘online platform’ means online platform as defined in Article 23, point (hi), of Regulation (EU)…/… of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Single Market for Digital Services (Digital Services Act)54. _________________ 54 +OP: Please insert in the text the number of the Directive contained in document PE-CONS 30/22 (2020/0361(COD)) and insert the number, date, title and OJ reference of that Directive in the footnote. 2022/2065
Amendment 257 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 17 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 17 a (new)
(17a) ‘potential claimant’ means a natural or legal person who is considering but has not yet brought a claim for damages;
Amendment 265 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 266 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a (new)
Amendment 271 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the presentationcharacteristics of the product, including its design , technical features, composition, packaging, and the instructions for assembly, installation, use and maintenance;
Amendment 274 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) the presentation of the product, including the labelling, any warnings and other information regarding the product;
Amendment 275 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the reasonably foreseeable use and, where applicable, misuse of the product, taking into account the expected life-span of a product ;
Amendment 280 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the effect on the product of any ability to continue to learn after deploymentit is placed on the market or put into service;
Amendment 284 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the reasonably foreseeable effect on the product of other products that can reasonably be expected to be used together with the product or to be interconnected with the product;
Amendment 288 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) product safety requirementsthe compliance with relevant product safety requirements set out in Union or national law, including safety- relevant cybersecurity requirements, where such a non-compliance enhanced the risk of causing harm of the relevant type suffered by the injured person and that risk has materialised;
Amendment 294 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) the specific reasonable expectations of the end- users for whom the product is intended and, where appropriate, the categories of end users at risk when using the product, in particular vulnerable persons such as children, older persons and persons with disabilities.
Amendment 304 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Member States shall ensure that, where a defective component has caused the product to be defective, the manufacturer of a defective component can also be held liable for the same damage. in the chain of commercial transactions for the same damage, unless the defect is attributable to the design of the product in which the component has been integrated or to the instructions given by the manufacturer of that product to the manufacturer of the component.
Amendment 308 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to the liability of the manufacturer, Member States shall ensure that, where the manufacturer of the defective product or component is established outside the Union, the importer of the defective product or component and the authorised representative of the manufacturer can be held liable for damage caused by that product or component.
Amendment 318 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that, where the manufacturer of the defective product is established outside the Union and neither of the economic operators referred to in paragraph 2 is established in the Union, the fulfilment service provider can be held liable for damage caused by the defective product or component.
Amendment 322 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. Any natural or legal person that substantially modifies a product that has already been placedoutside the manufacturer’s control and thereafter makes it available on the market or put into service shall be considered a manufacturer of the product for the purposes of paragraph 1, where the modification is considered substantial under relevant Union or national rules on product safety and is undertaken outside the original manufacturer’s control.
Amendment 328 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) the claimantinjured person requests that distributor to identify the economic operator or the person who supplied the distributor with the product; and
Amendment 333 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Article 7 – paragraph 6
6. Paragraph 5 shall also apply to any provider of an online platform that allows consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders and that is not a manufacturer, importer or distributor , provided that the conditions of Article 6(3) set out in Regulation (EU)…/… of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Single Market for Digital Services (Digital Services Act)55are fulfilled. _________________ 55 +OP: Please insert in the text the number of the Directive contained in document PE-CONS 30/22 (2020/0361(COD)) and insert the number, date, title and OJ reference of that Directive in the footnote 2022/2065 are fulfilled.
Amendment 335 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – title
Article 8 – title
Amendment 336 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph -1 (new)
Article 8 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Member States shall ensure that a potential claimant who suffers or allegedly suffers harm caused by a defective product is able to request the relevant economic operator to disclose relevant information that is at its disposal in a timely, clear and intelligible manner before considering introducing judicial claim for compensation. As regards products containing AI components, such information shall consist a minima in the information being made accessible to consumers when the product is placed on the market, which shall include, where appropriate and relevant, which functions are AI enabled, if there is human oversight, and who is responsible for the decision-making process, as well as the existing rights and processes that, according to Union and national law, allow natural persons or their representatives to object against the application of such systems to them and to seek judicial redress against decisions taken by or harm caused by AI systems, including their right to seek an explanation.
Amendment 344 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that national courts are empowered, upon request of an injured person who is claiming compensation for damage caused by a defective product (‘the claimant’) who has presented facts and evidence sufficient to support the plausibility of the claim for compensation, to order the defendant to disclose relevant evidence that is at its disposal, or is considering to do so, to order the disclosure of relevant evidence that is at its disposal in a timely, clear and intelligible manner.
Amendment 346 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that national courts limit the disclosure of evidence is limited to what is necessary and proportionate to support a claimthe requests referred to in paragraph -1 and 1.
Amendment 349 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 3
3. When determining whether the disclosure is proportionate, national courts shall consider the legitimate interests of all parties, including third parties concerned, in particular in relation to the protection of confidential information and trade secrets within the meaning of Article 2, point 1, of Directive (EU) 2016/943.
Amendment 350 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that, where a defendant is ordered to disclose information that is a trade secret or an alleged trade secret, national courts are empowered, upon a duly reasoned request of a partyby the defendant, or on their own initiative, to take the specific and proportionate measures necessary to preserve the confidentiality of that information when it is used or referred to in the course of the legal proceedings.
Amendment 381 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Where a national court judges that the claimant faces excessive difficulties, due to technical or scientific complexity, to prove the defectiveness of the product or the causal link between its defectiveness and the damage, or both, the defectiveness of the product or causal link between its defectiveness and the damage, or both, shall be presumed where the claimant has demonstrated, on the basis of sufficiently relevantprima facie evidence, that:
Amendment 383 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) it is likely that the product contributed to the damage; and
Amendment 394 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) in the case of a distributor or of an online platform, that it did not make the product available on the market;
Amendment 395 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) that, having regard to the circumstances, it is probable that the defectiveness that caused the damage did not exist when the product was placed on the market, put into service nor originated from any update or supply under the control of the manufacturer, nor was due to their failure to provide an update as required by Union or national law or, in respect of a distributor, made available on the market, or that this defectiveness came into being after that moment;
Amendment 397 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) that the defectiveness is due to compliance of the product with mandatory regulations issued by public authoritiesrequirements issued by Union or national law, unless the manufacturer become aware of such a defect and failed to take corrective measures as required by Union and national law;
Amendment 402 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) in the case of a manufacturer, that the objective state of scientific and technical knowledge at the time when the product was placed on the market, put into service or the last update or supply under the control of the manufacturer, or in the period in which the product was within the manufacturer’s control was not such that the defectiveness could be discovered;
Amendment 414 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that where two or more economic operators are liable in the chain of commercial transaction for the same damage pursuant to this Directive, they can be held liable jointly and severally.
Amendment 417 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the liability of an economic operator is not excluded or reduced when the damage is caused both by the defectiveness of a product and by an act or omission of a third party.
Amendment 418 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. TWithout prejudice to the compensation mechanisms provided under this Directive, the liability of an economic operator may be reduced or disallowed when the damage is caused both by the defectiveness of the product and by the fault of the injured person or any person for whom the injured person is responsible, including when the injured person does not install updates or upgrades provided by the economic operator, that would have mitigated the defect, where this can be reasonably expected from the owner of the product in terms of their technical capabilities and the knowledge required to be able to perform such update or upgrade.
Amendment 420 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12 a (new)
Article12a Compensation mechanisms in case of shared or reduced liability Member States shall ensure that financial compensation is guaranteed to the claimant where two or more economic operators are jointly and severally liable pursuant to Article 11, and where the damage is caused both by a defective product and by an act or omission of a third party as referred to in Article 12. National rules on recourse and on calculating compensation shall ensure that, where appropriate, the economic operator held liable should have a right of recourse against the party which has brought about the defect, and that where compensation cannot be financed in full by the economic operator liable, the costs for compensation are shared proportionally between the parties liable.
Amendment 425 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the rights conferred upon the injured person pursuant to this Directive are extinguished upon the expiry of a limitation period of 10 years from the date on which the actual defective product or the last update or supply under the control of the manufacturer which caused the damage was placed on the market, put into service or substantially modified as referred to in Article 7(4), or should have made available on the market in order to bring it to conformity with product safety requirements under Union or national law, unless a claimant has, in the meantime, initiated proceedings before a national court against an economic operator that can be held liable pursuant to Article 7.
Amendment 432 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. By way of exception from paragraph 2, where an injured person has not been able to initiate proceedings within 10 years due to the latency of a personal injury or in case of hidden defects, the rights conferred upon the injured person pursuant to this Directive shall be extinguished upon the expiry of a limitation period of 1520 years.
Amendment 439 #
2022/0302(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission mayshall set up and maintain a publicly available database containing the judgments referred to in paragraph 1. and judgments delivered by the Court of Justice of the European Union in relation to proceedings launched pursuant to this Directive.
Amendment 120 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 4 a (new)
Citation 4 a (new)
Having regard to the opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor,
Amendment 126 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 5 a (new)
Citation 5 a (new)
Having regard to the opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor,
Amendment 132 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) A free and well-functioning internal market for media services is also an essential pillar of a functioning democracy, by providing access to a plurality of views and trustworthy sources of information to the consumers. The increased role of the online environment and its new functionalities have had a disruptive effect on the market for media services. The ability of media service providers to operate in a fair level-playing field environment is hampered by divergent approaches at national level. These approaches have created market fragmentation and legal uncertainty. Therefore, it is necessary to have a single legal framework that ensures a harmonised application of rules for media service providers throughout the Union, ensuring that European consumers have access to a broad range of reliable sources of information and to quality journalism as public goods in order to make informed choices, including about the state of their democracies.
Amendment 134 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 b (new)
Recital 5 b (new)
(5b) The right to freedom of expression and information, enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter and in Article 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, encompasses the right to receive and impart information as well as the freedom and pluralism of the media. Accordingly, this Regulation draws upon the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and builds upon the standards developed by the Council of Europe in this regard.
Amendment 137 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) RecipiUnion citizents of media services in the Union (natural persons who are nationals of Member States orr natural persons who benefit from rights conferred upon them by Union law and legal persons established in the Union) should be able to effectively enjoy the freedom to receive free and pluralistic media services in the internal market. In fostering the cross- border flow of media services, a minimum level of protection of service recipients should be ensured in the internal market. That would be in compliance with the right to receive and impart information pursuant to Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’). It is thus necessary to harmonise certain aspects of national rules related to media services. In the final report of the Conference on the Future of Europe, citizens called on the EU to further promote media independence and pluralism, in particular by introducing legislation addressing threats to media independence through EU-wide minimum standards46. _________________ 46 Conference on the Future of Europe – Report on the Final Outcome, May 2022, in particular proposal 27 (1) and 37 (4).
Amendment 137 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) A free and well-functioning internal market for media services is also an essential pillar of a functioning democracy, by providing access to a plurality of views and trustworthy sources of information to the consumers. The increased role of the online environment and its new functionalities have had a disruptive effect on the market for media services. The ability of media service providers to operate in a fair level-playing field environment is hampered by divergent approaches at national level. These approaches have created market fragmentation and legal uncertainty. Therefore, it is necessary to have a single legal framework that ensures a harmonised application of rules for media service providers throughout the Union, ensuring that European consumers have access to a broad range of reliable sources of information and to quality journalism as public goods in order to make informed choices, including about the state of their democracies.
Amendment 138 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 b (new)
Recital 5 b (new)
(5b) The right to freedom of expression and information, enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter and in Article 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, encompasses the right to receive and impart information as well as the freedom and pluralism of the media. Accordingly, this Regulation draws upon the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and builds upon the standards developed by the Council of Europe in this regard.
Amendment 139 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
Amendment 140 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) For the purposes of this Regulation, the definition of a media services should be limitall be considered to be services as defined by the Treaty and therefore should cover any form of economic activitywithin the meaning of the Treaties where they are normally provided for remuneration. Thise definition of media service should exclude user-generated content uploaded to an online platform unless it constitutes a professional activity normally provided for consideration (be it of financial or of other nature). It should also exclude purely private correspondence, such as e-mails, as well as all services that do not have the provision of audiovisual or audio programmes or press publications as their principal purpose, meaning where the content is merely incidental to the service and not its principal purpose, such as advertisements or information related to a product or a service provided by websites that do not offer media services. The definition of a media service should cover in particular television or radio broadcasts, on-demand audiovisual media services, audio podcasts or press publications. Corporate communication and distribution of informational or promotional materials for public or private entities should be excluded from the scope of this definition.
Amendment 140 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) RecipiUnion citizents of media services in the Union (natural persons who are nationals of Member States orr natural persons who benefit from rights conferred upon them by Union law and legal persons established in the Union) should be able to effectively enjoy the freedom to receive free and pluralistic media services in the internal market. In fostering the cross- border flow of media services, a minimum level of protection of service recipients should be ensured in the internal market. That would be in compliance with the right to receive and impart information pursuant to Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’). It is thus necessary to harmonise certain aspects of national rules related to media services. In the final report of the Conference on the Future of Europe, citizens called on the EU to further promote media independence and pluralism, in particular by introducing legislation addressing threats to media independence through EU-wide minimum standards46. _________________ 46 Conference on the Future of Europe – Report on the Final Outcome, May 2022, in particular proposal 27 (1) and 37 (4).
Amendment 142 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) The media environment is undergoing major and fast changes. In this regard, the role of the media in a democratic society has not changed, but media has additional tools to facilitate interaction and engagement. Media- related policy must take these and future developments into account. Therefore, this Regulation should adopt a broad notion of media which encompasses all actors involved in the production and dissemination, to potentially large numbers of people, of content (for example information, analysis, comment, opinion, education, culture, art and entertainment in text, audio, visual, audiovisual or other form) and applications which are designed to facilitate interactive mass communication (for example social networks), while retaining (in all these cases) editorial control or oversight of the contents. Thus, the definition of media service provider should cover print media, broadcast media, non-linear audiovisual media, online newspapers, news websites, online news portals, online news archives, print and online publishers, journalists, including those in non-standard forms of employment such as free-lancing and independent journalism and other public watchdogs reporting on matters of public interest such as bloggers, NGOs, citizen journalists, whistle-blowers, well-known social media users and podcasters.
Amendment 146 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) On the other hand, online platform’s capacity to offer content without exercising editorial responsibility over it and to market the ability to target users with advertising allows them to act as direct competitors to media service providers whose content they intermediate and distribute. Given the transfer of economic value in favour of online platforms, the audience measurement definition should take into account content consumed by users of media services and users of online platforms. This will ensure that all intermediaries involved in content distribution are transparent about their audience measurement methodologies so as to enable advertisers to make informed choices that drive competition.
Amendment 148 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) On the other hand, online platform’s capacity to offer content without exercising editorial responsibility over it and to market the ability to target users with advertising allows them to act as direct competitors to media service providers whose content they intermediate and distribute. Given the transfer of economic value in favour online platforms, the audience measurement definition should take into account content consumed by users of media services and users of online platforms. This will ensure that all intermediaries involved in content distribution are transparent about their audience measurement methodologies so as to enable advertisers to make informed choices that drive competition.
Amendment 149 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) State advertising should be understood broadly as covering promotional or self-promotional activities undertaken by, for or on behalf of a wide range of public authorities or entities, including at Union, national, regional and local level, including the Commission and its agencies, governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities in different sectors, at national or, regional level, or local governments of territorial entities of more than 1 million inhabitants. However, the definition of state advertising should not include emergency messages by public authorities which are necessary, for example, in cases of natural or sanitary disasters, accidents or other sudden incidents that can cause harm to individualor local level. For the purposes of allocation of state advertising and other financial support, including in cases of natural or sanitary disasters, accidents or other unforeseen major incidents that can cause harm to significant portions of the population, criteria should be laid down in advance by national law. Such emergency messages should not be exempted from transparency obligations. Besides, state advertising is only one form of financial support for media that may include also direct subsidies in the form of direct state support awarded to media service providers, tax advantages, reductions to taxes or full tax exemptions for the media sector, state advertising, project-based support schemes funding covering specific needs of media outlets, such as training and skills development, upgrade of technology or facilities, or restructuring processes.
Amendment 152 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) State advertising should be understood broadly as covering promotional or self-promotional activities undertaken by, for or on behalf of a wide range of public authorities or entities, including at Union, national, regional and local level, including the Commission and its agencies, governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities in different sectors, at national or, regional level, or local governments of territorial entities of more than 1 million inhabitants. However, the definition of state advertising should not include emergency messages by public authorities which are necessary, for example, in cases of natural or sanitary disasters, accidents or other sudden incidents that can cause harm to individualor local level. For the purposes of allocation of state advertising and other financial support including in cases of natural or sanitary disasters, accidents or other unforeseen, major incidents that can cause harm to significant portions of the population, criteria should be laid down in advance by national law. Such emergency messages should not be exempted from transparency obligations. Besides, state advertising is only one form of financial support for media that may include also direct subsidies in the form of direct state support awarded to media service providers, tax advantages, reductions to taxes or full tax exemptions for the media sector, state advertising, project-based support schemes funding covering specific needs of media outlets, such as training and skills development, upgrade of technology or facilities, or restructuring processes.
Amendment 158 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In order to ensure that society reaps the benefits of the internal media market, it is essential not only to guarantee the fundamental freedoms under the Treaty, but also the legal certainty which the recipients of media services need for the enjoyment of the corresponding benefits. Such recipients should have access to quality media services, which have been produced by journalists and editors in an independent manner and in line with journalistic standards and hence provide trustworthy information, including news and current affairs content. Such right does not entail any correspondent obligation on any given media service provider to adhere to standards not set out explicitly by law. Such quality media services are also an antidote against disinformation, including foreign information manipulation and interference.
Amendment 159 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In order to ensure that society reaps the benefits of the internal media market, it is essential not only to guarantee the fundamental freedoms under the Treaty, but also the legal certainty which the recipients of media services need for the enjoyment of the corresponding benefits. Such recipients should have access to quality media services, which have been produced by journalists and editors in an independent manner and in line with journalistic standards and hence provide trustworthy information, including news and current affairs content. Such right does not entail any correspondent obligation on any given media service provider to adhere to standards not set out explicitly by law. Such quality media services are also an antidote against disinformation, including foreign information manipulation and interference.
Amendment 165 #
2022/0277(COD)
(14) The protection of editorial independence is a precondition for exercising the activity of media service providers and their professional integrity. Editorial independence is especially important for media service providers providing news and current affairs cInformation is a public good. Media service providers play a key societal role in this regard. In order to guarantee an independent and pluralistic media it is of key importance to put in place the necessary measures to create a safe environtment given its societal role as a public good. Mthat allows journalists to exercise editorial independence. Journalists, including freelancers and self-employed journalists, as well as other media service providers should be able to exercise their economic activities freely in the internal market and compete on equal footing in an increasingly online environment where information flows across borders.
Amendment 167 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15a) According to the Council of Europe Resolution 1003 (1993), on Ethics of journalism, inside the news organisation, publishers and journalists must co-exist, bearing in mind that the legitimate respect for publishers' and owners' ideological orientations is limited by the absolute requirements on truthful news reporting and ethical opinions. These requirements are such that it is necessary to reinforce the safeguards of the journalist's freedom of expression, for they must in the last instance operate as the ultimate sources of information. To that end, in addition to safeguarding the freedom of the media, freedom within the media must also be protected and internal pressures guarded against.
Amendment 168 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15a) According to the Council of Europe Resolution 1003 (1993), on Ethics of journalism, inside the news organisation, publishers and journalists must co-exist, bearing in mind that the legitimate respect for publishers' and owners' ideological orientations is limited by the absolute requirements on truthful news reporting and ethical opinions. These requirements are such that it is necessary to reinforce the safeguards of the journalist's freedom of expression, for they must in the last instance operate as the ultimate sources of information. To that end, in addition to safeguarding the freedom of the media, freedom within the media must also be protected and internal pressures guarded against.
Amendment 168 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Journalists, editors and meditoa workers are the main actors in the production and provision of trustworthy media content, in particular by reporting on news or current affairs. It is essential therefore to protect journalists’ capability to collect, fact-check and analyse information, including information imparted confidentially. In particular, media service providers, media workers and journalists (including those operating in non-standard forms of employment, such as freelancers and bloggers) should be able to rely on a robust protection of journalistic sources and communications, including against arbitrary interferences and deployment of surveillance technologies, since without such protection sources may be deterred from assisting the media in informing the public on matters of public interest. As a result, journalists’ freedomThis chilling effect is more pronounced for women and gender- diverse journalists, particularly women from marginalised groups such as racialised women, women from ethnic or religious minorities, LGTBIQ+ individuals and women with disabilities. As a result, journalists’ and media workers' freedom of expression and camapcity to exercise their economic activity and to fulfil their vital ‘public watchdog’ role may be undermined, thus affecting negatively access to quality media services. The protection of journalistic sources contributes tois a precondition for the protection of the fundamental right enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter. and crucial for safeguarding the ‘watchdog’ role of investigative journalism in democratic societies..
Amendment 169 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Journalists, editors and meditoa workers are the main actors in the production and provision of trustworthy media content, in particular by reporting on news or current affairs. It is essential therefore to protect journalists’ capability to collect, fact-check and analyse information, including information imparted confidentially. In particular, media service providers and journalists (including those operating in non-standard forms of employment, such as freelancers and bloggers) should be able to rely on a robust protection of journalistic sources and communications, including against arbitrary interferences and deployment of surveillance technologies, since without such protection sources may be deterred from assisting the media in informing the public on matters of public interest. As a result, journalists’ freedomThis chilling effect is more pronounced for women and gender-diverse journalists, particularly women from marginalised groups such as racialised women, women from ethnic or religious minorities, LGTBIQ+ individuals and women with disabilities. As a result, journalists' and media workers' freedom of expression and capacity to exercise their economic activity and fulfil their vital ‘public watchdog’ role may be undermined, thus affecting negatively access to quality media services. The protection of journalistic sources contributes tois a precondition for the protection of the fundamental right enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter and crucial for safeguarding the ‘watchdog’ role of investigative journalism in democratic societies. .
Amendment 172 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 a (new)
Recital 16 a (new)
(16a) Surveillance methods deployed against journalists are varied, such as interception of electronic communications and metadata, device or software hacking including denial of service attacks, wiretapping, bugging, videotaping, geolocation tracking via Radiofrequency identification (RFID), Global Positioning System (GPS) or cell-site data, data mining and social media monitoring. These techniques may gravely impact journalists’ rights to privacy, data protection and freedom of expression. The protections afforded by this Regulation therefore encompass current forms of digital surveillance but also future technologies that may appear along with technological innovation and they are without prejudice to the application of existing and future Union’s law that restricts or prohibits the development, trade in, and use of specific surveillance technologies deemed too invasive. Spyware which grant full unlimited access to personal data, including sensitive data, on a device could affect the very essence of the right to privacy, and thus should under no circumstance be considered necessary and proportionate under Union law.
Amendment 173 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 b (new)
Recital 16 b (new)
(16b) The use of surveillance technologies or coercion to access journalists' data protected by professional privilege and linked to secrecy obligations should never be considered necessary and proportionate in a democratic society given the gravity of the interference they entail with media freedoms. They undermine the role of journalists as public watchdog and the fundamental role of journalistic sources to the protection of freedom of expression enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter.
Amendment 175 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The protection of journalistic sources and communication is currently regulated heterogeneously in the Member States. Some Member States provide an absolute protection against coercing journalists to disclose information that identify their source in criminal and administrative proceedings. Other Member States provide a qualified protection confined to judicial proceedings based on certain criminal charges, while others provide protection in the form of a general principle. In spite of existing standards codified by the Council of Europe and of established case law by the European Court of Human Rights, practical examples from several Member States have revealed very different approaches to this matter and a lack of protection for journalistic sources in some situations. This leads to fragmentation in the internal media market. As a result, journalists, which work increasingly on cross-border projects and provide their services to cross- border audiences, and by extension providers of media services, are likely to face barriers, legal uncertainty and uneven conditions of competition. Therefore, the protection of journalistic sources and communications needs harmonisation and further strengthening at Union level, without weakening the current protection in any Member State. Journalists working on cross-border projects should benefit from the highest protection standards of the Member States involved. The protection of journalistic sources and communications should correspond, as minimum, to the protection as provided in accordance with international and European standards as well as the case law from the CJEU and the ECtHR.
Amendment 176 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 a (new)
Recital 16 a (new)
(16a) Surveillance methods deployed against journalists are varied, such as interception of electronic communications and metadata, device or software hacking including denial of service attacks, wiretapping, bugging, videotaping, geolocation tracking via Radiofrequency identification (RFID), Global Positioning System (GPS) or cell-site data, data mining and social media monitoring. These techniques may gravely impact journalists’ rights to privacy, data protection and freedom of expression. The protections afforded by this Regulation therefore encompass current forms of digital surveillance but also future technologies that may appear along with technological innovation and they are without prejudice to the application of existing and future Union’s law that restricts or prohibits the development, trade in, and use of specific surveillance technologies deemed too invasive. Spyware which grant full unlimited access to personal data, including sensitive data, on a device could affect the very essence of the right to privacy, and thus should under no circumstance be considered necessary and proportionate under Union law.
Amendment 177 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 b (new)
Recital 16 b (new)
(16b) The use of surveillance technologies or coercion to access journalists' data protected by professional privilege and linked to secrecy obligations should never be considered necessary and proportionate in a democratic society given the gravity of the interference they entail with media freedoms. They undermine the role of journalists as public watchdog and the fundamental role of journalistic sources to the protection of freedom of expression enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter.
Amendment 178 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new)
Recital 17 a (new)
(17a) Digital safety and the confidentiality of electronic communications have become a major concern for journalists. In light of this, the promotion and protection of anonymisation tools and end-to-end encrypted services used by media service providers and their employees needs to be encouraged at European level to ensure an equal level of access to such equipment across all Member States. These tools have become vital for journalists to freely exercise their work and their rights to privacy, data protection and freedom of expression including by securing their communications and protecting the confidentiality of their sources.
Amendment 179 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The protection of journalistic sources and communication is currently regulated heterogeneously in the Member States. Some Member States provide an absolute protection against coercing journalists to disclose information that identify their source in criminal and administrative proceedings. Other Member States provide a qualified protection confined to judicial proceedings based on certain criminal charges, while others provide protection in the form of a general principle. In spite of existing standards codified by the Council of Europe and of established case law by the European Court of Human Rights, practical examples from several Member States have revealed very different approaches to this matter and a lack of protection for journalistic sources in some situations This leads to fragmentation in the internal media market. As a result, journalists, which work increasingly on cross-border projects and provide their services to cross- border audiences, and by extension providers of media services, are likely to face barriers, legal uncertainty and uneven conditions of competition. Therefore, the protection of journalistic sources and communications needs harmonisation and further strengthening at Union level, without weakening the current protection in any Member State. Journalists working on cross-border projects should benefit from the highest protection standards of the Member States involved. The protection of journalistic sources and communications should correspond, as minimum, to the protection as provided in accordance with international and European standards as well as the case law from the CJEU and the ECtHR.
Amendment 180 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) State advertising should be understood broadly as covering promotional or self-promotional activities undertaken by, for or on behalf of a wide range of public authorities or entities, including the Commission and its agencies, governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities in different sectors, at national or regional level, or local governments of territorial entities of more than 1 million inhabitants. However, the definition of state advertising should not include emergency messages by public authorities which are necessary, for example, in cases of natural or sanitary disasters, accidents or other suddenunforeseen, major incidents that can cause harm to individualsignificant portions of the population. Such emergency messages should not be exempted from transparency obligations.
Amendment 181 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new)
Recital 17 a (new)
(17a) Digital safety and the confidentiality of electronic communications have become a major concern for journalists. In light of this, the promotion and protection of anonymisation tools and end-to-end encrypted services used by media service providers and their employees needs to be encouraged at European level to ensure an equal level of access to such equipment across all Member States. These tools have become vital for journalists to freely exercise their work and their rights to privacy, data protection and freedom of expression including by securing their communications and protecting the confidentiality of their sources.
Amendment 183 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Public service media established by the Member States play a particular role in the internal media market, by ensuring that citizens and businesses have access to quality information and impartialndependent media coverage, as part of their missionremit. However, public service media can be particularly exposed to the risk of interference, given their institutional proximity to the State and the public funding they receive. This risk may be exacerbated by uneven safeguards related to independent governance and balanced coverage by public service media across the Union. This situation may lead to biased or partial media coverage, distort competition in the internal media market and negatively affect access to independent and impartial media services. It is thus necessary, building on the international standards developed by the Council of Europe in this regard, to put in place legal safeguards for the independent functioning of public service media across the Union. It is also necessary to guarantee that, without prejudice to the application of the Union’s State aid rules, public service media providers benefit from sufficient and stable funding to fulfil their missionremit that enables predictability in their planning. Preferably, such funding should be decided and appropriated on a multi-year basis, in line with the public service missionremit of public service media providers, to avoid potential for undue influence from yearly budget negotiations. The requirements laid down in this Regulation do not affect the competence of Member States to provide for the funding of public service media as enshrined in Protocol 29 on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 187 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) It is crucial for the recipients of media services to know with certainty who owns and is behind the news media so that they can identify and understand potential conflicts of interest which is a prerequisite for forming well-informed opinions and consequently to actively participate in a democracy. Such transparency is also an effective tool to limit risks of interference with editorial independence. It is thus necessary to introduce common information requirements for all relevant media service providers across the Union that should include proportionate requirements to disclose ownership information, including the information on their parent and sister companies and details, if applicable, of their contracts with state bodies. In this context, the measures taken by Member States under Article 30(9) of Directive (EU) 2015/84949should not be affected. The required information should be disclosed by the relevant providers on their websites or other medium that is easily and directly accessible. _________________ 49 Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC (OJ L 141, 5.6.2015, p. 73-117).
Amendment 190 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Public service media established by the Member States play a particular role in the internal media market, by ensuring that citizens and businesses have access to quality information and impartialndependent media coverage, as part of their missionremit. However, public service media can be particularly exposed to the risk of interference, given their institutional proximity to the State and the public funding they receive. This risk may be exacerbated by uneven safeguards related to independent governance and balanced coverage by public service media across the Union. This situation may lead to biased or partial media coverage, distort competition in the internal media market and negatively affect access to independent and impartial media services. It is thus necessary, building on the international standards developed by the Council of Europe in this regard, to put in place legal safeguards for the independent functioning of public service media across the Union. It is also necessary to guarantee that, without prejudice to the application of the Union’s State aid rules, public service media providers benefit from sufficient and stable funding to fulfil their missionremit that enables predictability in their planning. Preferably, such funding should be decided and appropriated on a multi-year basis, in line with the public service missionremit of public service media providers, to avoid potential for undue influence from yearly budget negotiations. The requirements laid down in this Regulation do not affect the competence of Member States to provide for the funding of public service media as enshrined in Protocol 29 on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 190 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a) Transparency of media ownership is a fundament to monitor and understand the functioning of the European media market. A media ownership database serves as a one stop shop for citizens and other stakeholders with information mapping the ownership structures in the market. The Board and the Member states need to cooperate in information collecting, maintaining and updating the database as a primary source of such information.
Amendment 196 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) It is crucial for the recipients of media services to know with certainty who owns and is behind the news media so that they can identify and understand potential conflicts of interest which is a prerequisite for forming well-informed opinions and consequently to actively participate in a democracy. Such transparency is also an effective tool to limit risks of interference with editorial independence. It is thus necessary to introduce common information requirements for all relevant media service providers across the Union that should include proportionate requirements to disclose ownership information, including the information on their parent and sister companies and details, if applicable, of their contracts with state bodies. . In this context, the measures taken by Member States under Article 30(9) of Directive (EU) 2015/84949should not be affected. The required information should be disclosed by the relevant providers on their websites or other medium that is easily and directly accessible. _________________ 49 Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC (OJ L 141, 5.6.2015, p. 73-117).
Amendment 196 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) To mitigate regulatory burdens, micro enterprises within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council50should be exempted from thsomerequirements related to information and internal safeguards with a view to guaranteeing the independon transparencey of individual editorial decisionsmedia ownership. Moreover, media service providers should be free to tailor the internal safeguards to their needs, in particular if they are small and medium- sizedmicroenterprises within the meaning of thatArticle 3 of Directive 2013/34/EU. The Recommendation that accompanies this Regulation51provides a catalogue of voluntary internal safeguards that can be adopted within media companies in this regard. The present Regulation should not be construed to the effect of depriving the owners of private media service providers of their prerogative to set strategic or general goals and to foster the growth and financial viability of their undertakings. In this respect, this Regulation recognises that the goal of fostering editorial independence needs to be reconciled with the legitimate rights and interests of private media owners. _________________ 50 Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19-76). 51 OJ C , , p. .
Amendment 199 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Independent national regulatory authorities or bodies are key for media pluralism and media freedom and the proper application of media law across the Union. National regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU are best placed to ensure the correct application of the requirements related to regulatory cooperation and a well-functioning market for media services, envisaged in Chapter III of this Regulation. They are the primary enforcers and guardians of media freedom and pluralism at the national level. As independent regulatory authorities, they should be able to set their own priorities guided by the general interest of safeguarding media pluralism and freedom and decide independently about the allocation of their resources. Their decisions should respect the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, in particular Article 11 thereof. In order to ensure a consistent application of this Regulation and other Union media law, it is necessary to set up an independent advisory body at Union level gathering such authorities or bodies and coordinating their actions. The European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA), established by Directive 2010/13/EU, has been essential in promoting the consistent implementation of that Directive. The European Board for Media Services (‘the Board’) should therefore build on ERGA and replace it. This requires a targeted amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU to delete its Article 30b, which establishes ERGA, and to replace references to ERGA and its tasks as a consequence. The amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU by this Regulation is justified in this case as it is limited to a provision which does not need to be transposed by Member States and is addressed to the institutions of the Union.
Amendment 200 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a) Transparency of media ownership is a fundament to monitor and understand the functioning of the European media market. A media ownership database serves as a one stop shop for citizens and other stakeholders with information mapping the ownership structures in the market. The Board and the Member states need to cooperate in information collecting, maintaining and updating the database as a primary source of such information.
Amendment 202 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The Board should bring together senior representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU, appointed by such authorities or bodies. In cases where Member States have several relevant regulatory authorities or bodies, including at regional level, a joint representative should be chosen through appropriate procedures and the voting right should remain limited to one representative per Member State. This should not affect the possibility for the other national regulatory authorities or bodies to participate, as appropriate, in the meetings of the Board. The Board should also have the possibility to invite to attend its meetings, in agreement with the Commission, experts and observers, including in particular regulatory authorities or bodies from candidate countries, potential candidate countries, EEA countries, or ad hoc delegates from other competent national authorities. Due to the sensitivity of the media sector and following the practice of ERGA decisions in accordance with its rules of procedure, the Board should adopt its decisions on the basis of a two-thirds majority of the votes.
Amendment 202 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 a (new)
Recital 22 a (new)
(22a) Given the importance and the extensive nature of the new tasks conferred by this Regulation to independent national regulatory authorities or bodies, directly or indirectly, it is of utmost importance to ensure that the financial, human and technical resources of the national regulatory authorities or bodies are adequately and sufficiently increased. In this sense, Member States could make use of national resources coming from the auctioning of the spectrum, the digital dividend or the introduction of a levy on regulated entities. Member States should also provide the Commission with all relevant information concerning the increase of financial, human and technical resources. Moreover, within the framework of the applicable public function, and budgetary regulations, the NRA should have full authority over the recruitment and management of the staff, who should be hired under clear and transparent rules. The capacity over the management of the staff should include autonomy to decide the required profile, qualification, expertise, and other human resources features, including salary and retribution, with independence from other public bodies. The NRA should also have full autonomy and decision-making control in terms of management of internal structure, organisation, and procedures for the effective performance of their duties and the effective exercise of their powers. Without prejudice to national budgetary rules and procedures, NRAs should have allocated a separated annual budget. Member states should ensure that national authorities are granted full autonomy in the spending of the allocated budget for the purpose of carrying out their duties. Any control on the budget of the NRAs should be exercised in a transparent manner. Annual accounts of regulatory Authorities should have an ex post control by an independent auditor, and should be made public.
Amendment 205 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The Board should bring together senior representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU, appointed by such authorities or bodies. In cases where Member States have several relevant regulatory authorities or bodies, including at regional level, a joint representative should be chosen through appropriate procedures and the voting right should remain limited to one representative per Member State. This should not affect the possibility for the other national regulatory authorities or bodies to participate, as appropriate, in the meetings of the Board. T as observers. In agreement with the Commision, the Board should also have the possibility to invite to attend its meetings, in agreement with the Commission, experts and observers, including in particulardesignate as observers also regulatory authorities or bodies from candidate countries, potential candidate countries, EEA countries, or ad hoc delegates from other competent national authorities. The Board should also have the possibility to invite to attend its meetings experts, civil society organisations and representatives of media service providers. Due to the sensitivity of the media sector and following the practice of ERGA decisions in accordance with its rules of procedure, the Board should adopt its decisions on the basis of a two-thirds majority of the votes.
Amendment 208 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Without prejudice to the powers granted to the Commission by the Treaties, it is essential that the Commission and the Board work and cooperate closely. In particular, the Board should actively support the Commission in its tasks of ensuring the consistent application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU. For that purpose, the Board should in particular advise and assist the Commission on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the application of Union law, promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices and draw up opinions ion agreement with the Commissionits own initiative or upon itsa request from the Commission in the cases envisaged by this Regulation. In order to effectively fulfil its tasks, the Board should be able to rely on the expertise and human resources of a secretariat provided by the Commission. The Commission secretariat should provide administrative and organisational support to the Board, and help the Board in carrying out its tasks.
Amendment 211 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Ensuring a consistent regulatory practice regarding this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU is essential. For this purpose, and to contribute to ensuring a convergent implementation of EU media law, the Commission may issue guidelines on matters covered by both this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU when needed. When deciding to issue guidelines, the Commission should consider in particular regulatory issues affecting a significant number of Member States or those with a cross-border element. This is the case in particular for national measures taken under Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU on the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest. In view of the abundance of information and the increasing use of digital means to access the media, it is important to ensure prominence for content of general interest, in order to help achieving a level playing field in the internal market and compliance with the fundamental right to receive information under Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union. Given the possible impact of the national measures taken under Article 7a on the functioning of the internal media market, guidelines by the Commission would be important to achieve legal certainty in this field. It would also be useful to provide guidance on national measures taken under Article 5(2) of Directive 2010/13/EU with a view to ensuring the public availability of accessible, accurate and up-to-date information related to media ownership. In the process of preparing its guidelines, the Commission should be assisted by the Board. The Board should in particular share with the Commission its regulatory, technical and practical expertise regarding the areas and topics covered by the respective guidelines.
Amendment 211 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) To mitigate regulatory burdens, micro enterprises within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council50should be exempted from thsomerequirements related to information and internal safeguards with a view to guaranteeing the independon transparencey of individual editorial decisionsmedia ownership. Moreover, media service providers should be free to tailor the internal safeguards to their needs, in particular if they are small and medium- sizedmicroenterprises within the meaning of thatArticle 3 of Directive 2013/EU. The Recommendation that accompanies this Regulation51provides a catalogue of voluntary internal safeguards that can be adopted within media companies in this regard. The present Regulation should not be construed to the effect of depriving the owners of private media service providers of their prerogative to set strategic or general goals and to foster the growth and financial viability of their undertakings. In this respect, this Regulation recognises that the goal of fostering editorial independence needs to be reconciled with the legitimate rights and interests of private media owners. _________________ 50 Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19-76). 51 OJ C , , p. .
Amendment 214 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28 a (new)
Recital 28 a (new)
(28a) Transparency of media ownership is a fundament to monitor and understand functioning of the European media market. A media ownership database serves as a one stop shop for citizens and other stakeholders with information mapping the ownership structures in the market. The Board and the Member States need to cooperate in information collecting, maintaining and updating the database as a primary source of such information.
Amendment 215 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28 b (new)
Recital 28 b (new)
(28b) Minimum harmonisations of rules regarding restrictions on media ownership across the Union is one of the fundaments in order to guarantee a fair plurality and to protect fair competition among media services providers within the European media market and to uphold the right for consumers to receive variety of diverse information and opinions in an impartial and pluralistic manner.
Amendment 216 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Independent national regulatory authorities or bodies are key for media pluralism and media freedom and the proper application of media law across the Union. National regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU are best placed to ensure the correct application of the requirements related to regulatory cooperation and a well-functioning market for media services, envisaged in Chapter III of this Regulation. They are the primary enforcers and guardians of media freedom and pluralism at the national level. As independent regulatory authorities, they should be able to set their own priorities guided by the general interest of safeguarding media pluralism and freedom and decide independently about the allocation of their resources. Their decisions should respect the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, in particular Article 11 thereof. In order to ensure a consistent application of this Regulation and other Union media law, it is necessary to set up an independent advisory body at Union level gathering such authorities or bodies and coordinating their actions. The European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA), established by Directive 2010/13/EU, has been essential in promoting the consistent implementation of that Directive. The European Board for Media Services (‘the Board’) should therefore build on ERGA and replace it. This requires a targeted amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU to delete its Article 30b, which establishes ERGA, and to replace references to ERGA and its tasks as a consequence. The amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU by this Regulation is justified in this case as it is limited to a provision which does not need to be transposed by Member States and is addressed to the institutions of the Union.
Amendment 217 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 a (new)
Recital 22 a (new)
(22a) Given the importance and the extensive nature of the new tasks conferred by this Regulation to independent national regulatory authorities or bodies, directly or indirectly, it is of utmost importance to ensure that the financial, human and technical resources of the national regulatory authorities or bodies are adequately and sufficiently increased. In this sense, Member States could make use of national resources coming from the auctioning of the spectrum, the digital dividend or the introduction of a levy on regulated entities. Member States should also provide the Commission with all relevant information concerning the increase of financial, human and technical resources. Moreover, within the framework of the applicable public function, and budgetary regulations, the NRA should have full authority over the recruitment and management of the staff, who should be hired under clear and transparent rules. The capacity over the management of the staff should include autonomy to decide the required profile, qualification, expertise, and other human resources features, including salary and retribution, with independence from other public bodies. The NRA should also have full autonomy and decision-making control in terms of management of internal structure, organisation, and procedures for the effective performance of their duties and the effective exercise of their powers. Without prejudice to national budgetary rules and procedures, NRAs should have allocated a separated annual budget. Member states should ensure that national authorities are granted full autonomy in the spending of the allocated budget for the purpose of carrying out their duties. Any control on the budget of the NRAs should be exercised in a transparent manner. Annual accounts of regulatory Authorities should have an ex post control by an independent auditor, and should be made public.
Amendment 222 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Ensuring a consistent regulatory practice regardingn effective application of this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU is essential. For this purpose, and to contribute to ensuring a convergent implementation of EU media law, the Commission may issue guidelines on matters covered by both this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU when needed. When deciding to issue guidelines, the Commission should consider in particular regulatory issues affecting a significant number of Member States or those with a cross-border element. This is the case in particular for national measures taken under Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU on the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest. In view of the abundance of information and the increasing use of digital means to access the media, it is important to ensure prominence for content of general interest, in order to help achieving a level playing field in the internal market and compliance with the fundamental right to receive information under Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union. Given the possible impact of the national measures taken under Article 7a on the functioning of the internal media market, guidelines by the Commission would be important to achieve legal certainty in this field. It would also be useful to provide guidance on national measures taken under Article 5(2) of Directive 2010/13/EU with a view to ensuring the public availability of accessible, accurate and up-to-date information related to media ownership. In the process of preparing its guidelines, the Commission should be assisted by the Board. The Board should in particular share with the Commission its regulatory, technical and practical expertise regarding the areas and topics covered by the respective guidelines.
Amendment 223 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The Board should bring together senior representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU, appointed by such authorities or bodies. In cases where Member States have several relevant regulatory authorities or bodies, including at regional level, a joint representative should be chosen through appropriate procedures and the voting right should remain limited to one representative per Member State. This should not affect the possibility for the other national regulatory authorities or bodies to participate, as appropriate, in the meetings of the Board. T as observers. In agreement with the Commission, the Board should also have the possibility to invite to attend its meetings, in agreement with the Commission, experts and observers, including in particulardesignate as observers also regulatory authorities or bodies from candidate countries, potential candidate countries, EEA countries, or ad hoc delegates from other competent national authorities. The Board should also have the possibility to invite to attend its meetings, experts, civil society organisations and representatives of media service providers. Due to the sensitivity of the media sector and following the practice of ERGA decisions in accordance with its rules of procedure, the Board should adopt its decisions on the basis of a two-thirds majority of the votes.
Amendment 226 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28 a (new)
Recital 28 a (new)
(28a) Minimum harmonisations of rules regarding restrictions on media ownership across the European Union is one of the fundaments in order to guarantee a fair plurality and to protect fair competition among media services providers within the European media market and to uphold the right for consumers to receive variety of diverse information and opinions in an impartial and pluralistic manner. For this purpose, certain politically exposed persons, as defined in Article 3 of Directive (EU) 2015/849, such as heads of State, heads of government, ministers, deputy or assistant ministers, members of parliament or of similar legislative bodies, should after being appointed as such terminate their business relations with a media service provide.
Amendment 229 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Very large online platforms act for many users as a gateway for access to media services. Media service providers who exercise editorial responsibility over their content play an important role in the distribution of information and in the exercise of freedom of information online. When exercising such editorial responsibility, they are expected to act diligently and provide information that is trustworthy and respectful of fundamental rights, in line with the regulatory orequirements and self- regulatory requirecommitments they are subject to in the Member States. Therefore, also in view of users’ freedom of information, where providers of very large online platforms consider that content proviuploaded by such media service providers is incompatible with their terms and conditions, while it is not contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act], they should duly consider freedom and pluralism of media, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act] and provide, as early as possible, the necessary explanations to media service providers as their business users in the statement of reasons under Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council54 . To minimise the impact of any restriction to that content on users’ freedom of information, very large online platforms should endeavour to submit the statement of reasons prior to the restriction taking effectwithout undue delay and without prejudice to their obligations under Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act]. In particular, this Regulation should not prevent a provider of a very large online platform to take expeditious measures either against illegal content disseminated through its service, or in order to mitigate systemic risks posed by dissemination of certain content through its service, in compliance with Union law, in particular pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act]. __________________ 54 Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 57-79).
Amendment 229 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Without prejudice to the powers granted to the Commission by the Treaties, it is essential that the Commission and the Board work and cooperate closely. In particular, the Board should actively support the Commission in its tasks of ensuring the consistent application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU. For that purpose, the Board should in particular advise and assist the Commission on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the application of Union law, promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices and draw up opinions in agreement with the Commission or upon its requeson its own initiative or upon a request by the Commission or the European Parliament in the cases envisaged by this Regulation. In order to effectively and independently fulfil its tasks, the Board should be able to rely on the expertise and human resources of a secretariat provided by the Commission. The Commission secretariat should provide administrative and organisational support to the Board, and help the Board in carrying out its tasksbody of the Union having legal personality, an independent Bureau dedicated to the Board. The Bureau of the European Board for Media Services should provide administrative and organisational support to the Board, and help the Board in carrying out its tasks. The Bureau of the Board should have the expertise and resources necessary to provide its opinion in cases where it finds that media freedom and pluralism, or editorial independence are systematically undermined in a Member State either by national measures of the respective Member State or decisions of its National Regulatory Authority or body, or due to other reasons. In its opinions the Board should take due account of various sources of information, in particular the decisions of the respective National Regulatory Authority or body, submissions by civil society organisations and other available sources including the results of the Media Pluralism Monitor.
Amendment 231 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) It is furthermore justified, in view of an expected positive impact on freedom to provide services and freedom of expression, that where media service providers adhere to certain regulatory or self-regulatory standards, their complaints against decisions of providers of very large online platformcomplaints against unjustified removals of content made by representative bodies of media service providers are treated with priority and without undue delay, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 .
Amendment 231 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU have specific practical expertise that allows them to effectively balance the interests of the providers and recipients of media services while ensuring the respect for the freedom of expression. This is key in particular when it comes to protecting the internal market from activities of media service providers originating from outside the Union (either established outside of the UnionEU, established outside the EU but under jurisdiction of an EU Member State through the Directive 2010/13/EU satellite criteria or established in the EU) irrespective of the means of distribution or access, that target or reach audiences in the Union where, inter alia in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, they may prejudice or pose risks of prejudice to public security and defence. In this regard, the coordinperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together possible public security and defence threats stemming from such media services needs to be strengthened and given a legal framework to ensure the effectiveness and possible coordination of the national measures adopted in line with Union media legislation. In order to ensure that media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other means in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law. Additionally, it is necessary to coordinate the national measures that may be adopted to counter public security and defence threats by media services established outside of the Union and targeting audiences in the Union, including the possibility for the Board, in agreement with the Commission, to issue opinions on such measures, as appropriate. In this regard, risks to public security and defence need to be assessed with a view to all relevant factual and legal elements, at national and European level. This is without prejudice to the competence of the Union under Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 233 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) To this end, providers of very large online platforms should provide a functionality on their online interface to enable media service providers to declare that they meet certain requirements, while at the same time retaining the possibility not to accept such self-declaration where they consider that these conditions are not met. Providers of very large online platforms may rely on information regarding adherence to these requirements, such as the machine- readable standard of the Journalism Trust Initiative or other relevant codes of conduct. Guidelines by the Commission may be useful to facilitate an effective implementation of such functionality, including on modalities of involvement of relevant civil society organisations in the review of the declarations, on consultation of the regulator of the country of establishment, where relevant, and address any potential abuse of the functionality.
Amendment 234 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 a (new)
Recital 30 a (new)
(30a) In the case of audiovisual media services providers under jurisdiction of EU Member States pursuant to Article 2 of Directive 2010/13/EU, in order to ensure that audiovisual media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other means in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance, pursuant to an opinion of the Board, should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law. Following the request of the authority or body from another Member State, the competent national authority or body could be invited by the opinion of the Board to undertake certain measures, where the threats mentioned above are proven and are prejudicing or presenting a serious and grave risk of prejudice for several Member States or the Union. In this regard, risks to public security and defence need to be assessed with a view to all relevant factual and legal elements, at national and European level. This is without prejudice to the competence of the Union under Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 236 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) Providers of very large online platforms should engage with media service providers that respect standards of credibility and transparency and that consider that restrictions on their content are frequently imposed by providers of , where audits undertaken pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 demonstrate that a VLOP’s content moderation practices is negativerly large online platforms without sufficient groundsimpacting freedom and pluralism of the media, in order to find an amicable solution for terminating any unjustified restrictions and avoiding them in the future. Providers of very large online platforms should engage in such exchanges in good faith, paying particular attention to safeguarding media freedom and freedom of information.
Amendment 237 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 b (new)
Recital 30 b (new)
(30b) As any measures limiting the freedom of media and of speech can only be envisaged in highly exceptional and justified cases, the implication of the Board should be limited to what is strictly necessary and in line with international and European standards, therefore should be triggered following a request of a minimum number of Board members to be defined in the Board’s Rules of procedure. Once adopted, the opinions of the Board should be taken into utmost account by the national regulatory authorities or bodies concerned.
Amendment 238 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) Building on the useful role played by ERGA in monitoring compliance by the signatories of EU Code of Practice on Disinformation, the Board should, at least on a yearly basis, organise a structured dialogue between providers of very large online platforms, representatives of media service providers and representatives of civil society to foster access to diverse offers of independent media on very large online platforms, discuss experience and best practices related to the application of the relevant provisions of this Regulation and to monitor adherence tocompliance with self- regulatory initiatives aimed at protecting society from harmful content, including those aimed at countering disinformation. The Commission may, where relevant, examine the reports on the results of such structured dialogues when assessing systemic and emerging issues across the Union under Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act] and may ask the Board to support it to this effect.
Amendment 242 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 c (new)
Recital 30 c (new)
(30c) In order to foster the coherence of decisions and facilitate the eventual cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies, the Board should develop a set of basic criteria on the service provider and the service provided. Those criteria should be used by national regulatory authorities or bodies, when a media service provider originating from outside of the Union seeks jurisdiction in one of the Member States, or when it is already under the jurisdiction of a Member State.
Amendment 243 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 a (new)
Recital 37 a (new)
(37a) The freedom of the recipients of media services to effectively choose the content they want to access is constrained by the way very large online platforms and very large search engines suggest, rank and prioritise information, for example by their recommender systems. As recognised inter alia by Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, ‘such recommender systems can have a significant impact on the ability of recipients to retrieve and interact with information online […]’. In other words, the recommender systems imposed by very large online platforms and very large search engines hold substantial power over the flow of content online, and over recipients’ exposure to diversity and their capacity to freely and effectively select their information diet. To preserve media diversity and plurality online it is thus key to create the conditions for a diversity of recommender systems to be available to service recipients, and for the latter to have the possibility to change, in a simple and user-friendly manner, the default settings and the criteria used by recommender systems to pre-select the content to which recipients are exposed. These conditions can be created by imposing pro- competitive remedies to lower barriers to entry for recommender systems providers, such as those based on unbundling and interoperability.
Amendment 246 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Ensuring a consistent regulatory practice regardingn effective application of this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU is essential. For this purpose, and to contribute to ensuring a convergent implementation of EU media law, the Commission may issue guidelines on matters covered by both this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU when needed. When deciding to issue guidelines, the Commission should consider in particular regulatory issues affecting a significant number of Member States or those with a cross-border element. This is the case in particular for national measures taken under Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU on the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest. In view of the abundance of information and the increasing use of digital means to access the media, it is important to ensure prominence for content of general interest, in order to help achieving a level playing field in the internal market and compliance with the fundamental right to receive information under Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union. Given the possible impact of the national measures taken under Article 7a on the functioning of the internal media market, guidelines by the Commission would be important to achieve legal certainty in this field. It would also be useful to provide guidance on national measures taken under Article 5(2) of Directive 2010/13/EU with a view to ensuring the public availability of accessible, accurate and up-to-date information related to media ownership. In the process of preparing its guidelines, the Commission should be assisted by the Board. The Board should in particular share with the Commission its regulatory, technical and practical expertise regarding the areas and topics covered by the respective guidelines.
Amendment 247 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Very large online platforms act for many users as a gateway for access to media services. Media service providers who exercise editorial responsibility over their content play an important role in the distribution of information and in the exercise of freedom of information online. When exercising such editorial responsibility, they are expected to act diligently and provide information that is trustworthy and respectful of fundamental rights, in line with the regulatory orequirements and self- regulatory requirecommitments they are subject to in the Member States. Therefore, also in view of users’ freedom of information, where providers of very large online platforms consider that content proviuploaded by such media service providers is incompatible with their terms and conditions, while it is not contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act], they should duly consider freedom and pluralism of media, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act] and provide, as early as possible, the necessary explanations to media service providers as their business users in the statement of reasons under Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council54. To minimise the impact of any restriction to that content on users’ freedom of information, very large online platforms should endeavour to submit the statement of reasons prior to the restriction taking effectwithout undue delay andwithout prejudice to their obligations under Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act]. In particular, this Regulation should not prevent a provider of a very large online platform to take expeditious measures either against illegal content disseminated through its service, or in order to mitigate systemic risks posed by dissemination of certain content through its service, in compliance with Union law, in particular pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act]. _________________ 54 Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 57-79).
Amendment 249 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) It is furthermore justified, in view of an expected positive impact on freedom to provide services and freedom of expression, that where media service providers adhere to certain regulatory or self-regulatory standards, their complaints against decisions of providers of very large online platformscomplaints against unjustified removals of content made by representative bodies of media service providers, are treated with priority and without undue delay, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2065.
Amendment 252 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Media play a decisive role in shaping public opinion and helping citizens participate in democratic processes. This is why Member States should provide for rules and procedures in their legal systems to ensure assessment of media market concentrations, affecting the media market, including existing concentrations at the time of entry into force of this Regulation, that could have a significant impact on media pluralism or editorial independence. Such rules and procedures can have an impact on the freedom to provide media services in the internal market and need to be properly framed and be transparent, objective, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Media market concentrations subject to such rules should be understood as covering those which could result in a single entity controlling or having significant interests in media services which have substantial influence on the formation of public opinion in a given media market, within a media sub- sector or across different media sectors in one or more Member States. An important criterion to be taken into account is the reduction of competing views within that market as a result of the concentration.
Amendment 252 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) To this end, providers of very large online platforms should provide a functionality on their online interface to enable representative bodies of media service providers to declare that they meet certain requirements, while at the same time retaining the possibility not to accept such self-declaration where they consider that these conditions are not met. Providers of very large online platforms may rely on information regarding adherence to these requirements, such as the machine- readable standard of the Journalism Trust Initiative or other relevant codes of conduct. Guidelines by the Commission may be useful to facilitate an effective implementation of such functionality, including on modalities of involvement of relevant civil society organisations in the review of the declarations, on consultation of the regulator of the country of establishment, where relevant, and address any potential abuse of the functionality.
Amendment 253 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) National regulatory authorities or bodies, who have specific expertise in the area of media pluralism, should be involved in the assessment of the impact ofn media market concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independence of concentrations affecting the media market, including existing concentrations at the time of entry into force of this Regulation, where they are not the designated authorities or bodies themselves. In order to foster legal certainty and ensure that the rules and procedures are genuinely geared at protecting media pluralism and editorial independence, it is essential that objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria for notifying and assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independence are set out in advance.
Amendment 253 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28 a (new)
Recital 28 a (new)
(28a) Minimum harmonisations of rules regarding restrictions on media ownership across the European Union is one of the fundaments in order to guarantee a fair plurality and to protect fair competition among media services providers within the European media market and to uphold the right for consumers to receive variety of diverse information and opinions in an impartial and pluralistic manner. For this purpose, certain politically exposed persons, as defined in Article 3 of Directive (EU) 2015/849, such as heads of State, heads of government, ministers, deputy or assistant ministers, members of parliament or of similar legislative bodies, should after being appointed as such terminate their business relations with a media service provide.
Amendment 255 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41 a (new)
Recital 41 a (new)
(41a) For the purpose of ensuring the protection of media freedom and pluralism, this Regulation should also apply to existing concentrations affecting the media market at the time of its entry into force.
Amendment 255 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) Providers of very large online platforms should engage with media service providers that respect standards of credibility and transparency and that consider that restrictions on their content are frequently imposed by providers of where audits undertaken pursuant to Article 37 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 demonstrate that a VLOP’s content moderation practices are negativerly large online platforms without sufficient groundsimpacting freedom and pluralism of the media, in order to find an amicable solution for terminating any unjustified restrictions and avoiding them in the future. Providers of very large online platforms should engage in such exchanges in good faith, paying particular attention to safeguarding media freedom and freedom of information.
Amendment 258 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) Building on the useful role played by ERGA in monitoring compliance by the signatories of EU Code of Practice on Disinformation, the Board should, at least on a yearly basis, organise a structured dialogue between providers of very large online platforms, representatives of media service providers and representatives of civil society to foster access to diverse offers of independent media on very large online platforms, discuss experience and best practices related to the application of the relevant provisions of this Regulation and to monitor adherence tocompliance with self- regulatory initiatives aimed at protecting society from harmful content, including those aimed at countering disinformation. The Commission may, where relevant, examine the reports on the results of such structured dialogues when assessing systemic and emerging issues across the Union under Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act] and may ask the Board to support it to this effect.
Amendment 260 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 a (new)
Recital 37 a (new)
(37a) The freedom of the recipients of media services to effectively choose the content they want to access is also constrained by the way very large online platforms and very large search engines suggest, rank and prioritise information, for example by their recommender systems. As recognised inter alia by Regulation 2022/2065 the [DSA- Recital 70 among others], ‘such recommender systems can have a significant impact on the ability of recipients to retrieve and interact with information online […]’. In other words, the recommender systems imposed by very large online platforms and very large search engines hold substantial power over the flow of content online, and over recipients’ exposure to diversity, and their capacity to freely and effectively select their information diet. To preserve media diversity and plurality online it is thus key to create the conditions for a diversity of recommender systems to be available to service recipients, and for the latter to have the possibility to change, in a simple and user-friendly manner, the default settings and the criteria used by recommender systems to pre-select the content to which recipients are exposed to. These conditions can be created by imposing pro-competitive remedies to lower barriers to entry for recommender systems providers, such as those based on unbundling and interoperability.
Amendment 262 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU have specific practical expertise that allows them to effectively balance the interests of the providers and recipients of media services while ensuring the respect for the freedom of expression. This is key in particular when it comes to protecting the internal market from activities of media service providers originating from outside the Union (either established outside of the UnionEU, established outside the EU but under jurisdiction of an EU Member State through the Directive 2010/13/EU satellite criteria or established in the EU) irrespective of the means of distribution or access, that target or reach audiences in the Union where, inter alia in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, they may prejudice or pose risks of prejudice to public security and defence. In this regard, the coordinperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together possible public security and defence threats stemming from such media services needs to be strengthened and given a legal framework to ensure the effectiveness and possible coordination of the national measures adopted in line with Union media legislation. In order to ensure that media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other means in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law. Additionally, it is necessary to coordinate the national measures that may be adopted to counter public security and defence threats by media services established outside of the Union and targeting audiences in the Union, including the possibility for the Board, in agreement with the Commission, to issue opinions on such measures, as appropriate. In this regard, risks to public security and defence need to be assessed with a view to all relevant factual and legal elements, at national and European level. This is without prejudice to the competence of the Union under Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 264 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 b (new)
Recital 37 b (new)
(37b) Recipients of media services increasingly face difficulties in identifying who bears the editorial responsibility for the content or services they consume, in particular when they access media services through connected devices or online platforms. Failure to clearly indicate editorial responsibility for media content or services (e.g., through incorrect attribution of logos, trademarks, or other characteristic traits) deprives recipients of media services of the possibility to understand and assess the information they receive, which is a prerequisite for forming well-informed opinions and consequently to actively participate in democracy. Recipients of media services should therefore be enabled to easily identify the media service provider bearing the editorial responsibility over any given media service on all devices and user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of media services.
Amendment 266 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) Different legislative, regulatory or administrative measures can negatively affect the operation of media service providers in the internal market. They includemedia pluralism and editorial indpendence by restricting the possibility of media service providers in the internal market to provide access to a plurality of views and to reliable sources of information. Such measures can take various forms, for example, rules to limit the ownership of media companies by other companies active in the media sector or non-media related sectors; they also include, or decisions related to licensing, authorisation or prior notification for media service providers. In order to mitigate their potential negative impact on the functioning of the internal market for media services and enhance legal certainty, it is important that such measures comply with the principles of objective justification, transparency, non- discrimination and proportionality.
Amendment 268 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 a (new)
Recital 30 a (new)
(30a) In the case of audiovisual media services providers under jurisdiction of EU Member States pursuant to Article 2 of Directive 2010/13/EU, in order to ensure that audiovisual media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other means in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance, pursuant to an opinion of the Board, should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law. Following the request of the authority or body from another Member State, the competent national authority or body could be invited by the opinion of the Board to undertake certain measures, where the threats mentioned above are proven and are prejudicing or presenting a serious and grave risk of prejudice for several Member States or the Union. In this regard, risks to public security and defence need to be assessed with a view to all relevant factual and legal elements, at national and European level. This is without prejudice to the competence of the Union under Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 270 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 b (new)
Recital 30 b (new)
(30b) As any measures limiting the freedom of media and of speech can only be envisaged in highly exceptional and justified cases, the implication of the Board should be limited to what is strictly necessary and in line with international and European standards, therefore should be triggered following a request of a minimum number of Board members to be defined in the Board’s Rules of procedure. Once adopted, the opinions of the Board should be taken into utmost account by the national regulatory authorities or bodies concerned.
Amendment 271 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) It is also key that the Board is empowered to issue an opinion, on its own initiative or at the Commission’s request, where national measures are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. This is, for example, the case when a national administrative measure is addressed to a media service provider providing its services towards more than one Member State, or when the concerned media service provider has a significant influence on the formation of public opinion in that Member State.
Amendment 273 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 c (new)
Recital 30 c (new)
(30c) In order to foster the coherence of decisions and facilitate the eventual cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies, the Board should develop a set of basic criteria on the service provider and the service provided. Those criteria should be used by national regulatory authorities or bodies, when a media service provider originating from outside of the Union seeks jurisdiction in one of the Member States, or when it is already under the jurisdiction of a Member State.
Amendment 274 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Media play a decisive role in shaping public opinion and helping citizens participate in democratic processes. This is why Member States should provide for rules and procedures in their legal systems to ensure ex-ante and ex-post quality assessments of media market concentrations affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism or editorial independence, including existing concentrations at the time of entry into force of this Regulation. Such rules and procedures can have an impact on the freedom to provide media services in the internal market and need to be properly framed and be transparent, objective, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Media market concentrations subject to such rules should be understood as covering those which could result in a single entity controlling or having significant interests in media services which have substantial influence on the formation of public opinion in a given media market, within a media sub- sector or across different media sectors in one or more Member States. An important criterion to be taken into account is the reduction of competing views within that market as a result of the concentration. Taking such measures is essential, in order to guarantee access, competition and quality and avoid conflicts of interests between media ownership concentration and political power, which are detrimental to free competition, a level playing field and pluralism. A detailed assessment of such media market concentrations capable of distorting media pluralism and competition should always be made by the competent national regulatory authorities or other bodies without any political interference.
Amendment 276 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) National regulatory authorities or bodies, who have specific expertise in the area of media pluralism, should be involved in the assessment of the impact of media market concentrationsconcentrations affecting the media market that could have an impact on media pluralism and editorial independence, including existing concentrations at the time of entry into force of this Regulation, where they are not the designated authorities or bodies themselves. In order to foster legal certainty and ensure that the rules and procedures are genuinely geared at protecting media pluralism and editorial independence, it is essential that objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria for notifying and assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independence are set out in advance.
Amendment 278 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41 a (new)
Recital 41 a (new)
(41a) For the purpose of ensuring the protection of media freedom and pluralism, this Regulation should also apply to existing concentrations affecting the media market at the time of its entry into force.
Amendment 279 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) When a media market concentration constitutes a concentration falling within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/200455, the application of this Regulation or of any rules and procedures adopted by Member States on the basis of this Regulation should not affect the application of Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. Any measures taken by the designated or involved national regulatory authorities or bodies based on their assessments of the impact of media marketconcentrations concentrations affecting the media market that could have an impacton media pluralism and editorial independence should therefore be aimed at protecting legitimate interests within the meaning of Article 21(4), third subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004, and should be in line with the general principles and other provisions of Union law. _________________ 55 Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) (OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1-22).
Amendment 280 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) The Board should be empowered to provide opinions on draft decisions or opinions by the designated or involved national regulatory authorities or bodies, where the notifiableat its own initiative, or upon request, and conduct assessments of concentrations may affect the functioning of the internal media market. This would be the case, for example, where such concentrations involve at least one undertaking established in another Member State or operating in more than one Member State or result in media service providers having a significant influence on formation of public opinion in a given media market. Moreover, that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence, including existing concentrations at the entry into force of the present Regulation. Democratic processes across the EU are rooted in national media markets, whereas national democratic processes spill over to EU level governance. Accordingly, it is necessary to have appropriate measures to enforce and protect democratic processes both at national and EU level. Moreover, the Board should provide an assessment where the concentration has not been assessed for its impact on media pluralism and editorial independence by the relevant national authorities or bodies, or where the national regulatory authorities or bodies have not consulted the Board regarding a given media market concentration, but that media market concentration is considered likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, the Board should be able to provide an opinion, upon request of the Commissionor where the National Competition Authorities do not impose proportionate remedies for concentrations distorting competitions. The Commission must respond to the reasoned call of the Board. In any event, the Commission retains the possibility to issue its own opinions following the opinions drawn up by the Board.
Amendment 283 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Very large online platforms act for many users as a gateway for access to media services. Media service providers who exercise editorial responsibility over their content play an important role in the distribution of information and in the exercise of freedom of information online. When exercising such editorial responsibility, they are expected to act diligently and provide information that is trustworthy and respectful of fundamental rights, in line with the regulatory orequirements and self- regulatory requirecommitments they are subject to in the Member States. Therefore, also in view of users’ freedom of information, where providers of very large online platforms consider that content proviuploaded by such media service providers is incompatible with their terms and conditions, while it is not contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act], they should duly consider freedom and pluralism of media, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act] and provide, as early as possible, the necessary explanations to media service providers as their business users in the statement of reasons under Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council54. To minimise the impact of any restriction to that content on users’ freedom of information, very large online platforms should endeavour to submit the statement of reasons prior to the restriction taking effectwithout undue delay andwithout prejudice to their obligations under Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act]. In particular, this Regulation should not prevent a provider of a very large online platform to take expeditious measures either against illegal content disseminated through its service, or in order to mitigate systemic risks posed by dissemination of certain content through its service, in compliance with Union law, in particular pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act]. _________________ 54 Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 57-79).
Amendment 284 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43 a (new)
Recital 43 a (new)
(43a) In order to ensure the full and lasting achievement of the objectives of this Regulation, the Commission should be able to assess whether undertakings which are part of a media market concentration haves systematically infringed the obligations laid down in this Regulation and that there is a clear risk of seriously undermining the independence, plurality and freedom of the media. Such assessment should be based on media market investigations to be carried out in an appropriate timeframe. In order to maintain or restore the independence, plurality and freedom of media as affected by the systematic non-compliance from undertakings which are part of a media market concentration, the Commission should have the power to impose any remedy, whether behavioural or structural, having due regard to the principle of proportionality. In this context, the Commission should have the power to prohibit, to the extent that such remedy is proportionate and necessary and during a limited period, that the undertakings part of the media market concentration under investigation remain or enter into further media market concentration. The power to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission in respect of imposing remedies which are proportionate and necessary to ensure effective compliance with this Regulation and the protection of media freedom, pluralism and independence.
Amendment 285 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) With a view to ensuring pluralistic media markets, the national authorities or bodies and the Board should take account of a set of criteria as well as the criteria that should take precedence or prevail in case of conflicts. In particular, impact on media pluralism should be considered, including notably the effect on the formation of public opinion, taking into account of the online environment. Concurrently, it should be considered whether other media outlets, providing different and alternative content, would still coexist in the given market(s) after the media market concentration in question. Assessment of safeguards for editorial independence should include the examination of potential risks of undue interference by the prospective owner, management or governance structure in the individual editorial decisions of the acquired or merged entity. The existing or envisaged internal safeguards aimed at preserving independence of the individual editorial decisions within the media undertakings involved should also be taken into account. Furthermore, the results of the annual Commission Rule of Law report presented in the chapters on press freedom as well as the risk assessment made annually by instruments such as the Media Pluralism Monitor should be considered in determining the overall climate for media and the effects of the concentration in question over media pluralism and editorial independence, under these specific conditions. In assessing the potential impacts, the effects of the concentration in question on the economic sustainability of the entity or entities subject to the concentration should also be considered and whether, in the absence of the concentration, they would be economically sustainable, in the sense that they would be able in the medium term to continue to provide and further develop financially viable, adequately resourced and technologically adapted quality media services in the market.
Amendment 288 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) It is furthermore justified, in view of an expected positive impact on freedom to provide services and freedom of expression, that where media service providers adhere to certain regulatory or self-regulatory standards, their complaints against decisions ofcomplaints against unjustified removals of content made by representative bodies of media service providers of very large online platformstreated are treated with priority and without undue delay, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2065.
Amendment 289 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) Audience measurement has a direct impact on the allocation and the prices of advertising, which represents a key revenue source for the media sector. It is a crucial tool to evaluate the performance of media content and understand the preferences of audiences in order to plan the future production, buying, planning or selling of content. Accordingly, media market players, in particular media service providers and advertisers, should be able to rely on objective audience data stemming from transparent, unbiased and verifiable audience measurement solutions, which should be in compliance with EU data protection and privacy rules. However, certain new players that have emerged in the media ecosystem provide their own measurement services without making available information on their methodologies. This could result in information asymmetries among media market players and in potential market distortions, to the detriment of equality of opportunities for media service providers in the market.
Amendment 291 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) To this end, providers of very large online platforms should provide a functionality on their online interface to enable representative bodies of media service providers to declare that they meet certain requirements, while at the same time retaining the possibility not to accept such self-declaration where they consider that these conditions are not met. Providers of very large online platforms may rely on information regarding adherence to these requirements, such as the machine- readable standard of the Journalism Trust Initiative or other relevant codes of conduct. Guidelines by the Commission may be useful to facilitate an effective implementation of such functionality, including on modalities of involvement of relevant civil society organisations in the review of the declarations, on consultation of the regulator of the country of establishment, where relevant, and address any potential abuse of the functionality.
Amendment 293 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) In order to enhance the verifiability, comparability and reliability of audience measurement methodologies, in particular online, transparency obligations should be laid down for providers of audience measurement systems that do not abide by the industry benchmarks agreed within the relevant self-regulatory bodies. Under these obligations, such actors, when requested and to the extent possible, should provide advertisers and media service providers or parties acting on their behalf, with information describing the methodologies employed for the measurement of the audience. Such information could consist in providing elements, such as the size of the sample measured, the definition of the indicators that are measured, the metrics, the measurement methods and the margin of error as well as the measurement period. The obligations imposed under this Regulation are without prejudice to audiences’ right to protection of personal data as provided by Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights read in conjunction with Regulation 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation) as well as to any obligations that apply to providers of audience measurement services under Regulation 2019/1150 or Regulation (EU) 2022/XX1925 [Digital Markets Act], including those concerning ranking or self- preferencing.
Amendment 296 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) Codes of conduct, drawn up either by the providers of audience measurement systems or by organisations or associations representing them, together with media service providers and/or their representatives, civil society organisations and other relevant stakeholders can contribute to the effective application of this Regulation and should, therefore, be encouraged. Self- regulation has already been used to foster high quality standards in the area of audience measurement. Its further development could be seen as an effective tool for the industry with the support of national regulatory authorities or bodies to agree on the practical solutions needed for ensuring compliance of audience measurement systems and their methodologies with the principles of transparency, impartiality, inclusiveness, proportionality, non- discrimination, comparability and verifiability. When drawing up such codes of conduct, in consultation with all relevant stakeholders and notably media service providersmentioned above, account could be taken in particular of the increasing digitalisation of the media sector and the objective of achieving a level playing field among media market players.
Amendment 299 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) Providers of very large online platforms should engage with media service providers that respect standards of credibility and transparency and that consider that restrictions on their content are frequently imposed by providers of , where audits undertaken pursuant to 37 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 demonstrate that a VLOP’s content moderation practices is negativerly large online platforms without sufficient groundsimpacting freedom and pluralism of the media, in order to find an amicable solution for terminating any unjustified restrictions and avoiding them in the future. Providers of very large online platforms should engage in such exchanges in good faith, paying particular attention to safeguarding media freedom and freedom of information.
Amendment 300 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) State advertising isand other state financial support are an important source of revenue for many media service providers, and contributinge to their economic sustainability. Access to it must be granted in a non-discriminatory way to any media service provider from any Member State which can adequately reach some or all of the relevant members of the public, in order to ensure equal opportunities in the internal market. Moreover, State advertisingMoreover, State advertising and other state financial support may make media service providers vulnerable to undue state influence to the detriment of the freedom to provide services and fundamental rights. Opaque and biased allocation of state advertising and other state financial support is therefore a powerful tool to exert influence or ‘capture’ media service providers. The distribution and transparency of state advertising and other state financial support are in some regards regulated through a fragmented framework of media- specific measures and general public procurement laws, which, however, may not cover all state advertising expenditure nor do not offer sufficient protection against preferential or biased distribution. In particular, Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council56does not apply to public service contracts for the acquisition, development, production or co-production of programme material intended for audiovisual media services or radio media services. Media-specific rules on state advertising or other state financial support, where they exist, diverge significantly from one Member State to another. _________________ 56 Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 65-242).
Amendment 302 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) Providers of online platforms are increasingly competing with media service providers for the purpose of state advertising and other financial support. In order to ensure undistorted competition between media service providers and providers of online platforms and to avoid the risk of covert subsidies and of undue political influence on the media, it is necessary to establish common requirementand on online platforms, it is of particular importance that fair and transparent rules on the criteria for the allocation of state financial support and state advertising are in place, as well as them being effectively implemented. These criteria should follow principles of transparency, objectivity, proportionality and non- discrimination in the allocation of state advertising and of state resources to media service providers and of providers of online platforms for the purpose of purchasing goods or services from them other than state advertising, including the requirement to publish information on the beneficiaries of state advertising expenditure and the amounts spent. It is important that Member States make the necessary information related to state advertising. It is important that Member States make the necessary information, including beneficiaries and amounts spent, related to state advertising and other state financial support publicly accessible in an electronic format that is easy to view, access and download, in compliance with Union and national rules on commercial confidentiality. This Regulation shall not affect the application of the State aid rules, which are applied on a case-by-case basis.
Amendment 303 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) Building on the useful role played by ERGA in monitoring compliance by the signatories of EU Code of Practice on Disinformation, the Board should, at least on a yearly basis, organise a structured dialogue between providers of very large online platforms, representatives of media service providers and representatives of civil society to foster access to diverse offers of independent media on very large online platforms, discuss experience and best practices related to the application of the relevant provisions of this Regulation and to monitor adherence tocompliance with self- regulatory initiatives aimed at protecting society from harmful content, including those aimed at countering disinformation. The Commission may, where relevant, examine the reports on the results of such structured dialogues when assessing systemic and emerging issues across the Union under Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act] and may ask the Board to support it to this effect.
Amendment 305 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
(50) Risks to the functioning and resilience of the internal media market should be regularly monitored as part of the efforts to improve the functioning of the internal market for media services. Such monitoring should aim at providing detailed data and qualitative assessments on the resilience of the internal market for media services, including as regards the degree of concentration of the market also at national and regional level and risks of foreign information manipulation and interference. It should be conducted independently, on the basis of a robust list of key performance indicators, developed and regularly updated by the Commission, in consultation with the Board. Given the rapidly evolving nature of risks and technological developments in the internal media market, the monitoring should include forward-looking exercises such as stress tests to assess the prospective resilience of the internal media market, to alert about vulnerabilities around media pluralism and editorial independence, and to help efforts to improve governance, data quality and risk management. In particular, the level of cross-border activity and investment, regulatory cooperation and convergence in media regulation, obstacles to the provision of media services, including in a digital environment, as well as transparency and fairness of allocation of economic resources in the internal media market should be covered by the monitoring. It should also consider broader trends in the internal media market and national media markets as well as national legislation affecting media service providers. In addition, the monitoring should provide an overview of measures taken by media service providers with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions, including those proposed in the accompanying Recommendation. In order to ensure the highest standards of such monitoring, the Board, as it gathers entities with a specialised media market expertise, should be duly involved.
Amendment 306 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
Recital 51
(51) The Commission should be able to take the necessary actions to monitor the effective implementation of and compliance with the obligations laid down in this Regulation. To prepare the ground for a correct implementation of this Regulation, its provisions concerning independent media authorities, the Board and the required amendments to Directive 2010/13/EU (Articles 7 to 12 and 27 of this Regulation) should apply 3 months after the entry into force of the Act, while all other provisions of this Regulation will apply 6 months after the entry into force of this Regulation. In particular, this is needed to ensure that the Board will be established in time to ensure a successful implementation of the Regulation.
Amendment 311 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 a (new)
Recital 37 a (new)
(37a) The freedom of the recipients of media services to effectively choose the content they want to access is also constrained by the way very large online platforms and very large search engines suggest, rank and prioritise information, for example by their recommender systems. As recognised inter alia by Regulation 2022/2065 the [DSA- Recital 70 among others], ‘such recommender systems can have a significant impact on the ability of recipients to retrieve and interact with information online […]’. In other words, the recommender systems imposed by very large online platforms and very large search engines hold substantial power over the flow of content online, and over recipients’ exposure to diversity, and their capacity to freely and effectively select their information diet. To preserve media diversity and plurality online it is thus key to create the conditions for a diversity of recommender systems to be available to service recipients, and for the latter to have the possibility to change, in a simple and user-friendly manner, the default settings and the criteria used by recommender systems to pre-select the content to which recipients are exposed to. These conditions can be created by imposing pro-competitive remedies to lower barriers to entry for recommender systems providers, such as those based on unbundling and interoperability.
Amendment 312 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3
Article 1 – paragraph 3
3. This Regulation shall not affect the possibility for Member States to adopt more detailed rules in the fields covered by Chapter II and Section 5 of Chapter III and Article 24, provided that those rules comply with Union law.
Amendment 314 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
(13) ‘media market concentration’ means a concentration as defined in Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 involving at least one media service provider and/or a concentration with an impact on pluralism in a national or in the EU market;
Amendment 318 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 b (new)
Recital 37 b (new)
(37b) Recipients of media services increasingly face difficulties in identifying who bears the editorial responsibility for the content or services they consume, in particular when they access media services through connected devices or online platforms. Failure to clearly indicate editorial responsibility for media content or services (e.g., through incorrect attribution of logos, trademarks, or other characteristic traits) deprives recipients of media services of the possibility to understand and assess the information they receive, which is a prerequisite for forming well-informed opinions and consequently to actively participate in democracy. Recipients of media services should therefore be enabled to easily identify the media service provider bearing the editorial responsibility over any given media service on all devices and user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of media services.
Amendment 321 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8
(8) ‘editorial decision’ means a decision taken on a regular basis for the purpose of exercising editorial responsibility and linked to the day-to-day operation of a media service provider;
Amendment 322 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 15
(15) ‘State advertising’ means the placement, publication or dissemination, in any media service, of a promotional or self-promotional message, normally in return for payment or for any other consideration, by, for or on behalf of any national or regional public authority, such aspublic authority at Union, national or regional level, such as the Commission and its agencies, national, federal or regional governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities at the national or regional level, or any local government of a territorial entity of more than 1 million inhabitants;
Amendment 323 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Amendment 324 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
(9) ‘editorial responsibility’ means the exercise of effective control both over the selection of the programmes or press publications, and other media content, and over their organisation, for the purposes of the provision of a media service, regardless of the existence of liability under national law for the service provided;
Amendment 325 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) Different legislative, regulatory or administrative measures can negatively affect the operation of media service providers in the internal market. They include, for example,media pluralism and editorial independence by restricting the possibility of media service providers in the internal market to provide access to a plurality of views and to reliable sources of information. Such measures can take various forms such as rules to limit the ownership of media companies by other companies active in the media sector or non-media related sectors; they also include decisions related to licensing, authorisation or prior notification for media service providers. In order to mitigate their potential negative impact on the functioning of the internal market for media services and enhance legal certainty, it is important that such measures comply with the principles of objective justification, transparency, non- discrimination and proportionality.
Amendment 327 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
(9a) ‘provider of online platform’ means a hosting service as defined in article 3 (I) in the of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065
Amendment 333 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
(13) ‘media market concentration’ means a concentration as defined in Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 involving at least one media service providerparty in the media value chain;
Amendment 334 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14
(14) ‘audience measurement’ means the activity of collecting, interpreting or otherwise processing data about the number and characteristics of users of media services and users of providers of online platforms for the purposes of decisions regarding advertising allocation or prices or the related buying, planning, production, selling or distribution of content;
Amendment 336 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) It is also key that the Board is empowered to issue an opinion, on its own initiative or at the Commission’s request, where national measures are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. This is, for example, the case when a national administrative measure is addressed to a media service provider providing its services towards more than one Member State, or when the concerned media service provider has a significant influence on the formation of public opinion in that Member State.
Amendment 339 #
2022/0277(COD)
(40) Media play a decisive role in shaping public opinion and helping citizens participate in democratic processes. This is why Member States should provide for rules and procedures in their legal systems to ensure ex-ante and ex-post quality assessment of media market concentrations affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism or editorial independence, including existing concentrations at the time of entry into force of this Regulation. Such rules and procedures can have an impact on the freedom to provide media services in the internal market and need to be properly framed and be transparent, objective, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Media market concentrations subject to such rules should be understood as covering those which could result in a single entity controlling or having significant interests in media services which have substantial influence on the formation of public opinion in a given media market, within a media sub- sector or across different media sectors in one or more Member States. An important criterion to be taken into account is the reduction of competing views within that market as a result of the concentration. Taking such measures is essential, in order to guarantee access, competition and quality and avoid conflicts of interests between media ownership concentration and political power, which are detrimental to free competition, a level playing field and pluralism. A detailed assessment of such media market concentrations capable of distorting media pluralism and competition should always be made by the competent national regulatory authorities or other bodies without any political interference.
Amendment 341 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 15
(15) ‘State advertising’ means the placement, publication or dissemination, in any media service, of ar promotional or self-vider of online platform, of a promotional message, normally in return for payment or for any other consideration, by, for or on behalf of any Union, national or, regional or local public authority, such as the Commission and its agencies, national, federal or, regional and local governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities at the national or, regional level, or any local government of a territorial entity of more than 1 million inhabitantsor local level;
Amendment 343 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 16
(16) ‘spyware’ means any product with digital elements specially designed to exploit vulnerabilities in other products with digital elements that enables the covert surveillance of natural or legal persurveillance technologies' means any electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device that enables the acquisition of informations by monitoring, extracting, collecting or analysing data from such products or from the natural or legal persons using such products, in particular by secretly recording calls or otherwise using the microphone of an end-user device, filming natural persons, machines or their surroundings, copying messages, photographing, tracking browsing activity, tracking geolocation, collecting other sensor data or tracking activities across multiple end-user devicesof any information and communication technology, without the natural or legal person concerned being made aware in a specific manner and having given their express specific, free and informed consent in that regard;
Amendment 344 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) National regulatory authorities or bodies, who have specific expertise in the area of media pluralism, should be involved in the assessment of the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independenceconcentrations affecting the media market that could have an impact on media pluralism and editorial independence, including existing concentrations at the time of entry into force of this Regulation, where they are not the designated authorities or bodies themselves. In order to foster legal certainty and ensure that the rules and procedures are genuinely geared at protecting media pluralism and editorial independence, it is essential that objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria for notifying and assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independence are set out in advance.
Amendment 345 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Public service media providers shall provide in an impartialndependent manner a plurality of information and opinions to their audiences, in accordance with their public service missionremit.
Amendment 348 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41 a (new)
Recital 41 a (new)
(41a) For the purpose of ensuring the protection of media freedom and pluralism, this Regulation should also apply to existing concentrations affecting the media market at the time of its entry into force.
Amendment 350 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) When a media market concentration constitutes a concentration falling within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/200455, the application of this Regulation or of any rules and procedures adopted by Member States on the basis of this Regulation should not affect the application of Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. Any measures taken by the designated or involved national regulatory authorities or bodies based on their assessments of the impact of media marketconcentrations concentrations affecting the media market that could have an impacton media pluralism and editorial independence should therefore be aimed at protecting legitimate interests within the meaning of Article 21(4), third subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004, and should be in line with the general principles and other provisions of Union law. _________________ 55 Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) (OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1-22).
Amendment 352 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – title
Article 6 – title
Amendment 352 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) The Board should be empowered to provide opinions on draft decisions or opinions by the designated or involved national regulatory authorities or bodies, where the notifiableand, at its own initiative or upon request, conduct assessments of concentrations may affect the functioning of the internal media market. This would be the case, for example, where such concentrations involve at least one undertaking established in another Member State or that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence, including existing concentrations at the entry into force of the present Regulation. Democratic processes across the EU are rooted in national media markets, whereas national democratic processes spill opverating in more than one Member State or result in media service providers having a significant influence on formation of public opinion to EU level governance. As a consequence, concentrations that are purely national could have a significant impact on media pluralism at the EU level. Accordingly, in order to achieve the objectives of this Regulation, it is necessary to have appropriate measures to assess the national and cross-border concentrations aiming a given media market. Moreover,t enforcing and protecting democratic processes both at national and EU level. Moreover, the Board should provide an assessment where the concentration has not been assessed for its impact on media pluralism and editorial independence by the relevant national authorities or bodies, or where the national regulatory authorities or bodies have not consulted the Board regarding a given media market concentration, but that media market concentration is considered likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, the Board should be able to provide an opinion, upon request of the Commission or where the National Competition Autohrities do not impose proportionate remedies for concentrations distorting competitions. The Commission must respond to the reasoned call of the Board. In any event, the Commission retains the possibility to issue its own opinions following the opinions drawn up by the Board.
Amendment 353 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17 – point a
(a) terrorism, as defined in Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council,
Amendment 354 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Media service providers providing news and current affairs content shall make easily and directly accessible to the recipients of their servicesshall make, in line with accessibility requirements, easily and publically available the following up-to-date information:
Amendment 355 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17 – point h
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17 – point h
Amendment 356 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the name(s) and contact details of their beneficial owners within the meaning of Article 3, point 6 of Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Amendment 356 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43 a (new)
Recital 43 a (new)
(43a) In order to ensure the full and lasting achievement of the objectives of this Regulation, the Commission should be able to assess whether undertakings which are part of a media market concentration hasve systematically infringed the obligations laid down in this Regulation and that there is a clear risk of seriously undermining the independence, plurality and freedom of the media. Such assessment should be based on media market investigations to be carried out in an appropriate timeframe. In order to maintain or restore the independence, plurality and freedom of media as affected by the systematic non-compliance from undertakings which are part of a media market concentration, the Commission should have the power to impose any remedy, whether behavioural or structural, having due regard to the principle of proportionality. In this context, the Commission should have the power to prohibit, to the extent that such remedy is proportionate and necessary and during a limited period, that the undertakings part of the media market concentration under investigation remain or enter into a further media market concentration. The power to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission in respect of imposing remedies which are proportionate and necessary to ensure effective compliance with this Regulation and the protection of media freedom, pluralism and independence.
Amendment 357 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – title
Article 3 – title
Rights of recipients of media services to receive and impart information
Amendment 358 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) information on the nature and the extent of the interest and links held by the beneficial owners and family members known to be close associates as defined in Article 3 points 9, 10, 11 of Directive (EU) 2015/849 in other media, other media enterprises and even in other economic sectors;
Amendment 359 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) With a view to ensuring pluralistic media markets, the national authorities or bodies and the Board should take account of a set of criteria as well as the criteria should take precedence or prevail in case of conflicts. In particular, impact on media pluralism should be considered, including notably the effect on the formation of public opinion, taking into account of the online environment. Concurrently, it should be considered whether other media outlets, providing different and alternative content, would still coexist in the given market(s) after the media market concentration in question. Assessment of safeguards for editorial independence should include the examination of potential risks of undue interference by the prospective owner, management or governance structure in the individual editorial decisions of the acquired or merged entity. The existing or envisaged internal safeguards aimed at preserving independence of the individual editorial decisions within the media undertakings involved should also be taken into account. Furthermore, the results of the annual Commission Rule of Law report presented in the chapters on press freedom as well as the risk assessment made annually by instruments such as the Media Pluralism Monitor should be considered in determining the overall climate for media and the effects of the concentration in question over media pluralism and editorial independence, under these specific conditions. In assessing the potential impacts, the effects of the concentration in question on the economic sustainability of the entity or entities subject to the concentration should also be considered and whether, in the absence of the concentration, they would be economically sustainable, in the sense that they would be able in the medium term to continue to provide and further develop financially viable, adequately resourced and technologically adapted quality media services in the market.
Amendment 359 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Amendment 361 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
(cb) information regarding the state support measures granted to the media
Amendment 362 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c c (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c c (new)
(cc) whether and to what extent their direct or beneficial ownership is held by the government, a state institution, a state-owned enterprise or other public body;
Amendment 364 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Member States shall entrust a relevant national regulatory authority or body with developing and maintaining a dedicated online media ownership database, containing disaggregated data about different types of media, as defined in paragraph 1, including at regional and/or local levels, to which the public would have easy, swift and effective access free of charge, and to produce regular reports on the ownership of media services under the jurisdiction of a given Member State.
Amendment 364 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) Audience measurement has a direct impact on the allocation and the prices of advertising, which represents a key revenue source for the media sector. It is a crucial tool to evaluate the performance of media content and understand the preferences of audiences in order to plan the future production, buying, planning or selling of content. Accordingly, media market players, in particular media service providers and advertisers, should be able to rely on objective audience data stemming from transparent, unbiased and verifiable audience measurement solutions, which should be in compliance with EU data protection and privacy rules. However, certain new players that have emerged in the media ecosystem provide their own measurement services without making available information on their methodologies. This could result in information asymmetries among media market players and in potential market distortions, to the detriment of equality of opportunities for media service providers in the market.
Amendment 365 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 d (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Media service providers shall submit the information defined in paragraph 1, to the national databases of media ownership established according to paragraph 3 within 90 days after any change of any information regarding their ownership.
Amendment 366 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 e (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 e (new)
1e. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall submit data provided according to paragraph 3 to the European Database of Media Ownership on quarterly basis.
Amendment 373 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) In order to enhance the verifiability, comparability and reliability of audience measurement methodologies, in particular online, transparency obligations should be laid down for providers of audience measurement systems that do not abide by the industry benchmarks agreed within the relevant self-regulatory bodies. Under these obligations, such actors, when requested and to the extent possible, should provide advertisers and media service providers or parties acting on their behalf, with information describing the methodologies employed for the measurement of the audience. Such information could consist in providing elements, such as the size of the sample measured, the definition of the indicators that are measured, the metrics, the measurement methods and the margin of error as well as the measurement period. The obligations imposed under this Regulation are without prejudice to audiences’ right to protection of personal data as provided by Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights read in conjunction with Regulation 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation) as well as any obligations that apply to providers of audience measurement services under Regulation 2019/1150 or Regulation (EU) 2022/XX [Digital Markets Act]1925, including those concerning ranking or self- preferencing.
Amendment 376 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) ensure disclosure of any actual or potential conflict of interest by any party having a stake in media service providers that may affect the provision of news and current affairs content.
Amendment 378 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) Codes of conduct, drawn up either by the providers of audience measurement systems or by organisations or associations representing them, together with media service providers and/or their representatives, civil society organisations and other relevant stakeholders can contribute to the effective application of this Regulation and should, therefore, be encouraged. Self- regulation has already been used to foster high quality standards in the area of audience measurement. Its further development could be seen as an effective tool for the industry with the support of national regulatory authorities or bodies to agree on the practical solutions needed for ensuring compliance of audience measurement systems and their methodologies with the principles of transparency, impartiality, inclusiveness, proportionality, non- discrimination, comparability and verifiability. When drawing up such codes of conduct, in consultation with all relevant stakeholders and notably media service providersmentiones above, account could be taken in particular of the increasing digitalisation of the media sector and the objective of achieving a level playing field among media market players.
Amendment 380 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) detain, sanction, intercept, subject to surveillance or search and seizure, or inspect media service providers or their employees or, if applicable, their family members, or any otheir employees or their family members, or their corporate and private premises, on the ground that they refuse to disclose information on their sources, unless this is justified by an overriding requirement in the public interest,subject belonging to their professional or private network of relationships, their sources, or their corporate and private premises, unless the following cumulative conditions are fulfilled: (i) the interference is justified for the prevention, investigation or prosecution of a serious criminal offence listed in Article 2(17) of this Regulation; and (ii) the interference is, ex ante, ordered exclusively by an independent and impartial judicial authority with effective remedial measures. To this end, a prior review is carried out on a case by-case basis by an independent and impartial court delivering a duly reasoned decision based on a fair balance between the interests of enforcing criminal law and the fundamental rights affected by the measure, including in case of disclosure of journalistic sources; and (iii) the measure is provided for by law in accordance with Article 52(1) of the Charter and in compliance with other Union law, and is proportionate in respect to the legitimate aim pursued; and (iv) the defence rights and the right to access to effective legal remedies are ensured in accordance with Article 52(1)47 of the Charter and in compliance with other Union law;.
Amendment 383 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. The obligations under this Articleparagraph 1 point d, e, f shall not apply to media service providers that are micro enterprises within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2013/34/EU.
Amendment 384 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6a Media Ownership Restrictions 1. Politically exposed persons, falling under points 9a, point 9b of Article 3 of Directive (EU) 2015/849 shall not be beneficial owners, as defined in Directive (EU) 2015/849, of any press publications, or audiovisual media service. 2. When a person becomes a politically exposed person, they shall terminate the operation of the media service provider or shall terminate the business relationship, which allow for exercising influence over the media service provider, with the media service provider without undue delay, but not later than 60 days after becoming a politically exposed person.
Amendment 384 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) State advertising isand other state financial support are an important source of revenue for many media service providers, and contributinge to their economic sustainability. Access to it must be granted in a non-discriminatory way to any media service provider from any Member State which can adequately reach some or all of the relevant members of the public, in order to ensure equal opportunities in the internal market. Moreover, State advertisingMoreover, State advertising and other state financial support may make media service providers vulnerable to undue state influence to the detriment of the freedom to provide services and fundamental rights. Opaque and biased allocation of state advertising and other state financial support is therefore a powerful tool to exert influence or ‘capture’ media service providers. The distribution and transparency of state advertising and other state financial support are in some regards regulated through a fragmented framework of media- specific measures and general public procurement laws, which, however, may not cover all state advertising expenditure nor do not offer sufficient protection against preferential or biased distribution. In particular, Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council56does not apply to public service contracts for the acquisition, development, production or co-production of programme material intended for audiovisual media services or radio media services. Media-specific rules on state advertising or other state financial support, where they exist, diverge significantly from one Member State to another. _________________ 56 Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 65-242).
Amendment 386 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) Providers of online platforms are increasingly competing with media service providers for the purpose of state advertising and other financial support. In order to ensure undistorted competition between media service providers and with providers of online platforms and to avoid the risk of covert subsidies and of undue political influence on the media, it is necessary to establish common requirement and on online platforms, it is of particular importance that fair and transparent rules on the criteria for the allocation of state financial support and state advertising are in place, as well as their being effectively implemented. These criteria should follow principles of transparency, objectivity, proportionality and non- discrimination in the allocation of state advertising and of state resources to media service providers and of providers of online platforms for the purpose of purchasing goods or services from them other than state advertising, including the requirement to publish information on the beneficiaries of state advertising expenditure and the amounts spent. It is important that Member States make the necessary information related to state advertising. It is important that Member States make the necessary information, including beneficiaries and amounts spent related to state advertising and other state financial support publicly accessible in an electronic format that is easy to view, access and download, in compliance with Union and national rules on commercial confidentiality. This Regulation shall not affect the application of the State aid rules, which are applied on a case-by-case basis.
Amendment 391 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
(50) Risks to the functioning and resilience of the internal media market should be regularly monitored as part of the efforts to improve the functioning of the internal market for media services. Such monitoring should aim at providing detailed data and qualitative assessments on the resilience of the internal market for media services, including as regards the degree of concentration of the market also at national and regional level and risks of foreign information manipulation and interference. It should be conducted independently, on the basis of a robust list of key performance indicators, developed and regularly updated by the Commission, in consultation with the Board. Given the rapidly evolving nature of risks and technological developments in the internal media market, the monitoring should include forward-looking exercises such as stress tests to assess the prospective resilience of the internal media market, to alert about vulnerabilities around media pluralism and editorial independence, and to help efforts to improve governance, data quality and risk management. In particular, the level of cross-border activity and investment, regulatory cooperation and convergence in media regulation, obstacles to the provision of media services, including in a digital environment, as well as transparency and fairness of allocation of economic resources in the internal media market should be covered by the monitoring. It should also consider broader trends in the internal media market and national media markets as well as national legislation affecting media service providers. In addition, the monitoring should provide an overview of measures taken by media service providers with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions, including those proposed in the accompanying Recommendation. In order to ensure the highest standards of such monitoring, the Board, as it gathers entities with a specialised media market expertise, should be duly involved.
Amendment 394 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) deploy spyware in any device or machine used byforce access to or perform any other hacking operations on any device or machine, or deploy surveillance technologies against media service providers or their employees or, if applicable, their family members, or their employees or any otheir family members, unless the deployment is justified, on a case-by-case basis, on grounds of national security and is in compliance with Article 52(1) of the Charter and other Union law or the deployment occurs in serious crimes investigations of one of the aforementioned persons, it is provided for under national law and is in compliance with Article 52(1) of the Charter and other Union law, and measures adopted pursuant to sub-paragraph (b) would be inadequate and insufficient to obtain the information soughtsubject belonging to their professional or private network of relationships, or their sources, where that might lead to a violation of professional secrecy and legal professional privilege.
Amendment 395 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
Recital 51
(51) The Commission should be able to take the necessary actions to monitor the effective implementation of and compliance with the obligations laid down in this Regulation. To prepare the ground for a correct implementation of this Regulation, its provisions concerning independent media authorities, the Board and the required amendments to Directive 2010/13/EU (Articles 7 to 12 and 27 of this Regulation) should apply 3 months after the entry into force of the Act, while all other provisions of this Regulation will apply 6 months after the entry into force of this Regulation. In particular, this is needed to ensure that the Board will be established in time to ensure a successful implementation of the Regulation.
Amendment 401 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) Commission a third party to perform any of the measures under paragraphs (b) and (c).
Amendment 403 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Member States shall ensure the promotion and protection of confidentiality of communications and of end-to-end encrypted services in particular in media service providers communications. The use of encrypted and anonymisation tools by media service providers and their employees shall be encouraged and shall not be considered a valid reason for suspicion for the adoption of measures pursuant to subparagraph (b) of paragraph 2 of this Article.
Amendment 408 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall designate a representative to the Board. The representative of the Commission shall participate in all activities and meetings of the Board, without voting rights. The Chair of the Board shall keep the Commission informed about the ongoing and planned activities of the Board. The Board shall consult the Commission , in particular in preparation of its work programme and main deliverables.
Amendment 408 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. Without prejudice and in addition to the right to effective judicial protection guaranteed to each natural and legal person, Member States shall designate an independent authority or body, such as an ombudsperson, to handle complaints lodged by media service providers or, if applicable, their family members, their employees or their family members, regarding breaches of paragraph 2, points (b), (c) and (ca). Media service providers shall have the right to request that authority or body to issue, within three months of the request, an opinion regarding compliance with paragraph 2, points (b), (c) and (ca).
Amendment 410 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6
Article 10 – paragraph 6
6. The Board, in agreement with the Commission, may invite experts and observers to attend its meetings.
Amendment 414 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Breaches of the obligations set out under this Article shall constitute a breach of the principles of the rule of law, within the meaning of Article 3 of Regulation 2020/2092.
Amendment 416 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3
Article 1 – paragraph 3
3. This Regulation shall not affect the possibility for Member States to adopt more detailed rules in the fields covered by Chapter II and Section 5 of Chapter III, and Article 24 provided that those rules comply with Union law.
Amendment 420 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 8
Article 10 – paragraph 8
8. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights, in agreement with the Commission.
Amendment 423 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) ‘media service provider’ means ameans any natural or legal person whose is regularly or professional activityly engaged isn tohe providesion of a media service and who has editorial responsibility for the choice of the content of the media service and determines the manner in which it is organised;
Amendment 423 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Public service media providers shallMember States shall ensure that public service media providers are editorially independent and provide in an impartialndependent manner a plurality of information and opinions to their audiences, in accordance with their public service missionremit.
Amendment 426 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The head of management and the members of the governing board of public service media providers, and all management positions, shall be appointed through a transparent, open and non-discriminatory procedure and on the basis of transparent, objective, gender-balanced, non- discriminatory and proportionate criteria that emphasises professional competence, political neutrality and commitment to public service journalism, laid down in advance by national law.
Amendment 431 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The duration of their term of office shall be established by national law, and be adequate and sufficient to ensure effective independence of the public media service provider. They may be dismissed before the end of their term of office onlyunder exceptionally circumstances where they no longer fulfil the legally predefined conditions required for the performance of their duties laid down in advance by national law or for specific reasons of illegal conduct or serious misconduct as defined in advance by national law.
Amendment 433 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8
(8) ‘editorial decision’ means a decision taken on a regular basis for the purpose of exercising editorial responsibility and linked to the day-to-day operation of a media service provider;
Amendment 435 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
(9) ‘editorial responsibility’ means the exercise of effective control both over the selection of the programmes or, press publications and other media content, and over their organisation, for the purposes of the provision of a media service, regardless of the existence of liability under national law for the service provided;
Amendment 437 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) advise the Commission, on its own initiative or where requested by it, on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent application of this Regulation and implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU as well as all on other matters related to media services within its competence. Where the Commission requests advice or opinions from the Board, it may indicate a time limit, taking into account the urgency of the matter;
Amendment 440 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
(9a) ‘provider of online platform’ means a hosting service as defined in article 3 (I) in the of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065
Amendment 440 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that public service media providers have adequate and stable financial resources for the fulfilment of their public service missioremit and to meet the objectives therein. Those resources shall be such that editorial independence is safeguarded.
Amendment 441 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) on its own initiative or when requested by the Commission, provide opinions on the technical and factual issues that arise with regard to Article 2(5c), Article 3(2) and (3), Article 4(4), point (c) and Article 28a(7) of Directive 2010/13/EU;
Amendment 443 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Member States shall ensure that the allocation of financial resources to the public service media providers is conducted through predictable, transparent, independent, impartial and non-discriminatory procedures and on the basis of transparent, objective and proportionate criteria laid down in advance by national law. Those procedures shall be such that editorial independence is safeguarded.
Amendment 445 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall designate one or more independent authorities or bodies in order to monitor compliance with paragraphs 1 to 3. Following findings related to non-compliance or partial compliance with this Article, the designated independent authorities or bodies shall make the findings available to the public.
Amendment 446 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
(e) in agreement with the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:
Amendment 448 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – title
Article 6 – title
Amendment 451 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
(13) ‘media market concentration’ means a concentration as defined in Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 involving at least one media service providerparty in the media value chain;
Amendment 453 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Media service providers providing news and current affairs content shall make easily and directly accessible to the recipients of their servicesshall make, in line with the accessibility requirements and in an user-friendly manner, publicly available the following information:
Amendment 455 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14
(14) ‘audience measurement’ means the activity of collecting, interpreting or otherwise processing data about the number and characteristics of users of media services and users of providers of online platforms for the purposes of decisions regarding advertising allocation or prices or the related buying, planning, production, selling or distribution of content;
Amendment 458 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point ii
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point ii
(ii) media market concentrations which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, in accordance with Article 22(1) of this Regulation;
Amendment 460 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the name(s) of their direct or indirect owner(s) with shareholdings enabling them to exercise influence on the operation and strategic decision making, and where applicable its registered office, legal form and name(s) of legal representative, of their direct or indirect owner(s) with shareholdings of at least 15% of its capital;
Amendment 464 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the name(s) of their beneficial owners within the meaning of Article 32, paragraph 1, point 622 of Directive (EU) 2015/849Regulation (EU) XXXX/XXX [Anti-Money Laundering Regulation] of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Amendment 466 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
(ma) establish and maintain the European Database for Media Ownership collecting information provided by national regulatory authorities and bodies, in accordance with Article 6 of this Regulation.
Amendment 467 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m b (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m b (new)
(mb) establish and maintain the European Database on State Advertising collecting information provided by national regulatory authorities and bodies, in accordance with Article 24 of this Regulation
Amendment 467 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) whether and to what extent their direct or beneficial ownership is held by the government, a state institution, a state-owned enterprise or other public body;
Amendment 471 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 15
(15) ‘State advertising’ means the placement, publication or dissemination, in any media service, of ar promotional or self-viders of online platform, of a promotional message, normally in return for payment or for any other consideration, by, for or on behalf of any Union, national or, regional or local public authority, such as the Commission and its agencies, national, federal or, regional and local governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities at the national or, regional level, or any local government of a territorial entity of more than 1 million inhabitantsor local level ;
Amendment 472 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
(cb) information on the nature and the extent of the interest and links held by the beneficial owners and family members known to be close associates as defined in Article 2, paragraph 1, points 25, 26 and 27 of Regulation (EU) XXXX/XXX [Anti- Money Laundering Regulation] in other media, other media enterprises and even in other economic sectors;
Amendment 474 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 16
(16) ‘spyware’ means any product with digital elements specially designed to exploit vulnerabilities in other products with digital elementsurveillance technologies’ means any electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device that enables the covert surveillance of natural or legal persacquisition of informations by monitoring, extracting, collecting or analysing data from such products or from the natural or legal persons using such products, in particular by secretly recording calls or otherwise using the microphone of an end-user device, filming natural persons, machines or their surroundings, copying messages, photographing, tracking browsing activity, tracking geolocation, collecting other sensor data or tracking activities across multiple end-user devicesof any information and communication technology, without the natural or legal person concerned being made aware in a specific manner and having given their express specific, free and informed consent in that regard ;
Amendment 477 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c c (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c c (new)
(cc) state advertising and state financial support allocated to them;
Amendment 478 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c d (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c d (new)
(cd) details concerning the ownership structure related to their parent and sister companies, as well as their subsidiaries;
Amendment 480 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17 – point a
(a) terrorism, as defined in Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council,
Amendment 481 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17 – point h
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17 – point h
Amendment 481 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c e (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c e (new)
(ce) details of revenue from contracts with state bodies received by companies that belong to the same business grouping as the media service provider;
Amendment 482 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall entrust the national regulatory authorities or bodies with developing and maintaining a dedicated online media ownership databases, containing disaggregated data about different types of media, as defined in paragraph 1 of this Article, including at regional and/or local levels, to which the public would have easy, swift and effective access free of charge. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall produce regular reports on the ownership of media services under the jurisdiction of a given Member State.
Amendment 484 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – title
Article 3 – title
Rights of recipients of media services to receive and impart information
Amendment 486 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Media service providers shall submit the information defined in paragraph 1, to the national databases of media ownership established according to paragraph 3 within 90 days after any change of any information regarding their ownership.
Amendment 487 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Amendment 489 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall submit data provided according to paragraph 3 to the European Database of Media Ownership on quarterly basis.
Amendment 493 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Without prejudice to national constitutional laws consistent with the Charter, media service providers providing news and current affairs content shall take measures that they deem appropriate with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions. In particular, such measures shall aim to:
Amendment 495 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall ensure the promotion and protection of confidentiality of communications and of end-to-end encrypted services in particular in media service providers communications. The use of encrypted and anonymisation tools by media service providers and their employees shall be encouraged and shall not be considered a valid reason for suspicion for the adoption of measures pursuant to subparagraph (b) of paragraph 2 of this Article.
Amendment 502 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) guarantee that journalists and editors are free to take individual editorial decisions in the exercise of their professional activity; and
Amendment 507 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) ensure disclosure of any actual or potential conflict of interest by any party having a stake in media service providers that may affect the provision of news and current affairs content.
Amendment 510 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Develop self-regulatory instruments such as codes of conduct, in cooperation with professional associations or organisations of journalists, representatives of publishers and other stakeholders, establishing the principles of independence, reliability and freedom of information, as well as the roles, rights and obligations of the various actors involved in the information process.
Amendment 513 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. Without prejudice and in addition to the right to effective judicial protection guaranteed to each natural and legal person, Member States shall designate an independent authority or body, such as an ombudsperson, to handle complaints lodged by media service providers or, if applicable, their family members, their employees or their family members, regarding breaches of paragraph 2, points (b) and (c). Media service providers shall have the right to request that authority or body to issue, within three months of the request, an opinion regarding compliance with paragraph 2, points (b) and (c).
Amendment 515 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Breaches of the obligations set out under this Article shall constitute a breach of the principles of the rule of law, within the meaning of Article 3 of Regulation 2020/2092.
Amendment 518 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. The obligations under paragraph 1, points (ca), (cb) and (cc) of this Article, shall not apply to media service providers that are micro enterprises within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2013/34/EU.
Amendment 519 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers of very large online platforms shall provide a functionality allowing recipients of their services to declare that:ensure that their content moderation processes have adequate and sufficient personnel, linguistic range and cultural sensitivity and context-specific training, to ensure that freedom and pluralism of the media is not undermined.
Amendment 522 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 524 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6 a (new)
Article6a Media Ownership Restrictions 1. Politically exposed persons, falling under point 25, paragraph 1, of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) XXXX/XXX [Anti- Money Laundering Regulation] shall not be beneficial owners, as defined within the meaning of Article 2, paragraph 1, point 22, of Regulationin (EU) XXXX/XXX [Anti-Money Laundering Regulation], of any press publications, or audiovisual media service. 2. When a person becomes a politically exposed person, they shall terminate the operation of the media service provider or shall terminate the business relationship, which allows for exercising influence over the media service provider, with the media service provider without undue delay, but not later than 60 days after becoming a politically exposed person.
Amendment 525 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 525 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Public service media providers shallMember States shall ensure that public service media providers are editorially independent and provide in an impartialndependent manner a plurality of information and opinions to their audiences, in accordance with their public service missionremit.
Amendment 527 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The head of management and the members of the governing board of public service media providers, and all management positions, shall be appointed through a transparent, open and non-discriminatory procedure and on the basis of transparent, objective, gender-balanced, non- discriminatory and proportionate criteria that emphasises professional competence, political neutrality and commitment to public service journalism, laid down in advance by national law.
Amendment 527 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that the financial, human and technical resources of the national regulatory authorities or bodies havare adequate financial, human and technical resourcly and sufficiently sized and increased to allow the national regulatory authorities or bodies to carry out their tasks under this Regulation and the Directive 2010/13/EU. Member states shall guarantee the organisational and functional autonomy of the national regulatory authorities or bodies.
Amendment 528 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 532 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The duration of their term of office shall be established by national law, and be adequate and sufficient to ensure effective independence of the public media service provider. They may be dismissed before the end of their term of office onlyunder exceptionally circumstances where they no longer fulfil the legally predefined conditions required for the performance of their duties laid down in advance by national law or for specific reasons of illegal conduct or serious misconduct as defined in advance by national law.
Amendment 534 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Member States shall ensure that the heads and members of national regulatory authorities and bodies are appointed through a transparent, open and non-discriminatory procedure and on the basis of objective, gender-balanced, clear, transparent and proportionate criteria laid down in advance by national law. They may be dismissed before the end of their term of office under exceptional circumstances where they no longer fulfil the legally predefined conditions required for the performance of their duties or serious misconduct as defined in advance by national law. Dismissal decisions shall be duly justified, subject to prior notification to the person concerned, and include the possibility for judicial review. The grounds for dismissal shall be made available to the public.
Amendment 537 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Member States shall ensure that the members of the national regulatory authorities or bodies and their governing bodies are independent of the government and market players, and that they act in full independence when performing their tasks or exercising their powers. National regulatory authorities or bodies and their governing bodies shall have full operational autonomy to manage their financial and human resources.
Amendment 538 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 c (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Members of the national regulatory authorities or bodies, their governing bodies and their management shall, in the performance of their tasks or the exercise of their powers, neither seek nor take instructions from the government, institution, person or body and fulfill their missions in an effective, independent and transparent manner. This shall not affect the competencies of the Board or the Commission in conformity with this Regulation.
Amendment 539 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 d (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Within one year after the entry into application of this Regulation pursuant to Article 28(2), the Commission shall assess the implementation of this Article. To this end, Members States shall send all relevant information to the Commission upon its request.
Amendment 540 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that public service media providers have adequate and stable financial resources for the fulfilment of their public service missioremit and to meet the objectives therein. Those resources shall be such that editorial independence is safeguarded.
Amendment 540 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Those powers shall be laid down in advance by national law and shall include in particular the power to request such persons to provide, within a reasonable time period, information that is proportionate and necessary for carrying out the tasks under Chapter III; the request can also be addressed to any other person that, for purposes related to their trade, business or profession, may reasonably be in possession of the information needed.
Amendment 541 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Member States shall ensure that the allocation of financial resources to the public service media providers is conducted through predictable, transparent, independent, impartial and non-discriminatory procedures and on the basis of transparent, objective and proportionate criteria laid down in advance by national law. Those procedures shall be such that editorial independence is safeguarded.
Amendment 542 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Member States shall entrust the national regulatory authorities or bodies with developing and maintaining dedicated online media ownership databases containing data as defined in paragraph 1 of Article 6, including at regional and/or local levels, to which the public would have easy, swift and effective access free of charge. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall produce regular reports on the ownership of media services under the jurisdiction of a given Member State.
Amendment 545 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall designate one or more independent authorities or bodies in order to monitor compliance with paragraphs 1 to 3. Following findings related to non-compliance or partial compliance with this Article, the designated independent authorities or bodies shall make the findings available to the public.
Amendment 545 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall organise consultations on matters covered by this Regulation with stakeholders such as civil society organisations, media experts, and representatives of the media services providers established in the Union. The results of these consultations shall be reflected in reports published annually.
Amendment 546 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 c (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall submit data provided according to article 24 to the European Database of State financial support on quarterly basis, including at regional and/or local levels, to which the public would have easy, swift and effective access free of charge. National Regulatory authorities or bodies shall produce regular reports on the ownership of media services under their jurisdiction of a given Member State.
Amendment 548 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Where a provider of very large online platform decides to suspend the provision of its online intermediation services in relation toremove content, particularly content providosted by a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Articleor linking to content under its editorial control, on the grounds that such content is incompatible with its terms and conditions, without that content otherwise contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX2065 [Digital Services Act], it shall take all possireasonable measures, to the extent consistent with their obligations under Union law, including Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX2065 [Digital Services Act], to communicate to the media service provider concernedentity that posted the content the statement of reasons accompanying that decision, as required by Article 4(1)17 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150,22/2065 [Digital Services Act], if possible prior to the suspension taking effect.
Amendment 550 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – title
Article 6 – title
6 Duties of media service providers providing news and current affairs contentMedia ownership transparency
Amendment 552 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
The Board shall act in full independence when performing its tasks or exercising its powers. In particular, the Board shall, in the performance of its tasks or the exercise of its powers, neither seek nor take instructions from any government, national or European institution, person or body. This shall not affect the competences of the Commission or the national regulatory authorities or bodies in conformity with this Regulation.
Amendment 553 #
Amendment 556 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. Providers of very large online platforms shall take all the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that complaints under Article 1186 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 by media service providers that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article are processed and decided upon with priority and22/2065 [Digital Services Act] by representative bodies including those representing media service providers are decided upon without undue delay.
Amendment 557 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Media service providers providing news and current affairs content shall make easily and directly accessible to the recipients of their servicesshall make, in line with the accessibility requirements and in an user-friendly manner, publicly available the following up-to-date information:
Amendment 558 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. The Board shall be represented by its Chair. The Board shall elect a Chair from amongst its members. The Board shall also elect a Steering group from amongst its members. The Steering Group shall consist of a Chair, a Vice-Chair and 3 other members, including the outgoing Chair. The Chair and the other members of the steering Group shall be elected by a two-thirds majority of ithe Board's members with voting rights. The term of office of the Chair shall be two yearsof one year, renewable once. The Board's Rules of procedure shall specify the roles, the tasks and the procedures for the appointment of the members of the Steering Group.
Amendment 561 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall designate a representative to the Board without voting rights. The representative of the Commission shall participate in all activities andthe meetings of the Board, without voting rights. The Chair of the Board shall keep the European Parliament and the Commission informed about the ongoing and planned activities of the Board. The Board shall consult the Commission, including the presentation of the report according to paragraph (m e) of Article 12 of this Regulation. The Board shall take into account the recommendations of the Commission and other interested parties in the media field, in preparation of its work programme and main deliverables.
Amendment 562 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4
Article 17 – paragraph 4
4. Where a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 considers that a provider oftrends identified under Article 18 suggest that very large online platforms frequently restricts or suspends the provision of its services in relation to content providosted by thone or more media service provider(s) without sufficient grounds and in a manner that undermines media freedom and pluralism, the provider of very large online platform shall engage in a meaningful and effective dialogue with the media service provider(s), upon itstheir request, in good faith with a view to finding an amicable solution for terminating unjustified restrictions or suspensions and avoiding them in the future. The media service provider may notify the outcome of such exchanges to the Board.
Amendment 565 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The media service provider shall immediately notify the outcome of any meaningful and effective dialogue to the Board. To this end, the Board shall maintain a transparent, complete, up-to- date, public register documenting all procedures of this nature, including the name of the concerned media service providers and very large online platform, as well as the number of meetings, meeting documents, and the outcomes of such dialogues
Amendment 567 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Pursuant to the objectives laid out in the previous paragraph, the Board shall be able to request additional documentation when it finds that the information provided by very large online platforms in the context of meaningful and effective dialogues is not adequate.
Amendment 567 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. The Board may designate permanent observers from amongst national regulatory authorities or bodies with competence in the media field, including those coming from non-EU countries which have entered into agreements with the Union to that effect. The observers shall not have voting rights.
Amendment 568 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) the number of instances where they imposed any restriction or suspension on the grounds that the content providosted by a media service provider that submitted a declaration in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article is incompatible with their terms and conditions; and
Amendment 568 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the name(s) of their direct or indirect owner(s) with shareholdings enabling them to exercise influence on the operation and strategic decision making, and where applicable its registered office, legal form and name(s) of legal representative of their direct or indirect owner(s) with shareholdings of at least 15% of its capital;
Amendment 572 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the name(s) of their beneficial owners within the meaning of Article 32, paragraph 1, point 622 of Directive (EU) 2015/849Regulation (EU) XXXX/XXX of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Amendment 574 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 6
Article 17 – paragraph 6
Amendment 576 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6
Article 10 – paragraph 6
6. The Board, in agreement with the Commission, may invite experts and observers to attend its meetings where necessary.
Amendment 577 #
Amendment 579 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall regularly organise a structured dialogueforum between providers of very large online platforms, representatives of media service providers and representatives of civil society to discuss experience and best practices in the application of Article 17 of this Regulation, to foster access to diverse offers of independent media on very large online platforms and to monitor adherence to self-regulatory initiatives aimed at protecting society from harmful content, including disinformation and foreign information manipulation and interferencein particular, to identify numbers and trends related to the subject matter, volume, and affected parties.
Amendment 579 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) whether and to what extent their direct or beneficial ownership is held by the government, a state institution, a state-owned enterprise or other public body;
Amendment 580 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
Amendment 581 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. The Board shall report on the results of the dialogueforum to the Commission.
Amendment 581 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 8
Article 10 – paragraph 8
8. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights, in agreement with the Commission. The Board shall lay down, in its rules of procedure, the practical arrangements for the prevention and management of conflict of interests.
Amendment 582 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – title
Article 19 – title
Right of customisation of audiovisual media offer
Amendment 583 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c c (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c c (new)
(cc) state advertising and state financial support allocated to them
Amendment 584 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. Users shall have a right to easily change the default settings of any device or user interface controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services, including through the use of third party recommender systems, as defined in Article 3 of Regulation 2022/2065, in order to customise the audiovisual media offer according to their interests or preferences in compliance with the law. This provision shall not affect national measures implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 584 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c d (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c d (new)
(cd) details concerning the ownership structure related to their parent and sister companies, as well as their subsidiaries
Amendment 586 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c e (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c e (new)
Amendment 588 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall entrust the national regulatory authorities or bodies with developing and maintaining a dedicated online media ownership databases, containing disaggregated data about different types of media, as defined in paragraph 1 of this Article, including at regional and/or local levels, to which the public would have easy, swift and effective access free of charge. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall produce regular reports on the ownership of media services under the jurisdiction of a given Member State.
Amendment 594 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
4. The Board, upon request of the Commissioneither on its own initiative or upon request of the Commission or the media service provider affected by the measure, shall draw up an opinion where a national legislative, regulatory or administrative measure is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. Following the opinion of the Board, and without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission may issue its own opinion on the matter. Opinions by the Board and, where applicable, by the Commission shall be made publicly available.
Amendment 595 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Media service providers shall submit the information defined in paragraph 1, to the national databases of media ownership established according to paragraph 1 a within 90 days after any change of any information regarding their ownership
Amendment 598 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall submit data provided according to paragraph 1 a to the European Database of Media Ownership on quarterly basis
Amendment 601 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Amendment 603 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – title
Article 21 – title
Assessment of media market concentrations affecting the media market
Amendment 605 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Member States shall provide, in their national legal systems, substantive and procedural rules which ensure an assessment of media market concentrations affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence. These rules shall:
Amendment 608 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) require the parties to a media market concentrationconcentrations affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence to notify that concentration in advance to the relevant national authorities or bodies;
Amendment 608 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) advise the Commission, on its own initiative, or where requested by it, on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent application of this Regulation and implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU as well as all on other matters related to media services within its competence. Where the Commission requests advice or opinions from the Board, it may indicate a time limit, taking into account the urgency of the matter;
Amendment 611 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d
(d) set out in advance objective, non- discriminatory and proportionate criteria for notifying media market concentrations affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence and for assessing the impact of media marketsuch concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independence.
Amendment 613 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) on its own initiative or when requested by the Commission, provide opinions on the technical and factual issues that arise with regard to Article 2(5c), Article 3(2) and (3), Article 4(4), point (c) and Article 28a(7) of Directive 2010/13/EU;
Amendment 616 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) guarantee that journalists and editors are free to take individual editorial decisions in the exercise of their professional activity; and
Amendment 618 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
(e) in agreement with the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:
Amendment 623 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the impact of the concentration on media pluralism, including its effects on the formation of public opinion and on the diversity of media players on the market, taking into account the online environment and the parties’ interests, links or activities in other media or non-media businesses;
Amendment 623 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) ensure disclosure of any actual or potential conflict of interest by any party having a stake in media service providers that may affect the provision of news and current affairs content.
Amendment 625 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) develop self-regulatory instruments such as codes of conduct, in cooperation with professional associations or organisations of journalists, representatives of publishers and other stakeholders, establishing the principles of independence, reliability and freedom of information, as well as the roles, rights and obligations of the various actors involved in the information process.
Amendment 629 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) whether, in the absence of the concentration, the acquiring and acquired entity would remain economically sustainable, and whether there are any possible alternatives to ensure its economic sustainability, which would not undermine freedom and pluralism of the media.
Amendment 633 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
(f) upon request of the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:
Amendment 635 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 3
Article 21 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission, assisted by the Board, may issue guidelines on the factors to be taken into account when applying the criteria for assessing the impact of media market concentrations affecting the media market on media pluralism and editorial independence by the national regulatory authorities or bodies. It may request assistance from the Commission when fulfilling this function.
Amendment 636 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point i
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point i
(i) national measures which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services or have a significant impact on media pluralism, in accordance with Article 20(4) of this Regulation;
Amendment 637 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4
Article 21 – paragraph 4
4. The national regulatory authority or body shall consult the Board in advance on any opinion or decision it aims to adopt assessing the impact on media pluralism and editorial independence of a notifiable media market concentrations affecting the media market where such concentrations may affect the functioning of the internal market.
Amendment 638 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. The obligations under this Articleparagraph 1 point c a, c b, c c shall not apply to media service providers that are micro enterprises within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2013/34/EU.
Amendment 638 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point ii
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point ii
(ii) media market concentrations which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services and that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence, in accordance with Article 22(1) of this Regulation;
Amendment 642 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) draw up opinions on draft national opinions or decisions assessing the impact on media pluralism and editorial independence of a notifiable media market concentration where such a concentration may affect the functioning of the internal marketaffecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence, in accordance with Article 21(5) of this Regulation;
Amendment 644 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6 a (new)
Article6a Media Ownership Restrictions 1. Politically exposed persons, falling under points 9a, point 9b of Article 3 of Directive (EU) 2015/849 shall not be beneficial owners, as defined within the meaning of Article 2, paragraph 1, point 22, of Regulationin (EU) XXXX/XXX, of any press publications, or audiovisual media service. 2. When a person becomes a politically exposed person, they shall terminate the operation of the media service provider or shall terminate the business relationship, which allows for exercising influence over the media service provider, with the media service provider without undue delay, but not later than 60 days after becoming a politically exposed person.
Amendment 644 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) issue guidelines and recommendations to promote a common methodology for the elaboration of the assessments of concentrations affecting the media market as referred to in Article 21 of this Regulation. The guidelines and recommendations shall be made publicly available.
Amendment 646 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g b (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g b (new)
(gb) on its own initiative, or upon request, conduct assessments of concentrations affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence, including existing concentrations at the entry into force of the present Regulation, in accordance with Article 22 of this Regulation.
Amendment 647 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Amendment 647 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g c (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g c (new)
(gc) monitor compliance with the guidelines and recommendations to promote a common methodology with the view of protecting and promoting media freedom and pluralism across the EU as referred to in paragraph (ga) of this Article.
Amendment 648 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Board shall take utmost account of input from civil society and industry groups when deciding whether to draw up an opinion on a concentration which would objectively impact the media market despite neither party being a media market service provider.
Amendment 651 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that the financial, human and technical resources of the national regulatory authorities or bodies havare adequate financial, human and technical resourcly and sufficiently sized and increased to allow the national regulatory authorities or bodies to carry out their tasks conferred on them under this Regulation. and the Directive 2010/13/EU. Member states shall guarantee the organisational and functional autonomy of the national regulatory authorities or bodies.
Amendment 654 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point l
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point l
(l) organise a structured dialogueforum between providers of very large online platforms, representatives of media service providers and of civil society, and report on its results to the Commissionother relevant stakeholders, in accordance with Article 18 of this Regulation;
Amendment 655 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point l a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point l a (new)
(la) under request or at its own initiative, the Board may provide mediation assistance in case of no agreement between media service providers and providers of very large online platforms pursuant to Article 17(4).
Amendment 656 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m
(m) foster the exchange of best practices and encourage compliance with existing codes of conduct related to the deployment of audience measurement systems, in accordance with Article 23(5) of this Regulation.
Amendment 657 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Member States shall ensure that the heads and members of national regulatory authorities and bodies are appointed through a transparent, open and non-discriminatory procedure and on the basis of objective, gender-balanced, clear, transparent and proportionate criteria laid down in advance by national law. They may be dismissed before the end of their term of office under exceptional circumstances where they no longer fulfil the legally predefined conditions required for the performance of their duties or serious misconduct as defined in advance by national law. Dismissal decisions shall be duly justified, subject to prior notification to the person concerned, and include the possibility for judicial review. The grounds for dismissal shall be made available to the public.
Amendment 658 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
(ma) in so far as necessary in order to achieve the objectives set out in this Regulation and carry out its tasks, and without prejudice to the competences of the Member States and the institutions of the Union, the Board, in consultation agreement with the Commission, may cooperate with relevant Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory groups, with competent authorities of third countries and with international organisations. To that end, the Board may, subject to prior approval by the Commission, establish working arrangements. Working arrangement shall be publicly available and included in the annual report of the Board in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 10.
Amendment 660 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Member States shall ensure that the members of the national regulatory authorities or bodies and their governing bodies are independent of the government and market players, and that they act in full independence when performing their tasks or exercising their powers. National regulatory authorities or bodies and their governing bodies shall have full operational autonomy to manage their financial and human resources.
Amendment 661 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 c (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Members of the national regulatory authorities or bodies, their governing bodies and their management shall, in the performance of their tasks or the exercise of their powers, neither seek nor take instructions from the government, institution, person or body and fulfill their missions in an effective, independent and transparent manner. This shall not affect the competencies of the Board or the Commission in conformity with this Regulation.
Amendment 662 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 d (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Within one year after the entry into application of this Regulation pursuant to Article 28(2), the Commission shall assess the implementation of this Article. To this end, Members States shall send all relevant information to the Commission upon its request.
Amendment 664 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m b (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m b (new)
(mb) establish and maintain the European Database for Media Ownership collecting informations provided by national regulatory authorities and bodies, in accordance with Article 6 of this Regulation.
Amendment 665 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Article 23 – paragraph 3
3. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall encourage the drawing up of codes of conduct by providers of audience measurement systems, together with media service providers, their representative organisations, civil society and any other interested parties, that are intended to contribute to compliance with the principles referred to in paragraph 1, including by promoting independent and transparent audits.
Amendment 665 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Those powers shall be laid down in advance by national law and shall include in particular the power to request such persons to provide, within a reasonable time period, information that is proportionate and necessary for carrying out the tasks under Chapter III; the request can also be addressed to any other person that, for purposes related to their trade, business or profession, may reasonably be in possession of the information needed.
Amendment 667 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Member States shall entrust the national regulatory authorities or bodies with developing and maintaining dedicated online media ownership databases containing data as defined in paragraph 1 of Article 6, including at regional and/or local levels, to which the public would have easy, swift and effective access free of charge. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall produce regular reports on the ownership of media services under the jurisdiction of a given Member State.
Amendment 668 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall organise consultations on matters covered by this Regulation with stakeholders such as civil society organisations, media experts, and representatives of the media services providers established in the Union. The results of these consultations shall be reflected in reports published annually.
Amendment 668 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m c (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m c (new)
(mc) establish and maintain the European Database on State Advertising collecting informations provided by national regulatory authorities and bodies, in accordance with Article 24 of this Regulation.
Amendment 669 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 c (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall submit data provided according to article 24 to the European Database of State financial support on quarterly basis, including at regional and/or local levels, to which the public would have easy, swift and effective access free of charge. National Regulatory authorities or bodies shall produce regular reports on the ownership of media services under their jurisdiction of a given Member State.
Amendment 670 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m d (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m d (new)
(md) organise a structured dialogue with representatives of media service providers, civil society, academia and other relevant stakeholders to cooperate and exchange information, experience and best practices on the implementation of this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU. The results of these consultations shall be reflected in the preparation of its work programme and main deliverables, and shall be publicly available.
Amendment 672 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m e (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m e (new)
(me) prepare a detailed annual report of its activities and tasks as provided for in this Article, in particular an overview of the state of play of compliance with the recommendations issued by the Board. The annual report shall be made publicly available. The Board shall provide, in its future annual reports, a follow-up of the previous reports prepared.
Amendment 673 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m f (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m f (new)
Amendment 674 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m g (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m g (new)
(mg) examine the problem of interdependency between media service providers and the state created by financial flows from the state to media owners via state contracts through companies belonging to the same business group as the media service provider, operating in other industries. The Board should draw up guidelines on how to prevent any conflict of interest arising from and its potential impact on editorial policy.
Amendment 678 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
The Board shall act in full independence when performing its tasks or exercising its powers. In particular, the Board shall, in the performance of its tasks or the exercise of its powers, neither seek nor take instructions from any government, national or European institution, person or body. This shall not affect the competences of the Commission or the national regulatory authorities or bodies in conformity with this Regulation.
Amendment 678 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Where a national regulatory authority or body considers that there is a serious and grave risk of prejudice to the functioning of the internal market for media services or a serious and grave risk of prejudice to rule of law and/or public security and defence, it may request other national regulatory authorities or bodies to provide accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, while ensuring compliance with fundamental rights, in particular freedom of expression.
Amendment 679 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Public authorities, includingat Union, national, federal or regional governmentslevel, regulatory authorities or bodies, as well as state-owned enterprises or other state- controlled entities at the national or regional level, or local governments of territorial entities of more than 1 million inhabitants, shall make publicly availableshall make publicly available through electronic and user- friendly means, accurate, comprehensive, intelligible, detailed and yearly information about their advertising expenditure allocated to media service providers, which shall include at least the following details:
Amendment 680 #
Amendment 681 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Requests for cooperation or mutual assistance, including accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, shall contain all the necessary information related to the request, including the purpose of and reasons for it, as specified in the Board´s Rules of Procedure.
Amendment 684 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6
Article 13 – paragraph 6
6. The requested authority shall do its utmost to address and reply to the request without undue delay. The requested authority shall provide intermediary results within the period of 14 calendar days from the receipt of the request, with subsequent regular updates on the progress of execuFurther details on the procedure of the structured cooperation, including the rights and obligations of the request. In case of requests for accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, the requested authority shall address and reply to the request within 14 calendar daysparties as well as the deadlines to be respected, shall be defined in the Board’s rules of procedure.
Amendment 687 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the total annual amount spent as well as the amounts spent per media service provider.;
Amendment 688 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) the amounts spent per media service provider;
Amendment 688 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. The Board shall be represented by its Chair. The Board shall elect a Chair from amongst its members. The Board shall also elect a Steering group from amongst its members. The Steering Group shall consist of a Chair, a Vice-Chair and 3 other members, including the outgoing Chair. The Chair and the other members of the steering Group shall be elected by a two-thirds majority of ithe Board's members with voting rights. The term of office of the Chair shall be two yearsof one year, renewable once. The Board's Rules of procedure shall specify the roles, the tasks and the procedures for the appointment of the members of the Steering Group. .
Amendment 688 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 7
Article 13 – paragraph 7
7. Where the requesting authority does not consider the measures taken by the requested authority to be sufficient to address and reply to its request, it shall inform the requested authority without undue delay, explaining the reasons for its position. If the requested authority does not agree with that position, or if the requested authority’s reaction is missing, either authority may refer the matter to the Board. Within 14 calendar daysa time period to be defined in the Board´s Rules of procedure from the receipt of that referral, the Board shall issue, in agreement with the Commission, an opinion on the matter, including recommended actions. The requested authority shall do its outmost to take into account the opinion of the Board.
Amendment 689 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In the two months preceding an election, no public funds or any other consideration or advantage shall be granted by public authorities to media service providers for the purpose of advertising, unless it concerns information relating to the procedures of the election.
Amendment 692 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall designate a representative to the Board without voting rights. The representative of the Commission shall participate in all activities andthe meetings of the Board, without voting rights. The Chair of the Board shall keep the European Parliament and the Commission informed about the ongoing and planned activities of the Board. The Board shall consult the Commission, including the presentation of the report according to paragraph (m d) of Article 12 of this Regulation. The Board shall take into account the recommendations of the Commission and other interested parties in the media field, in preparation of its work programme and main deliverables.
Amendment 692 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay and within 30 calendar daysa maximum time period to be defined in the Board´s rules of procedure, inform the requesting national authority or body about the actions taken or planned pursuant to paragraph 1, or justify the reasons for which action was not taken.
Amendment 693 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Member States shall entrust a relevant national regulatory authority or body with developing and maintaining a dedicated online database of state advertising, containing disaggregated data defined in paragraph 2.
Amendment 694 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Public authorities allocating public funds or any other consideration or advantage granted for the purpose of advertising shall submit the information defined in paragraph 1, to the national databases of state advertising established according to paragraph 3.
Amendment 695 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3 c (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall submit data provided according to paragraph 3 to the European Database of State advertising on quarterly basis.
Amendment 696 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. In the event of a disagreement between the requesting national authority or body and the requested authority or body regarding actions taken or planned, or a refusal to take action pursuant to paragraph 1, either authority or body may refer the matter to the Board for mediation in view of finding an amicable solution.
Amendment 701 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. The Board may designate permanent observers from amongst national regulatory authorities or bodies with competence in the media field, including those coming from non-EU countries which have entered into agreements with the Union to that effect. The observers shall not have voting rights.
Amendment 702 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4
Article 14 – paragraph 4
4. If no amicable solution has been found following mediation by the Board, the requesting national authority or body or the requested national authority or body may request the Board to issue an opinion on the matter. In its opinion the Board shall assess whether the requested authority or body has complied with a request referred to in paragraph 1. If the Board considers that the requested authority has not complied with such a request, the Board shall recommend actions to comply with the request. The Board shall issue its opinion, in agreement with the Commission, without undue delay.
Amendment 705 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5
Article 14 – paragraph 5
5. The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay and within 30 calendar days at the latesta maximum period to be defined in the Board´s rules of procedure from the receipt of the opinion referred to in paragraph 4, inform the Board, the Commission and the requesting authority or body of the actions taken or planned in relation to the opinion.
Amendment 710 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) making information accessible on the ownership structure of media service providers, as provided under Article 5(2) of Directive 2010/13/EU6 of this Regulation.
Amendment 713 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6
Article 10 – paragraph 6
6. The Board, in agreement with the Commission, may invite experts and observers to attend its meetings where necessary.
Amendment 714 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – title
Article 16 – title
16 Coordination of measures concerning media service providers establishedoriginating from outside the Union
Amendment 722 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall coordinate measures by national regulatory authorities or bodies related to the dissemination of or access to media services provided by media service providers establishedoriginating from outside the Union that target, irrespective of the means of distribution or access, target or reach audiences in the Union where, inter alia in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, such media services prejudice or present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and defence.
Amendment 723 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 8
Article 10 – paragraph 8
8. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights, in agreement with the Commission. The Board shall lay down, in its rules of procedure, the practical arrangements for the prevention and management of conflict of interests.
Amendment 724 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 729 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The Board, in agreement with the Commission, may issue opinions on appropriate national measures under paragraph 1. All competent national authorities, including the national regulatory authorities or bodies, shall do their utmost to take into account the opinions of the Board issued according to paragraph 1a and 1b. The competent authority or body shall provide reasons for any refusal to undertake the recommended actions.
Amendment 732 #
Amendment 733 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. When taking a decision regarding the jurisdiction (inter alia through licensing or registration) over an audiovisual media service provider originating from outside of the Union, the competent regulatory authority or body shall, without prejudice to the national legislation, do its utmost to take into account a set of basic principle-based criteria concerning the service and the service provider to be developed by the Board.
Amendment 735 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Member States shall ensure that, when relevant, national regulatory authorities or bodies, when deciding to take action against a media service provider originating from outside of the Union, have the legal basis to take into account: (i) a decision taken against that provider by a national regulatory authority or body from another Member State, and/or (ii) an opinion of the Board relating to that provider and taken on the grounds of this article
Amendment 739 #
2022/0277(COD)
1. The Board shall have a secretariat, which shall be provided by the Commissionbe supported by an independent bureau with sufficient budgetary and human resources.
Amendment 740 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers of very large online platforms shall provide a functionality allowing recipients of their services to declare that:ensure that their content moderation processes have adequate and sufficient personnel, linguistic range and cultural sensitivity and context-specific training, to ensure that freedom and pluralism of the media is not undermined.
Amendment 742 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 743 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 745 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 747 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Bureau of the European Board for Media Services (‘Bureau’) is hereby established as a body with legal personality.
Amendment 750 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. The main task of the secretariatBureau shall be to contribute to the execution of the tasks of the Board laid down in this Regulation and in Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 754 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. The secretariatBureau shall provide administrative and organisational support to the activities of the Board. The secretariat shall also assist the Board in carrying out its tasks.
Amendment 759 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Where a provider of very large online platform decides to suspend the provision of its online intermediation services in relation toremove content, particularly content providosted by a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Articleor linking to content under its editorial control, on the grounds that such content is incompatible with its terms and conditions, without that content otherwise contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX2065 [Digital Services Act], it shall take all possireasonable measures, to the extent consistent with their obligations under Union law, including Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX2065 [Digital Services Act], to communicate to the media service provider concernedentity that posted the content the statement of reasons accompanying that decision, as required by Article 4(17) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150,22/2065 [Digital Service Act], if possible prior to the suspension taking effect.
Amendment 766 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. Providers of very large online platforms shall take all the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that complaints under Article 1186 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 by media service providers that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article are processed and decided upon with priority and22/2065 [Digital Service Act] by representative bodies including those representing media service providers are decided upon without undue delay.
Amendment 772 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4
Article 17 – paragraph 4
4. Where a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 considers that a provider oftrends identified under Article 18 suggest that a very large online platform frequently restricts or suspends the provision of its services in relation to content providosted by thone or more media service provider(s) without sufficient grounds and in a manner that undermines media freedom and pluralism, the provider of very large online platform shall engage in a meaningful and effective dialogue with the media service provider(s), upon itstheir request, in good faith with a view to finding an amicable solution for terminating unjustified restrictions or suspensions and avoiding them in the future. The media service provider may notify the outcome of such exchanges to the Board.
Amendment 773 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The media service provider shall may immediately notify the outcome of any meaningful and effective dialogue such exchanges to the Board. To this end, the Board shall maintain a transparent, complete, up-to-date, public register documenting all procedures of this nature, including the name of the concerned media service providers and very large online platforms, as well as the number of meetings, meeting documents, and the outcomes of such dialogues.
Amendment 774 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Pursuant to the objectives laid out in paragraph 5, the Board shall be able to request additional documentation when it finds that the information provided by very large online platforms in the context of meaningful and effective dialogues is not sufficient or adequate.
Amendment 777 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) the number of instances where they imposed any restriction or suspension on the grounds that the content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article is incompatible with their terms and conditions; and
Amendment 779 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) advise the Commission, on its own initiative, or where requested by it, on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent application of this Regulation and implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU as well as all on other matters related to media services within its competence. Where the Commission requests advice or opinions from the Board, it may indicate a time limit, taking into account the urgency of the matter;
Amendment 783 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 6
Article 17 – paragraph 6
Amendment 784 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) on its own initiative or when requested by the Commission, provide opinions on the technical and factual issues that arise with regard to Article 2(5c), Article 3(2) and (3), Article 4(4), point (c) and Article 28a(7) of Directive 2010/13/EU;
Amendment 787 #
Amendment 789 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall regularly organise a structured dialogueforum between providers of very large online platforms, representatives of media service providers and representatives of civil society to discuss experience and best practices in the application of Article 17 of this Regulation, to foster access to diverse offers of independent media on very large online platforms and to monitor adherence to self-regulatory initiatives aimed at protecting society from harmful content, including disinformation and foreign information manipulation and interferencein particular, to identify numbers and trends related to the subject matter, volume, and affected parties.
Amendment 792 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
(e) in agreement with the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:
Amendment 793 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. The Board shall report on the results of the dialogueForum to the Commission.
Amendment 795 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – title
Article 19 – title
Right of customisation of audiovisual media offer
Amendment 796 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. Users shall have a right to easily change the default settings of any device or user interface controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services, including through the use of third party recommender systems, as defined in article 3 of Regulation 2022/2065, in order to customise the audiovisual media offer according to their interests or preferences in compliance with the law. This provision shall not affect national measures implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 801 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f
Amendment 801 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 a (new)
Article 19 a (new)
Article19a Right to identify the content of a media service 1. Recipients of media services shall have a right to easily identify the media service provider on any device or user interface controlling or managing access to and use of media services. 2. Manufacturers of devices and providers of user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of media services shall ensure that the identity of the media service provider bearing the editorial responsibility for the content or services is clearly visible alongside the content and services offered
Amendment 802 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – title
Article 20 – title
National measures affecting the provision and operation of media service providers
Amendment 807 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Any legislative, regulatory or administrative measure taken by a Member State that is liable to affect thenegatively affect the provision or operation of media service providers and media pluralism in the internal market shall be duly justified and proportionate. Such measures shall be reasoned, transparent, objective and non- discriminatory.
Amendment 809 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3
Article 20 – paragraph 3
3. Without prejudice and in addition to its right to effective judicial protection, any media service provider subject to an administrative or regulatory measure referred to in paragraph 1 that concerns it individually and directly shall have the right to appeal against that measure to an appellate body. That body shall be independent of the parties involved and of any external intervention or political pressure liable to jeopardise its independent assessment of matters coming before it. It shall have the appropriate expertise and funding to enable it to carry out its functions effectively. The European Commission or the Board may submit written observations during the course of proceedings before such a national appellate body and may, with the permission of the body in question, also make oral observations.
Amendment 813 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point i
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point i
(i) national measures which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services or have a significant impact on media pluralism, in accordance with Article 20(4) of this Regulation;
Amendment 814 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
4. The Board, upon request of the Commission, shalleither on its own initiative or upon request of the Commission or the media service provider affected by the measure, may draw up an opinion where a national legislative, regulatory or administrative measure is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. Following the opinion of the Board, and without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission may issue its own opinion on the matter. Opinions by the Board and, where applicable, by the Commission shall be made publicly available.
Amendment 817 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point ii
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point ii
(ii) media market concentrations which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services and that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence, in accordance with Article 22(1) of this Regulation;
Amendment 821 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) draw up opinions on draft national opinions or decisions assessing the impact on media pluralism and editorial independence of a notifiable media market concentration where such a concentration may affect the functioning of the internal marketaffecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence, in accordance with Article 21(5) of this Regulation;
Amendment 821 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 5
Article 20 – paragraph 5
5. Where a national authority or body adopts a measure that affects individually and directly a media service provider and is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, it shall communicate, at the request of the Board, and where applicable, of the Commission, without undue delay and by electronic means, any relevant information, including the summary of the facts, its measure, the grounds on which the national authority or body has based its measure, and, where applicable, the views of other authorities concernedthe timeline set out, and, the views of other authorities concerned. The Board shall provide recommendations addressed to the national authority or body adopting the measure with the aim to ensure that such measure is not having a significant impact on media pluralism. The national authority or body shall make every effort to comply with the recommendations from the Board. In particular, it shall inform the Board how it intends to comply with them and the timeline foreseen. In the event that a national authority or body does not comply or does not intend to comply, it shall inform the Board, stating its reasons. National authorities or bodies shall always publish and reason their decisions including rejection of complaints submitted to them. The recommendations from the Board and the follow-up from the national authority or body shall also be made publicly available.
Amendment 823 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – title
Article 21 – title
21 Assessment of media market concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence
Amendment 825 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Member States shall provide, in their national legal systems, substantive and procedural rules which ensure anthe conducting of ex-ante and ex-post quality assessments of media market concentrations affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence. These rules shall:
Amendment 826 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) issue guidelines and recommendations to promote a common methodology for the elaboration of the assessments of concentrations affecting the media market as referred to in Article 21 of this Regulation. The guidelines and recommendations shall be made publicly available.
Amendment 827 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) require the parties to a media market concentration affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence to notify that concentration in advance to the relevant national authorities or bodies;
Amendment 828 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g b (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g b (new)
(gb) on its own initiative, or upon request, conduct assessments of concentrations affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence, including existing concentrations at the entry into force of the present Regulation, in accordance with Article 22 of this Regulation.
Amendment 829 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d
(d) set out in advance objective, non- discriminatory and proportionate criteria for notifying media market concentrations affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence and for assessing the impact of media marketsuch concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independence.
Amendment 830 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g c (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g c (new)
(gc) monitor compliance with the guidelines and recommendations to promote a common methodology with the view of protecting and promoting media freedom and pluralism across the EU as referred to in paragraph (ga) of this Article.
Amendment 830 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) incorporate the guidelines and recommendations issued by the Board to conduct assessments regarding concentrations affecting the media market and to establish a follow-up system.
Amendment 833 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the impact of the concentration on media pluralism, including its effects on the formation of public opinion and on the diversity of media players on the market, taking into account the online environment and the parties’ interests, links or activities in other media or non-media businesses;
Amendment 834 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) the results of the risk assessment made by the annual Commission Rule of Law Report and its country-specific reports, as well as instruments such as the Media Pluralism Monitor to identify, analyse and assess any systemic risks to media freedom and media pluralism in the particular Member State;
Amendment 835 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the safeguards for editorial independence, including the impact of the concentration on the functioning of the editorial teams and the existence of measures by media service providers taken with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions, as well as national legislation and self-regulatory norms in this regard;
Amendment 839 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 3
Article 21 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission, assisted by the Board, mayshall issue guidelines on the factors to be taken into account when applying the criteria for assessing the impact of media market concentrations affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence by the national regulatory authorities or bodies in accordance with this article, as well as which criteria should take precedence or prevail in case of conflicts. It may request assistance from the Commission when fulfilling this function.
Amendment 840 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point l
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point l
(l) organise a structured dialogueforum between providers of very large online platforms, representatives of media service providers and of civil society, and report on its results to the Commission,other relevant stakeholders in accordance with Article 18 of this Regulation ;
Amendment 841 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point l a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point l a (new)
(la) under request or at its own initiative, the Board may provide mediation assistance in case of no agreement between media service providers providers and providers of very large online platforms pursuant to Article. 17(4)
Amendment 842 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m
(m) foster the exchange of best practices and encourage compliance with existing codes of conduct related to the deployment of audience measurement systems, in accordance with Article 23(5) of this Regulation.
Amendment 843 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4
Article 21 – paragraph 4
4. The national regulatory authority or body shall consult the Board in advance on any opinion or decision it aims to adopt assessing the impact on media pluralism and editorial independence of a notifiable media market concentration where such concentrations may affect the functioning of the internal marketa notifiable concentration affecting the media market that could have significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence.
Amendment 844 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
(ma) In so far as necessary in order to achieve the objectives set out in this Regulation and carry out its tasks, and without prejudice to the competences of the Member States and the institutions of the Union, the Board, in consultation agreement with the Commission, may cooperate with relevant Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory groups, with competent authorities of third countries and with international organisations. To that end, the Board may, subject to prior approval by the Commission, establish working arrangements. Working arrangement shall be publicly available and included in the annual report of the Board in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 10.
Amendment 844 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. The respective national regulatory authorities or bodies, at their own initiative or requested by the Board, shall conduct an ex-post evaluation of concentrations significantly affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence in order to assess the consequences of the NRAs’ decision and whether the effects of the merger should be reduced or eliminated ex post. During such an assessment national regulatory authorities or bodies shall gather information on the media landscape, assess the conditions under which the concentrations have been carried out, verify the extent to which such concentrations present dangers to the media pluralism and editorial independence, and issue proposals how to remedy such dangers. National independent authorities or bodies will report the result of the post-concentration evaluation to the Board.
Amendment 845 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 6 b (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. In case of media concentrations, National Competition Authorities and National Regulatory Authorities shall cooperate particularly when assessing their impact on media pluralism and media freedom. National Regulatory Authorities shall provide a reasoned opinion to such consultation. For concentrations distorting competition, National Competition Authorities shall impose proportionate remedies, such as structural remedies.
Amendment 846 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 6 c (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. The assessments and opinions referred to in this Article shall be made publicly available.
Amendment 847 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – title
Article 22 – title
22 Opinions on media marketAssessments of concentrations by the Board
Amendment 849 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m b (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m b (new)
(mb) establish and maintain the European Database for Media Ownership collecting informations provided by national regulatory authorities and bodies, in accordance with Article 6 of this Regulation
Amendment 852 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 1
1. In the absence of an assessment or a consultation and, if applicable, remedies pursuant to Article 21, the Board, upon request of the Commission, shall draw up an opinionassessment on the impact of a media market concentration affecting the media market on media pluralism and editorial independence, where a media market concentration is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. The Board shall base its opinionassessment on the elements set out in Article 21(2). The Board may bring media market concentrations likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services to the attention of the European Parliament and the Commission.
Amendment 853 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m c (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m c (new)
(mc) establish and maintain the European Database on State Advertising collecting informations provided by national regulatory authorities and bodies, in accordance with Article 24 of this Regulation
Amendment 854 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m d (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m d (new)
(md) organise a structured dialogue with representatives of media service providers, civil society, academia and other relevant stakeholders to cooperate and exchange information, experience and best practices on the implementation of this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU. The results of these consultations shall be reflected in the preparation of its work programme and main deliverables,and shall be publicly available.
Amendment 855 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Board shall take utmost account of input from civil society and industry groups when deciding whether to draw up an assessment on a concentration which would objectively impact the media market despite neither party being a media market service provider.
Amendment 856 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m e (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m e (new)
Amendment 856 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. When conducting its assessments, the Board shall take into account the assessments conducted by Member States pursuant to Article 21 of this Regulation, the findings of the Commission’s Annual Rule of Law report and its country- specific reports, as well as of those instruments such as the Media Pluralism Monitor, and it shall consult with the relevant stakeholders. The Board shall also take into account any other information that it may deem relevant for its assessment.
Amendment 857 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m f (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m f (new)
(mf) develop criteria, in consultation with media stakeholders, for the distribution of public funds through state financial support in accordance with article 24 of this Regulation, that ensure they are insulated from political interference.
Amendment 857 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. The Board shall prepare a report with the findings of its assessments, the methodology used and the follow-up recommendations.
Amendment 858 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m g (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m g (new)
(mg) examine the problem of interdependency between media service providers and the state created by financial flows from the state to media owners via state contracts through companies belonging to the same business group as the MSP, operating in other industries. The Board should draw up guidelines on how to prevent any conflict of interest arising from and its potential impact on editorial policy.
Amendment 858 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 d (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. The National Regulatory Authority who is addressed by the assessment shall report to the Board within 90 days concerning the measures it has taken to comply with the recommendations.
Amendment 859 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 e (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 1 e (new)
1e. The Board adopts a subsequent assessment concerning the National Regulatory Authority’s report and informs the Commission of the report and its opinion.
Amendment 860 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 2
2. Following the opinionassessment of the Board, and without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission may issue its own opinion on the matter.
Amendment 861 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3
Article 22 – paragraph 3
3. OpinionAssessments by the Board and, where applicable, the opinions by the Commission shall be made publicly available.
Amendment 862 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 a (new)
Article 22 a (new)
Amendment 863 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 b (new)
Article 22 b (new)
Amendment 864 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 c (new)
Article 22 c (new)
Article22c Delegated acts 1. The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article. 2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 22a and 22b shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [OP please insert the date = 6 months after the date of entry into force of this Regulation]. 3. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 22a and 22b may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force. 4. Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by each Member State in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making. 5. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council. 6. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 22a and 22b shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of one month of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by one month at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
Amendment 865 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. Audience measurement systems and methodologies shall comply with principles of transparency, impartiality, inclusiveness, proportionality, non- discrimination, comparability and verifiability.
Amendment 866 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Where a national regulatory authority or body considers that there is a serious and grave risk of prejudice to the functioning of the internal market for media services or a serious and grave risk of prejudice to rule of law and/or public security and defence, it may request other national regulatory authorities or bodies to provide accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, while ensuring compliance with fundamental rights, in particular freedom of expression.
Amendment 870 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Requests for cooperation, or mutual assistance, including accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, shall contain all the necessary information related to the request, including the purpose of and reasons for it., as specified in the Board´s Rules of Procedure
Amendment 872 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to the protection of undertakings’ business secretstrade secrets within the meaning of Article 2(1) of Directive (EU) 2016/943, providers of proprietary audience measurement systems shall provide, without undue delay and free of costs, to media service providers and advertisers, as well as to third parties authorised by media service providers and advertisers, accurate, detailed, comprehensive, intelligible and up-to-date information on the methodology used by their audience measurement systems. This provision shall not affect the Union’s data protection and privacy rules.
Amendment 873 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Article 23 – paragraph 3
3. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall encourage the drawing up of codes of conduct by pProviders of audience measurement systems, together with media service providers, their representative organisations, civil society and any other interested parties, shall draw up codes of conduct, with the support of national regulatory authorities or bodies that are intended to contribute to compliance with the principles referred to in paragraph 1, including by promoting independent and transparent audits. These codes of conduct should provide for regular, transparent and independent monitoring and evaluation of the achievement of these objectives. The codes of conduct should provide effective implementation including through proportionate sanctions where appropriate. In the drawing up of codes of conduct, special consideration should be given to small media to ensure proper measurements of their audiences.
Amendment 881 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5
Article 23 – paragraph 5
5. The Board shall foster the exchange of best practices related to the deployment of audience measurement systems through a regular dialogue between representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies, representatives of providers of audience measurement systems and media service providers, civil society organisations and other interested parties.
Amendment 882 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6
Article 13 – paragraph 6
6. The requested authority shall do its utmost to address and reply to the request without undue delay. The requested authority shall provide intermediary results within the period of 14 calendar days from the receipt of the request, with subsequent regular updates on the progress of execuFurther details on the procedure of the structured cooperation, including the rights and obligations of the request. In case of requests for accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, the requested authority shall address and reply to the request within 14 calendar daysparties as well as the deadlines to be respected, shall be defined in the Board’s rules of procedure.
Amendment 885 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 23 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. The obligations imposed under this Regulation are without prejudice to audiences’ right to protection of personal data as provided by Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights read in conjunction with Regulation 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation).
Amendment 887 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – title
Article 24 – title
24 Allocation of state advertisingTransparency regarding state advertising and other state financial support
Amendment 888 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 7
Article 13 – paragraph 7
7. Where the requesting authority does not consider the measures taken by the requested authority to be sufficient to address and reply to its request, it shall inform the requested authority without undue delay, explaining the reasons for its position. If the requested authority does not agree with that position, or if the requested authority’s reaction is missing, either authority may refer the matter to the Board. Within 14 calendar daysa time period to be defined in the Board´s Rules of procedure from the receipt of that referral, the Board shall issue, in agreement with the Commission, an opinion on the matter, including recommended actions. The requested authority shall do its outmost to take into account the opinion of the Board.
Amendment 893 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1
1. Public funds or any other consideration or advantage granallocated by public authorities to media service providers for the purposes of advertisingand providers of online platforms shall be awarded according to transparent, objective, proportionate and non- discriminatory criteria and through open, proportionate and non-discriminatory procedures. This Article shall not affect public procurement rules.
Amendment 894 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay and within 30 calendar daysa maximum time period to be defined in the Board´s rules of procedure , inform the requesting national authority or body about the actions taken or planned pursuant to paragraph 1, or justify the reasons for which action was not taken.
Amendment 895 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Prior to allocating state advertising and other state financial support resources to media service providers and providers of online platforms, public authorities shall ensure that the specific criteria employed to determine the allocation of state financial support according to paragraph 1 are made available to the public through electronic and user-friendly means. The national regulatory authorities' will consult national media stakeholders on the development of the criteria and methodology and hold consultations with the stakeholders on the results.
Amendment 899 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Public authorities, includingat Union, national, federal or, regional governmentsor local level, regulatory authorities or bodies, as well as state-owned enterprises or other state- controlled entities at the national or, regional level, or local governments of territorial entities of more than 1 million inhabitants, shall make publicly availablelevel, shall make publicly available through electronic and user-friendly means accurate, comprehensive, intelligible, detailed and yearly information about their advertising expenditureand other financial support allocated to media service providers and providers of online platforms, which shall include at least the following details:
Amendment 900 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. In the event of a disagreement between the requesting national authority or body and the requested authority or body regarding actions taken or planned, or a refusal to take action pursuant to paragraph 1, either authority or body may refer the matter to the Board for mediation in view of finding an amicable solution.
Amendment 903 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the legal names of media service providers and providers of online platforms from which advertising services were purchased or whom they have financially supported;
Amendment 906 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4
Article 14 – paragraph 4
4. If no amicable solution has been found following mediation by the Board, the requesting national authority or body or the requested national authority or body may request the Board to issue an opinion on the matter. In its opinion the Board shall assess whether the requested authority or body has complied with a request referred to in paragraph 1. If the Board considers that the requested authority has not complied with such a request, the Board shall recommend actions to comply with the request. The Board shall issue its opinion, in agreement with the Commission, without undue delay.
Amendment 906 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the total annual amount spent as well as the amounts spent per media service provider.
Amendment 908 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) the total amounts spent per media service provider and provider of online platforms.
Amendment 910 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In the two months preceding an election, no public funds or any other consideration or advantage shall be allocated by public authorities to media service providers and providers of online platforms, unless it concerns information relating to the procedures of the election.
Amendment 911 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5
Article 14 – paragraph 5
5. The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay and within 30 calendar days at the latesta maximum period to be defined in the Board´s rules of procedure from the receipt of the opinion referred to in paragraph 4, inform the Board, the Commission and the requesting authority or body of the actions taken or planned in relation to the opinion.
Amendment 914 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3
Article 24 – paragraph 3
3. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall monitor the allocation of state advertising in media marketfinancial support to media service providers and providers of online platforms. In order to assess the accuracy of the information on state advertising and other financial support made available pursuant to paragraph 2, national regulatory authorities or bodies may request from the entities referred to in paragraph 2 further information, including information on the application of criteria referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 919 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Member States shall entrust the national regulatory authorities or bodies with developing and maintaining dedicated online databases of state advertising and other financial support , containing disaggregated data defined in paragraph 2
Amendment 921 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Public authorities allocating state advertising and other financial support shall submit the information defined in paragraph 2, to the national databases established according to paragraph 3.
Amendment 922 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3 c (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall submit data provided according to paragraph 3 to the European Database of State advertising and other financial support on a quarterly basis.
Amendment 923 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3 d (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 3 d (new)
Amendment 924 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) making information accessible on the ownership structure of media service providers, as provided under Article 5(2) of Directive 2010/13/EU6 of this Regulation.
Amendment 924 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 4
Article 24 – paragraph 4
4. The allocation of state resources to media service providers and providers of online platforms for the purpose of purchasing goods or services from them other than state advertising shall be subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 1this Article. This Article shall not affect the application of the State aid rules.
Amendment 928 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Commission shall in its monitoring exercise take account of the Board’s reports, assessments and recommendations, input from civil society, the results from the Media Pluralism Monitor and the findings from Rule of Law Reports.
Amendment 929 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The monitoring exercise shall include, in particular:
Amendment 931 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) a detailed analysis of the resilience of media markets of allin Member States, including as regards the level of media concentration and risks of foreign information manipulation and interference;
Amendment 932 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) an overview and forward-looking assessment of the resilience of the internal market for media services as a whole, including as regards the degree of concentration of the market;
Amendment 933 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
(ca) an overview of the allocation of state advertising and state financial support to media service providers and providers of online platforms.
Amendment 934 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – title
Article 16 – title
Coordination of measures concerning media service providers establishedoriginating from outside the Union
Amendment 937 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c b (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c b (new)
(cb) an assessment of the rules and practices in the allocation of public subsidies to media services.
Amendment 939 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c c (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c c (new)
(cc) a detailed analysis around media pluralism and editorial independence at the European, national, regional and local levels.
Amendment 940 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c d (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c d (new)
(cd) a detailed analysis of the independence of National Authorities or bodies.
Amendment 941 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 1
1. By [fourtwo years after the entry into force of this Regulation] at the latest, and every fourtwo years thereafter, the Commission shall evaluate the implementation of this Regulation and report to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee about the findings and follow-up measures.
Amendment 943 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall coordinate measures by national regulatory authorities or bodies related to the dissemination of or access to media services provided by media service providers establishedoriginating from outside the Union that target, irrespective of the means of distribution or access, target or reach audiences in the Union where, inter alia in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, such media services prejudice or present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and defence.
Amendment 944 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 26 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. In carrying out the evaluations referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission shall evaluate, in particular, the effective implementation of and compliance with the obligations laid down in this Regulation.
Amendment 945 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Regarding media services provided by media service providers originating from outside of the Union, at the request of a minimum number of Board members to be defined in the Board’s Rules of procedure, the Board may issue an opinion on the coordination of measures.
Amendment 947 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Amendment 953 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The Board, in agreement with the Commission, may issue opinions on appropriate national measures under paragraph 1. All competent national authorities, including the national regulatory authorities or bodies, shall do their utmost to take into account the opinions of the Board issued according to paragraph 1a and 1b. The competent authority or body shall provide reasons for any refusal to undertake the recommended actions.
Amendment 959 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. When taking a decision regarding the jurisdiction (inter alia through licensing or registration) over an audiovisual media service provider originating from outside of the Union, the competent regulatory authority or body shall, without prejudice to the national legislation, do its utmost to take into account a set of basic principle-based criteria concerning the service and the service provider to be developed by the Board.
Amendment 962 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Member States shall ensure that, when relevant, national regulatory authorities or bodies, when deciding to take action against a media service provider originating from outside of the Union, have the legal basis to take into account: (i) a decision taken against that provider by a national regulatory authority or body from another Member State, and/or (ii) an opinion of the Board relating to that provider and taken on the grounds of this article
Amendment 973 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers of very large online platforms shall provide a functionality allowing recipients of their services to declare that:ensure that their content moderation processes have adequate and sufficient personnel, linguistic range and cultural sensitivity and context-specific training, to ensure that freedom and pluralism of the media is not undermined.
Amendment 977 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 983 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 986 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 1015 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Where a provider of very large online platform decides to suspend the provision of its online intermediation services in relation toremove content, particularly content provided posted by a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Articleor linking to content under its editorial control, on the grounds that such content is incompatible with its terms and conditions, without that content otherwise contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX 2065 [Digital Services Act], it shall take all possireasonable measures, to the extent consistent with their obligations under Union law, including Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX 2065 [Digital Services Act], to communicate to the media service provider concernedentity that posted the content the statement of reasons accompanying that decision, as required by Article 4 (17) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150,22 /2065 [Digital Services Act], if possible prior to the suspension taking effect.
Amendment 1025 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. Providers of very large online platforms shall take all the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that complaints under Article 1186 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 by media service providers that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article are processed and decided upon with priority and22 2065 [Digital Services Act] by representative bodies including those representing media service providers are decided upon without undue delay.
Amendment 1032 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4
Article 17 – paragraph 4
4. Where a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 considers that a provider oftrends identified under Article 18 suggest that a very large online platform frequently restricts or suspends the provision of its services in relation to content providosted by thone or more media service provider(s) without sufficient grounds and in a manner that undermines media freedom and pluralism, the provider of very large online platform shall engage in a meaningful and effective dialogue with the media service provider(s), upon itstheir request, in good faith with a view to finding an amicable solution for terminating unjustified restrictions or suspensions and avoiding them in the future. The media service provider may notify the outcome of such exchanges to the Board.
Amendment 1037 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The media service provider shall immediately notify the outcome of any meaningful and effective dialogue to the Board. To this end, the Board shall maintain a transparent, complete, up-to- date, public register documenting all procedures of this nature, including the name of the concerned media service providers and very large online platforms, as well as the number of meetings, meeting documents, and the outcomes of such dialogues.
Amendment 1039 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Pursuant to the objectives laid out in paragraph 5, the Board shall be able to request additional documentation when it finds that the information provided by very large online platforms in the context of meaningful and effective dialogues is not sufficient or adequate.
Amendment 1043 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) the number of instances where they imposed any restriction or suspension on the grounds that the content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article is incompatible with their terms and conditions; and
Amendment 1060 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 6
Article 17 – paragraph 6
Amendment 1069 #
Amendment 1072 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall regularly organise a structured dialogueForum between providers of very large online platforms, representatives of media service providers and representatives of civil society to discuss experience and best practices in the application of Article 17 of this Regulation, to foster access to diverse offers of independent media on very large online platforms and to monitor adherence to self-regulatory initiatives aimed at protecting society from harmful content, including disinformation and foreign information manipulation and interferencein particular, to identify numbers and trends related to the subject matter, volume, and affected parties.
Amendment 1080 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. The Board shall report on the results of the dialogueForum to the Commission.
Amendment 1081 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – title
Article 19 – title
Right of customisation of audiovisual media offer
Amendment 1084 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. Users shall have a right to easily change the default settings of any device or user interface controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services, including through the use of third party recommender systems, as defined in article 3 of Regulation 2022/2065, in order to customise the audiovisual media offer according to their interests or preferences in compliance with the law. This provision shall not affect national measures implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 1100 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 a (new)
Article 19 a (new)
Amendment 1103 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – title
Article 20 – title
National measures affecting the provision and operation of media service providers
Amendment 1113 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Any legislative, regulatory or administrative measure taken by a Member State that is liable to affect thenegatively affect the provision or operation of media service providers or media pluralism in the internal market, shall be duly justified and proportionate. Such measures shall be reasoned, transparent, objective and non- discriminatory.
Amendment 1125 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
4. The Board, upon request of the Commissioneither on its own initiative or upon request of the Commission or the media service provider affected by the measure, shall draw up an opinion where a national legislative, regulatory or administrative measure is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. Following the opinion of the Board, and without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission may issue its own opinion on the matter. Opinions by the Board and, where applicable, by the Commission shall be made publicly available.
Amendment 1135 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 5
Article 20 – paragraph 5
5. Where a national authority or body adopts a measure that affects individually and directly a media service provider and is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, it shall communicate, at the request of the Board, and where applicable, of the Commission, without undue delay and by electronic means, any relevant information, including the summary of the facts, its measure, the grounds on which the national authority or body has based its measure, and, where applicable, the views of other authorities concerned. the timeline set out, and the views of other authorities concerned. The Board shall provide recommendations addressed to the national authority or body adopting the measure with the aim to ensure that such measure is not having a significant impact on media pluralism. The national authority or body shall make every effort to comply with the recommendations from the Board. In particular, it shall inform the Board how it intends to comply with them and the timeline foreseen. In the event that a national authority or body does not comply or does not intend to comply, it shall inform the Board, stating its reasons. National authorities or bodies shall always publish and reason their decisions including rejection of complaints submitted to them. The recommendations from the Board and the follow-up from the national authority or body shall also be made publicly available.
Amendment 1144 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – title
Article 21 – title
21 Assessment of media market concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence
Amendment 1146 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Member States shall provide, in their national legal systems, substantive and procedural rules which ensure anthe conducting of ex-ante and ex-post quality assessments of media market concentrations affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence. These rules shall:
Amendment 1150 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) require the parties to a media market concentration affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence to notify that concentration in advance to the relevant national authorities or bodies;
Amendment 1159 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d
(d) set out in advance objective, non- discriminatory and proportionate criteria for notifying media market concentrations affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence and for assessing the impact of media marketsuch concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independence.
Amendment 1162 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) incorporate the guidelines and recommendations issued by the Board to conduct assessments regarding concentrations affecting the media market and to establish a follow-up system.
Amendment 1168 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the impact of the concentration on media pluralism, including its effects on the formation of public opinion and on the diversity of media players on the market, taking into account the online environment and the parties’ interests, links or activities in other media or non-media businesses;
Amendment 1169 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) the results of the risk assessment made by the annual Commission Rule of Law Report and its country-specific reports, as well as instruments such as the Media Pluralism Monitor to identify, analyse and assess any systemic risks to media freedom and media pluralism in the particular Member State;
Amendment 1172 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the safeguards for editorial independence, including the impact of the concentration on the functioning of the editorial teams and the existence of measures by media service providers taken with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions, as well as national legislation and self-regulatory norms in this regard;
Amendment 1183 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 3
Article 21 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission, assisted by the Board, mayshall issue guidelines on the factors to be taken into account when applying the criteria for assessing the impact of media market concentrations affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence by the national regulatory authorities or bodies in accordance with this article, as well as which criteria should take precedence or prevail in case of conflicts. It may request assistance from the Commission when fulfilling this function.
Amendment 1190 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4
Article 21 – paragraph 4
4. The national regulatory authority or body shall consult the Board in advance on any opinion or decision it aims to adopt assessing the impact on media pluralism and editorial independence of a notifiable media market concentration where such concentrations may affect the functioning of the internal market.a notifiable concentrations affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence
Amendment 1198 #
2022/0277(COD)
6a. The respective national regulatory authorities or bodies, at their own initiative or requested by the Board, shall conduct an ex-post evaluation of concentrations significantly affecting the media market that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence in order to assess the consequences of the NRAs’ decision and whether the effects of the merger should be reduced or eliminated ex post. During such an assessment national regulatory authorities or bodies shall gather information on the media landscape, assess the conditions under which the concentrations have been carried out, verify the extent to which such concentrations present dangers to the media pluralism and editorial independence, and issue proposals how to remedy such dangers. National independent authorities or bodies will report the result of the post-concentration evaluation to the Board.
Amendment 1200 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 6 b (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. In case of media concentrations, National Competition Authorities and National Regulatory Authorities shall cooperate particularly when assessing their impact on media pluralism and media freedom. National Regulatory Authorities shall provide a reasoned opinion to such consultation. For concentrations distorting competition, National Competition Authorities shall impose proportionate remedies, such as structural remedies.
Amendment 1201 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 6 c (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. The assessments and opinions referred to in this Article shall be made publicly available.
Amendment 1202 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – title
Article 22 – title
22 Opinions on media marketAssessments of concentrations by the Board
Amendment 1206 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 1
1. In the absence of an assessment or a consultation and, if applicable, remedies pursuant to Article 21, the Board, upon request of the Commission, shall draw up an opinionassessment on the impact of a media market concentration affecting the media market on media pluralism and editorial independence, where a media market concentration is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. The Board shall base its opinionassessment on the elements set out in Article 21(2). The Board may bring media market concentrations likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services to the attention of the European Parliament and to the Commission.
Amendment 1212 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Board shall take utmost account of input from civil society and industry groups when deciding whether to draw up an assessment on a concentration which would objectively impact the media market despite neither party being a media market service provider.
Amendment 1214 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. When conducting its assessments, the Board shall take into account the assessments conducted by Member States pursuant to Article 21 of this Regulation, the findings of the Commission’s Annual Rule of Law report and its country- specific reports, as well as of those instruments such as the Media Pluralism Monitor, and it shall consult with the relevant stakeholders. The Board shall also take into account any other information that it may deem relevant for its assessment.
Amendment 1215 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. The Board shall prepare a report with the findings of its assessments, the methodology used and the follow-up recommendations.
Amendment 1216 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 d (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. The National Regulatory Authority who is addressed by the opinion assessment shall report to the Board within 90 days concerning the measures it has taken to comply with the recommendations
Amendment 1217 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 e (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 1 e (new)
1e. The Board adopts a subsequent assessment concerning the National Regulatory Authority’s report and informs the Commission of the report and its opinion.
Amendment 1219 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 2
2. Following the opinionassessment of the Board, and without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission may issue its own opinion on the matter.
Amendment 1222 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3
Article 22 – paragraph 3
3. OpinionAssessments by the Board and, where applicable, the opinions by the Commission shall be made publicly available.
Amendment 1224 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 a (new)
Article 22 a (new)
Amendment 1225 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 b (new)
Article 22 b (new)
Amendment 1226 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 c (new)
Article 22 c (new)
Article22c Delegated acts 1. The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article. 2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 22a and 22b shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [OP please insert the date = 6 months after the date of entry into force of this Regulation]. 3. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 22a and 22b may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force. 4. Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by each Member State in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making. 5. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council. 6. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 22a and 22b shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of one month of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by one month at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
Amendment 1228 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. Audience measurement systems and methodologies shall comply with principles of transparency, impartiality, inclusiveness, proportionality, non- discrimination, comparability and verifiability.
Amendment 1240 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to the protection of undertakings’ business secretstrade secrets within the meaning of Article 2(1) of Directive (EU) 2016/943, providers of proprietary audience measurement systems shall provide, without undue delay and free of costs, to media service providers and advertisers, as well as to third parties authorised by media service providers and advertisers, accurate, detailed, comprehensive, intelligible and up-to-date information on the methodology used by their audience measurement systems. This provision shall not affect the Union’s data protection and privacy rules.
Amendment 1244 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Article 23 – paragraph 3
3. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall encourage the drawing up of codes of conduct by pProviders of audience measurement systems, together with media service providers, their representative organisations, civil society and any other interested parties, shall draw up codes of conduct, with the support of national regulatory authorities or bodies that are intended to contribute to compliance with the principles referred to in paragraph 1, including by promoting independent and transparent audits. These codes of conduct should provide for regular, transparent and independent monitoring and evaluation of the achievement of these objectives. The codes of conduct should provide effective implementation including through proportionate sanctions where appropriate. In the drawing up of codes of conduct, special consideration should be given to small media to ensure proper measurements of their audiences.
Amendment 1257 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5
Article 23 – paragraph 5
5. The Board shall foster the exchange of best practices related to the deployment of audience measurement systems through a regular dialogue between representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies, representatives of providers of audience measurement systems and media service providers , civil society organisations and other interested parties.
Amendment 1260 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 23 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. The obligations imposed under this Regulation are without prejudice to audiences’ right to protection of personal data as provided by Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights read in conjunction with Regulation 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation).
Amendment 1261 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – title
Article 24 – title
Amendment 1267 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1
1. Public funds or any other consideration or advantage granallocated by public authorities to media service providers for the purposes of advertisingand providers of online platforms shall be awarded according to transparent, objective, proportionate and non- discriminatory criteria and through open, proportionate and non-discriminatory procedures. This Article shall not affect public procurement rules.
Amendment 1269 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Prior to allocating state advertising and other state financial support to media service providers and providers of online platforms, public authorities shall ensure that the specific criteria employed to determine the allocation of state financial support according to paragraph 1 are made available to the public through electronic and user-friendly means.The national regulatory authorities will consult national media stakeholders on the development of the criteria and methodology and hold consultations with the stakeholders on the results.
Amendment 1276 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Public authorities, includingat Union, national, federal or, regional or local level governments, regulatory authorities or bodies, as well as state- owned enterprises or other state- controlled entities at the national or, regional level, or local governments of territorial entities of more than 1 million inhabitants, shall make publicly availablelevel, shall make publicly available through electronic and user-friendly means accurate, comprehensive, intelligible, detailed and yearly information about their advertising expenditureand other financial support allocated to media service providers and providers of online platforms, which shall include at least the following details:
Amendment 1284 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the legal names of media service providers and providers of online platforms from which advertising services were purchased ;or whom they have financially supported;
Amendment 1289 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the total annual amount spent as well as the amounts spent per media service provider.;
Amendment 1291 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) the amounts spent per media service provider and provider of online platforms;
Amendment 1294 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In the two months preceding an election, no public funds or any other consideration or advantage shall be allocated by public authorities to media service providers and providers of online platforms unless it concerns information relating to the procedures of the election.
Amendment 1298 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3
Article 24 – paragraph 3
3. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall monitor the allocation of state advertising in media marketfinancial support to media service providers and providers of online platforms. In order to assess the accuracy of the information on state advertising and other financial support made available pursuant to paragraph 2, national regulatory authorities or bodies may request from the entities referred to in paragraph 2 further information, including information on the application of criteria referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 1305 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Member States shall entrust the national regulatory authorities or bodies with developing and maintaining dedicated online databases of state advertising and other financial support , containing disaggregated data defined in paragraph 2
Amendment 1308 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Public authorities allocating state advertising and other financial support shall submit the information defined in paragraph 2, to the national databases established according to paragraph 3
Amendment 1309 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3 c (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall submit data provided according to paragraph 3 to the European Database of State advertising and other financial support on a quarterly basis.
Amendment 1310 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3 d (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Member states shall publish, on an annual basis, details of all contracts with state bodies, to business groupings and their beneficial owners, which own media. This report should be published alongside the yearly National Regulatory Authorities reports on state advertising and other financial support.
Amendment 1312 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 4
Article 24 – paragraph 4
4. The allocation of state resources to media service providers and providers of online platforms for the purpose of purchasing goods or services from them other than state advertising shall be subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 1this Article. This Article shall not affect the application of the State aid rules.
Amendment 1318 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Commission shall in its monitoring exercise take account of the Board’s reports, assessments and recommendations, input from civil society, the results from the Media Pluralism Monitor and the findings from Rule of Law Reports.
Amendment 1319 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The monitoring exercise shall include, in particular:
Amendment 1325 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) a detailed analysis of the resilience of media markets of allin Member States, including as regards the level of media concentration and risks of foreign information manipulation and interference;
Amendment 1326 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) an overview and forward-looking assessment of the resilience of the internal market for media services as a whole, including as regards the degree of concentration of the market;
Amendment 1331 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
(ca) an overview of the allocation of state advertising and state financial support to media service providers and providers of online platforms
Amendment 1336 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c b (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c b (new)
(cb) an assessment of the rules and practices in the allocation of public subsidies to media services.
Amendment 1339 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c c (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c c (new)
(cc) a detailed analysis around media pluralism and editorial independence at the European, national, regional and local levels
Amendment 1342 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c d (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c d (new)
(cd) a detailed analysis of the independence of National Authorities or bodies.
Amendment 1347 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 1
1. By [fourtwo years after the entry into force of this Regulation] at the latest, and every two four years thereafter, the Commission shall evaluate the implementation of this Regulation and report to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee about the findings and follow-up measures.
Amendment 1352 #
2022/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 26 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. In carrying out the evaluations referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission shall evaluate, in particular, the effective implementation of and compliance with the obligations laid down in this Regulation.
Amendment 60 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) This Regulation ensures a high level of cybersecurity of products with digital elements. It does not regulate services, such as Software-as-a-Service (SaaS), except for, processes and ancillary services. The definition and regulatory scope for products with digital elements should also include remote data processing solutions relating to awhich are necessary for products with digital elements understood as any data processing at a distance for whichto perform their functions. Remote data processing solutions should be understood as any data processing at a distance, irrespective of whether data is processed or stored locally on the device of the user or remotely. Moreover, manufacturers shall remain responsible for the software which is designed and developed, as well as customised or substantially modified by the manufacturer of the product concerned or under the control or responsibility of that manufacturer, and the absence of which would prevent such a product with digital elements from performing one of its functions. Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) shall constitute remote data processing solutions within the meaning of this Regulation to the extent that is inextricably linked to the performing one the product functions. For instance, websites or cloud service models supporting the functionality of products with digital elements fall in the scope of this Regulation. [Directive XXX/XXXX (NIS2)] puts in place cybersecurity and incident reporting requirements for essential and important entities, such as critical infrastructure, with a view to increasing the resilience of the services they provide. [Directive XXX/XXXX (NIS2)] applies to cloud computing services and cloud service models, such as SaaS. All entities providing cloud computing services in the Union that meet or exceed the threshold for medium-sized enterprises fall in the scope of that Directive. Where the manufacturer employs such cloud solutions which are not covered by NIS 2 or uses a custom implementation of a cloud service model, the requirements in this Regulation should be applicable.
Amendment 62 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9 a) Software and data that are openly shared and where users can freely access, use, modify and redistribute them or modified versions thereof, can contribute to research and innovation in the market. Research by the Commission also shows that free and open-source software can contribute between €65 billion to €95 billion to the Union’s GDP and that it can provide significant growth opportunities for the European economy. Users are allowed to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve software and data, including models by way of free and open- source licences. To foster the development and deployment of free and open source software, especially by SMEs, start-ups, non-profits, academic research but also by individuals, this Regulation should not apply to such free and open-source software components, except in very specific cases. We must take into account the fact that different development models of software distributed and developed under public licences exist, having a wide range of different roles in such development models. Developers of free and open-source software components should not be mandated under this Regulation to comply with requirements targeting the product value chain and, in particular, not towards the manufacturer that has used that free and open-source software component in a commercial product. Developers of free and open- source software components, as well as all manufacturers that are not subject to stricter compliance rules, should however be encouraged to implement the provisions of Annex I, as a way to increase security, allowing the promotion of trustworthy products with digital elements in the Union.
Amendment 65 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) In order not to hamper innovation or research, free and open-source software developed or supplied outside the course of a commercial activity should not be covered by this Regulation. This is in particular the case for software, including its source codNeither the collaborative development of free and open-source software components nor making them available on open repositories should constitute a placing on the market or putting into service. As such, most package mand modified versions, that is openly shared and freely accessible, usable, modifiable and redistributable. In the context of software, a commercial activity mightagers, code hosting, and collaboration platforms do not make software products available on the market as distributors within this Regulation. A commercial activity, within the understanding of making available on the market, might however be characterizsed not only by charging a price for a product, but also byfree and open- source software component, but also by monetisation like charging a price for technical support services, paid software updates, by providing a software platform through which the manufacturprovider monetises other servicessoftware (such as an App Store), or by the use of personal data for reasons other than exclusively for improving the security, compatibility or interoperability of the software. Unrelated consulting services, membership fees and not for profit sponsorships do not constitute monetisation within the scope of this Regulation. When open-source software is integrated into a final product with digital elements that is placed on the market, the economic operator that has placed the final product with digital elements on the market shall be responsible for the compliance of the product including of the free and open-source components.
Amendment 79 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In order to ensure that products with digital elements, when placed on the market, do not pose cybersecurity risks to persons and organisations, essential requirements should be set out for such products. When the products are subsequently modified, by physical or digital means, in a way that is not foreseen by the manufacturer and that may imply that they no longer meet the relevant essential requirements, the modification should be considered as substantial. For example, software updates or repairs such as minor adjustment of the source code that can improve the security and functioning, could be assimilated to maintenance operations provided that they do not modify a product already placed on the market in such a way that compliance with the applicable requirements may be affected, or that the intended use for which the product has been assessed may be changed. As is the case for physical repairs or modifications, a product with digital elements should be considered as substantially modified by a software change where the software update modifies the original intended functions, type or performance of the product and these changes were not foreseen in the initial risk assessment, or the nature of the hazard has changed or the level of risk has increased because of the software update.
Amendment 82 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 a (new)
Recital 24 a (new)
(24 a) Manufacturers of products with digital elements should ensure that software updates are provided in a clear and transparent way and clearly differentiate between security and functionality updates. Whilst security updates are designed to decrease the level of risk of a product with digital elements, the uptake of functionality updates provided by the manufacturer should always remain a user choice. Manufacturers should therefore provide these updates separately, unless technically unfeasible. Manufacturers should provide consumers with adequate information on the reasons behind each update and its foreseen impact on the product, as well as a clear and easy-to-use opt-out mechanism.
Amendment 84 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Products with digital elements should be considered critical if the negative impact of the exploitation of potential cybersecurity vulnerabilities in the product can be severe due to, amongst others, the cybersecurity-related functionality, or the intended use or the size of market penetration of a particular product. . In particular, vulnerabilities in products with digital elements that have a cybersecurity- related functionality, such as secure elements, can lead to a propagation of security issues throughout the supply chain or society. The severity of the impact of a cybersecurity incident may also increase when taking into account the intended use of the product, such as in an industrial setting or in the context of an essential entity of the type referred to in Annex [Annex I] to Directive [Directive XXX/ XXXX (NIS2)], or for the performance of critical or sensitive functions, such as processing of personal dataimpacting health, safety or fundamental rights.
Amendment 87 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) This Regulation addresses cybersecurity risks in a targeted manner. Products with digital elements might, however, pose other safety risks, that are not always related to cybersecurity but can be a consequence of a security breach. Those risks should continue to be regulated by other relevant Union product legislation as a rule if a higher level of protection is conferred. If not, safety risks in connection with the cybersecurity functions of products with digital elements should fall within the scope of this Regulation. If no other Union harmonisation legislation is applicable, they should be subject to Regulation [General Product Safety Regulation]. Therefore, in light of the targeted nature of this Regulation, as a derogation from Article 2(1), third subparagraph, point (b), of Regulation [General Product Safety Regulation], Chapter III, Section 1, Chapters V and VII, and Chapters IX to XI of Regulation [General Product Safety Regulation] should apply to products with digital elements with respect to safety risks not covered by this Regulation, if those products are not subject to specific requirements imposed by other Union harmonisation legislation within the meaning of [Article 3, point (25) of the General Product Safety Regulation].
Amendment 90 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
Amendment 92 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Regulation [European Health Data Space Regulation proposal] complements the essential requirements laid down in this Regulation. The electronic health record systems (‘EHR systems’) falling under the scope of Regulation [European Health Data Space Regulation proposal] which are products with digital elements within the meaning of this Regulation should therefore also comply with the essential requirements set out in this Regulation. T and their manufacturers should demonstrate conformity as required by Regulation [European Health Data Spacethis Regulation proposal]. To facilitate compliance, manufacturers may draw up a single technical documentation containing the elements required by both legal acts. As this Regulation does not cover SaaS as such, EHR systems offered through the SaaS licensing and delivery model are not within the scope of this Regulation. Similarly, EHR systems that are developed and used in-house are not within the scope of this Regulation, as they are not placed on the market.
Amendment 95 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32 a (new)
Recital 32 a (new)
(32 a) In order to ensure the products are designed, developed and produced in line with essential requirements foreseen in Section 1 of Annex I, manufacturers should exercise due diligence when integrating components sourced from third parties in products with digital elements. Given that such components are tailored to and integrated taken into account the specificities of the product, in particular in the case of free and open source software that have not been placed on the market in exchange of financial or other type of monetisation, the manufacturer of the product shall be responsible for ensuring its compliance.
Amendment 99 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) Manufacturers should also report to ENISA any incident having an impact on the security of the product with digital elements. Notwithstanding the incident reporting obligations in Directive [Directive XXX/XXXX (NIS2)] for essential and important entities, it is crucial for ENISA, the single points of contact designated by the Member States in accordance with Article [Article X] of Directive [Directive XXX/XXXX (NIS2)] and the market surveillance authorities to receive information from the manufacturers of products with digital elements allowing them to assess the security of these products. In order to ensure that users can react quickly to incidents having an impact on the security of their products with digital elements, manufacturers should also inform their users about any such incident and, where applicable, about any corrective measures that the users can deploy to mitigate the impact of the incident, for example by publishing relevant information on their websites or, where the manufacturer is able to contact the users and where justified by the risks, by reaching out to the users directly. Manufacturers that identify vulnerability in a component integrated in a product with digital elements, including in a free and open source component should report the vulnerability to the person or entity maintaining the component together with the corrective measure taken, and provide the corresponding code under a free and open source licence.
Amendment 102 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) As a general rule the requirements for the conformity assessment of products with digital elements should be risk-based and to that regard in many cases the assessment could be carried out by the manufacturer under its own responsibility following the procedure based on Module A of Decision 768/2008/EC. The manufacturer should retain flexibility to choose a stricter conformity assessment procedure involving a third-party. If the product is classified as a critical product of class I, additional assurance is required to demonstrate conformity with the essential requirements set out in this Regulation. The manufacturer should apply harmonised standards, common specifications or cybersecurity certification schemes under Regulation (EU) 2019/881 which have been identified by the Commission in an implementing act, if it wants to carry out the conformity assessment under its own responsibility (module A). If the manufacturer does not apply such harmonised standards, common specifications or cybersecurity certification schemes, the manufacturer should undergo conformity assessment involving a third party. Taking into account the administrative burden on manufacturers and the fact that cybersecurity plays an important role in the design and development phase of tangible and intangible products with digital elements, conformity assessment procedures respectively based on modules B+C or module H of Decision 768/2008/EC have been chosen as most appropriate for assessing the compliance of critical products with digital elements in a proportionate and effective manner. The manufacturer that carries out the third- party conformity assessment can choose the procedure that suits best its design and production process. Given the even greater cybersecurity risk linked with the use of products classified as critical class II products, the conformity assessment should always involve a third party.
Amendment 107 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 69
Recital 69
(69) Economic operators should be provided with a sufficient time to adapt to the requirements of this Regulation. This Regulation should apply [124 months] from its entry into force, with the exception of the reporting obligations concerning actively exploited vulnerabilities and incidents, which should apply [12 months] from the entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 112 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) rules on market monitoring, market surveillance and enforcement of the above- mentioned rules and requirements.
Amendment 117 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. This Regulation shall not apply to software provided under free and open- source licences, including its source code and modified versions, except when such software is provided as a paid or monetised product. The compliance of free and open-source components of products shall be ensured by the manufacturer of the product.
Amendment 123 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘product with digital elements’ means any software or hardware product and itsits ancillary services, including remote data processing solutions, includingand software or hardware components to be placed on the market separately;
Amendment 132 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 18
(18) ‘manufacturer’ means any natural or legal person who develops or manufactures products with digital elements or has products with digital elements designed, developed or manufactured, and markets them under his or her name or trademark, whether for payment or free of chargemonetisation;
Amendment 133 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23
(23) ‘making available on the market’ means any supply of a product with digital elements for distribution or use on the Union market in the course of a commercial activity, whetherand in return for payment or free of charge;
Amendment 144 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. At trade fairs, exhibitions and demonstrations or similar events, Member States shall not prevent the presentation and use of a prototype product with digital elements or a software, which does not comply with this Regulation, provided that the availability is limited in time and geographical area and is supplied exclusively for testing.
Amendment 147 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Amendment 149 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) they meet the essential requirements set out in Section 1 of Annex I, under the condition that they are properly installed, maintained, used for their intended purpose or under conditions which can reasonably be foreseen, and, where applicable, provided with the necessary security and functionality updateds, and
Amendment 155 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission is empowered to adopt a delegated act in accordance with Article 50 to supplement this Regulation by specifying the definitions of the product categories under class I and class II as set out in Annex III. The delegated act shall be adopted [by 126 months since the entry into force of this Regulation].
Amendment 157 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. Critical products with digital elements shall be subject to the conformity assessment procedures referred to in Article 24(2) and (3). By exception, small and micro enterprises can use the procedure referred to in Article 24(2).
Amendment 175 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. For the purposes of complying with the obligation laid down in paragraph 1, manufacturers shall exercise due diligence when integrating components sourced from third parties in products with digital elements. They shallIt falls upon the manufacturer to ensure that such components do not compromise the security of the product with digital elements, in particular in the case of open source software that have not been placed on the market by charging a price or by the use of personal data for reasons other than exclusively for improving the security, compatibility or interoperability of the software. The due diligence obligation can be considered fulfilled if all components have been already deemed compliant and the CE marking has been affixed to them as appropriate.
Amendment 178 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
When placing a product with digital elements on the market, and for the expected product lifetime or for a period of five years from the placing of the product on the market, whichever is shorter, manufacturers shall ensure that vulnerabilities of that product are handled effectively and in accordance with the essential requirements set out in Section 2 of Annex I. When the expected product lifetime is shorter than 5 years, and the manufacturer is unable to continue to ensure that vulnerabilities of the product are handled effectively and in accordance with the essential requirements set out in Section 2 of Annex I, it shall publish the source code under free and open source license.
Amendment 183 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 8
Article 10 – paragraph 8
8. Manufacturers shall keep the technical documentation and the EU declaration of conformity, where relevant, at the disposal of the market surveillance authorities for at least ten years after the product with digital elements has been placed on the market.
Amendment 185 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 9 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Manufacturers shall publicly communicate and advertise the expected product lifetime of their products, in a clear and understandable manner, and in particular the minimal duration of the provision of security updates.
Amendment 188 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 12
Article 10 – paragraph 12
12. From the placing on the market and for the expected product lifetime or for a period of five years after the placing on the market of a product with digital elements, whichever is shorter, manufacturers who know or have reason to believe that the product with digital elements or the processes put in place by the manufacturer are not in conformity with the essential requirements set out in Annex I shall immediately take the corrective measures necessary to bring that product with digital elements or the manufacturer’s processes into conformity, to withdraw or to recall the product, as appropriateor publish the source code under free and open source license with this information in order to encourage research and innovation.
Amendment 190 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 15
Article 10 – paragraph 15
15. The Commission may, by means of implementingdelegated acts, specify the format and elements of the software bill of materials set out in Section 2, point (1), of Annex I. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 51(2).
Amendment 195 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. The manufacturer shall, without undue delay and in any event within 24 hours of becoming aware of it, notify to ENISA any actively exploited vulnerability contained in the product with digital elements. The notification shall include details concerning that vulnerability and, where applicable, any corrective or mitigating measures taken and the recommended risk mitigation measures. ENISA shall, without undue delay, unless for justified cybersecurity risk-related grounds, forward the notification to the CSIRT designated for the purposes of coordinated vulnerability disclosure in accordance with Article [Article X] of Directive [Directive XXX/XXXX (NIS2)] of Member States concerned upon receipt and inform the market surveillance authority about the notified vulnerabilityexistence of a vulnerability and where applicable, the potential risk mitigation measures.
Amendment 204 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Article 11 – paragraph 4
4. The manufacturer shall inform, without undue delay and after becoming aware, the users of the product with digital elements about the incident and, where necessary, about risk mitigation and any corrective measures that the user can deploy to mitigate the impact of the incident.
Amendment 208 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 7
Article 11 – paragraph 7
7. Manufacturers shall, upon identifying a vulnerability in a component, including in an open source component, which is integrated in the product with digital elements, report the vulnerability and the corrective or mitigating measure taken, to the person or entity maintaining the component. Such corrective or mitigating measures shall be accompanied by the relevant code and appropriate licenses that allow the deployment. This does not release the manufacturer from the obligation to maintain the compliance of the product with the requirements of this Regulation, nor does it create obligations for the developers of free and open source components that have no contractual relation to the said manufacturer.
Amendment 209 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 a (new)
Article 11 a (new)
Article 11 a Single point of contact for users 1. Manufacturers shall designate a single point of contact to enable users to communicate directly and rapidly with them, where applicable by electronic means and in a user-friendly manner, including by allowing recipients of the service to choose the means of communication, which shall not solely rely on automated tools. 2. In addition to the obligations provided under Directive 2000/31/EC, manufacturers shall make public the information necessary for the end users in order to easily identify and communicate with their single points of contact. That information shall be easily accessible and shall be kept up to date.
Amendment 210 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) all the documents proving the fulfilment of the requirements set in this article have been received from the manufacturer and are available for inspection.
Amendment 211 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Importers who know or have reason to believe that a product with digital elements, which they have placed on the market, or the processes put in place by its manufacturer, are not in conformity with the essential requirements set out in Annex I shall immediately take the corrective measures necessary to bring that product with digital elements or the processes put in place by its manufacturer into conformity with the essential requirements set out in Annex I, or to withdraw or recall the product, if appropriate. Based on a risk assessment, distributors and end users shall be timely informed of the lack of compliance and the risk mitigation measures they can take.
Amendment 212 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(b a) they have received from the importer all the information and documentation required by this regulation.
Amendment 213 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
A natural or legal person, other than the manufacturer, the importer or the distributor, that carries out a substantial modification of the product with digital elements and makes the product available on the market, shall be considered a manufacturer for the purposes of this Regulation.
Amendment 215 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Economic operators shall, on request and where the information is available, provide to the market surveillance authorities the following information:
Amendment 230 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. The technical documentation shall be drawn up before the product with digital elements is placed on the market and shall be continuously updated, where appropriate, during the expected product lifetime or during a period of five years after the placing on the market of a product with digital elements, whichever is shortlonger.
Amendment 239 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 5
Article 24 – paragraph 5
5. Notified bodies shall take into account the specific interests and needs of micro, small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) when setting the fees for conformity assessment procedures and reduce those fees proportionately to their specific interests and needs. The Commission shall take appropriate measures to ensure more accessible and affordable procedures, such as establishing a framework for providing appropriate financial support and guidance for the notified bodies.
Amendment 243 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Member States shall notify the Commission and the other Member States of conformity assessment bodies authorised to carry out conformity assessments in accordance with this Regulation. Member States and the Commission shall put in place appropriate measures to ensure sufficient availability of skilled professionals, in order to minimise bottlenecks in the activities pursuant to articles 26 to 31.
Amendment 248 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 12
Article 29 – paragraph 12
12. Conformity assessment bodies shall operate in accordance with a set of consistent, fair and reasonable terms and conditions, in particular taking into account the interests of SMEmicro, small and medium enterprises in relation to fees.
Amendment 257 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 3
Article 41 – paragraph 3
3. Where relevant, the market surveillance authorities shall cooperate with the national cybersecurity certification authorities designated under Article 58 of Regulation (EU) 2019/881 and exchange information on a regular basis. With respect to the supervision of the implementation of the reporting obligations pursuant to Article 11 of this Regulation, the designated market surveillance authorities shall cooperate with ENISA.
Amendment 258 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 41 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. With respect to the supervision of the implementation of the reporting obligations pursuant to Article 11 of this Regulation, the designated market surveillance authorities shall cooperate with ENISA. The market surveillance authorities may request ENISA to provide technical advice on matters related to the implementation and enforcement of this Regulation. When conducting an investigation under Article 43, market surveillance authorities may request ENISA to provide non-binding evaluations of compliance of products with digital elements.
Amendment 263 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 11 a (new)
Article 41 – paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Market surveillance authorities shall facilitate the active participation of stakeholders in market surveillance activities, including scientific, research and consumer organisations, by establishing a clear and accessible mechanism to facilitate the voluntary reporting of vulnerabilities, incidents, and cyber threats.
Amendment 264 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 a (new)
Article 41 a (new)
Article 41 a Expert group on technical matters 1. The Commission shall establish an expert group in order to provide technical advice to the Commission and competent authorities on matters related to in the implementation and enforcement of this Regulation. In particular, the expert group shall provide non-binding evaluations of products with digital elements upon request by a market surveillance authority that is conducting an investigation under Article 43 and guidance on the application of relevant concepts to software and the exclusion of free and open source software. 2. The expert group shall consist of independent experts appointed for a renewable three-year term by the Commission on the basis of their scientific or technical expertise in the field. The Commission shall appoint a number of experts which is deemed sufficient to fulfil the foreseen needs, ensuring that their professional background and affiliations result in a balanced representation of stakeholder interests, in particular open source organisations, national accreditation bodies, conformity assessment bodies pursuant to Regulation (EC) 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council, data protection authorities, as well as academia and consumer organisations. 3. The Commission shall take the necessary measures to manage and prevent any conflicts of interest. The Declarations of interests of the members of the expert group shall be made publicly available. 4. The appointed experts shall perform their tasks with the highest level of professionalism, independence, impartiality and objectivity. 5. When adopting positions, views and reports, the expert group shall attempt to reach consensus. If consensus cannot be reached, decisions shall be taken by a qualified majority of the group members.
Amendment 267 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Where, in the course of that evaluation, the market surveillance authority finds that the product with digital elements does not comply with the requirements laid down in this Regulation, it shall without delay require the relevant economic operator to take all appropriate corrective actions to bring the product into compliance with those requirements, to withdraw it from the market, or to recall it within a reasonabln adequate period, commensurate with the nature of the risk, as it may prescribe.
Amendment 271 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1
Article 45 – paragraph 1
1. Where the Commission has sufficient reasons to consider, including based on information provided by ENISA, that a product with digital elements that presents a significant cybersecurity risk is non-compliant with the requirements laid down in this Regulation, it mayshall request the relevant market surveillance authorities to carry out an evaluation of compliance and follow the procedures referred to in Article 43.
Amendment 273 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 2
Article 45 – paragraph 2
2. In exceptional circumstances which justify an immediate intervention to preserve the good functioning of the internal market and where the Commission has sufficient reasons to consider that the product referred to in paragraph 1 remains non-compliant with the requirements laid down in this Regulation and no effective measures have been taken by the relevant market surveillance authorities, the Commission mayshall request ENISA to carry out an evaluation of compliance. The Commission shall inform the relevant market surveillance authorities accordingly. The relevant economic operators shall cooperate as necessary with ENISA.
Amendment 276 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1
Article 46 – paragraph 1
1. Where, having performed an evaluation under Article 43, the market surveillance authority of a Member State finds that although a product with digital elements and the processes put in place by the manufacturer are in compliance with this Regulation, they present a significant cybersecurity risk and, in addition, they pose a risk to the health or safety of persons, to the compliance with obligations under Union or national law intended to protect fundamental rights, the availability authenticity, integrity or confidentiality of services offered using an electronic information system by essential entities of the type referred to in [Annex I to Directive XXX / XXXX (NIS2)] or to other aspects of public interest protection, it shall require the relevant economic operator to take all appropriate measures to ensure that the product with digital elements and the processes put in place by the manufacturer concerned, when placed on the market, no longer present that risk, to withdraw the product with digital elements from the market or to recall it within a reasonabln adequate period, commensurate with the nature of the risk.
Amendment 277 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2
Article 46 – paragraph 2
2. The manufacturer or other relevant economic operators shall ensure that corrective action is taken in respect of the products with digital elements concerned that they have made available on the market throughout the Union within the timeline established by the market surveillance authority of the Member State referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 278 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 6
Article 46 – paragraph 6
6. Where the Commission has sufficient reasons to consider, including based on information provided by ENISA, that a product with digital elements, although compliant with this Regulation, presents the risks referred to in paragraph 1, it mayshall request the relevant market surveillance authority or authorities to carry out an evaluation of compliance and follow the procedures referred to in Article 43 and paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of this Article.
Amendment 279 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 7
Article 46 – paragraph 7
7. In exceptional circumstances which justify an immediate intervention to preserve the good functioning of the internal market and where the Commission has sufficient reasons to consider that the product referred to in paragraph 6 continues to present the risks referred to in paragraph 1 and no effective measures have been taken by the relevant national market surveillance authorities, the Commission mayshall request ENISA to carry out an evaluation of the risks presented by that product and shall inform the relevant market surveillance authorities accordingly. The relevant economic operators shall cooperate as necessary with ENISA.
Amendment 280 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 8
Article 46 – paragraph 8
8. Based on ENISA’s evaluation referred to in paragraph 7, the Commission mayshall establish that a corrective or restrictive measure is necessary at Union level. To this end, it shall without delay consult the Member States concerned and the relevant operator or operators.
Amendment 282 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2
Article 48 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission or ENISA mayshall propose joint activities for checking compliance with this Regulation to be conducted by market surveillance authorities based on indications or information of potential non-compliance across several Member States of products falling in the scope of this Regulation with the requirements laid down by the latter.
Amendment 283 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1
Article 49 – paragraph 1
1. Market surveillance authorities mashall regularly decide to conduct simultaneous coordinated control actions (“sweeps”) of particular products with digital elements or categories thereof to check compliance with or to detect infringements to this Regulation.
Amendment 284 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 2
Article 49 – paragraph 2
2. Unless otherwise agreed upon by the market surveillance authorities involved, sweeps shall be coordinated by the Commission. The coordinator of the sweep mayshall, where appropriate, make the aggregated results publicly available.
Amendment 285 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 3
Article 49 – paragraph 3
3. ENISA mayshall identify, in the performance of its tasks, including based on the notifications received according to Article 11(1) and (2), categories of products for which sweeps mayshall be organised. The proposal for sweeps shall be submitted to the potential coordinator referred to in paragraph 2 for the consideration of the market surveillance authorities.
Amendment 286 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 4
Article 49 – paragraph 4
4. When conducting sweeps, the market surveillance authorities involved mayshall use the investigation powers set out Articles 41 to 47 and any other powers conferred upon them by national law.
Amendment 287 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 5
Article 49 – paragraph 5
5. Market surveillance authorities may shall invite Commission officials, and other accompanying persons authorised by the Commission, to participate in sweeps.
Amendment 289 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 52 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) intellectual property rights, and confidential business information or trade secrets of a natural or legal person, including source code, except the cases referred to in Article 5 of or trade secrets in line with Directive 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council 36 ; __________________ 36 Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure (OJ L 157, 15.6.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 293 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 6 – point c
Article 53 – paragraph 6 – point c
(c) the size and market share of the operator committing the infringement., taking into account the scale of risks, consequences and financial specificities of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises
Amendment 300 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 2
Article 57 – paragraph 2
It shall apply from [24 months after the date of entry into force of this Regulation]. However Article 11 shall apply from [12 months after the date of entry into force of this Regulation].
Amendment 308 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Part 1 – point 3 – point a a (new)
Annex I – Part 1 – point 3 – point a a (new)
(a a) be placed on the market with functional separation of security updates from functionality updates, to allow automatic installation of security updates, with a clear and easy-to-use opt-out mechanism, and preserve user choice on functionalities unless technically unfeasible;
Amendment 310 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Part 1 – point 3 – point c
Annex I – Part 1 – point 3 – point c
(c) protect the confidentiality of stored, transmitted or otherwise processed data, personal or other, such as by encrypting relevant data at rest or in transit by state of the art mechanisms, and by using other technical means;
Amendment 311 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Part 1 – point 3 – point d
Annex I – Part 1 – point 3 – point d
(d) protect the integrity of stored, transmitted or otherwise processed data, personal or other, commands, programs and configuration against any manipulation or modification not authorised by the user, as well as report on corruptions or possible unauthorised access;
Amendment 312 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Part 1 – point 3 – point f
Annex I – Part 1 – point 3 – point f
(f) protect the availability of essential and basic functions, including the resilience against and mitigation of denial of service attacks;
Amendment 314 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Part 1 – point 3 – point j
Annex I – Part 1 – point 3 – point j
(j) provide security related information by providing at user request recording and/or monitoring capabilities, locally and at device level for relevant internal activity, including the access to or modification of data, services or functions;
Amendment 316 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Part 1 – point 3 – point k
Annex I – Part 1 – point 3 – point k
(k) ensure that vulnerabilities can be addressed through security updates, including, where applicable, through automaticdedicated security updates and the notification of available updates to users.
Amendment 317 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Part 1 – point 3 – point k a (new)
Annex I – Part 1 – point 3 – point k a (new)
(k a) be designed, developed and produced in order to allow for its secure discontinuation and potential recycling when reaching the end of the life cycle, including by allowing users to securely withdraw and remove all data on a permanent basis;
Amendment 320 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Part 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Annex I – Part 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
(4) once a security update has been made available, publically disclose information about fixed vulnerabilities, including a description of the vulnerabilities, information allowing users to identify the product with digital elements affected, the impacts of the vulnerabilities, their severity and clear and accessible information helping users to remediate the vulnerabilities;
Amendment 322 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Part 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Annex I – Part 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
(7) provide for mechanisms to securely distribute security updates for products with digital elements to ensure that exploitable vulnerabilities are fixed or mitigated in a timely manner;
Amendment 324 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – paragraph 1 – point 2
Annex II – paragraph 1 – point 2
2. the single point of contact where information about cybersecurity vulnerabilities of the product can be reported and received;
Amendment 325 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – paragraph 1 – point 6
Annex II – paragraph 1 – point 6
6. if and, where applicable, where the software bill of materials can be accessed by the competent authorities;
Amendment 331 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point c a (new)
Annex II – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point c a (new)
(c a) the expected product lifetime and until when the manufacturer ensures the effective handling of vulnerabilities and provision of security updates;
Amendment 333 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – Part I – point 3 a (new)
Annex III – Part I – point 3 a (new)
3 a. Authentication, Authorization and Accounting (AAA) platforms;
Amendment 334 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – Part I – point 15
Annex III – Part I – point 15
15. Physical and virtual network interfaces;
Amendment 335 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – Part I – point 18
Annex III – Part I – point 18
Amendment 336 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – Part I – point 23
Annex III – Part I – point 23
23. Industrial products with digital elements that can be referred as part of Internet of Things not covered by class II.
Amendment 337 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – Part II – point 4
Annex III – Part II – point 4
4. Firewalls, security gateways, intrusion detection and/or prevention systems intended for industrial use;
Amendment 338 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – Part II – point 7
Annex III – Part II – point 7
7. Routers, modems intended for the connection to the internet, and switches, intended for industrial usand other network nodes that are necessary for the provision of the connectivity service;
Amendment 339 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – Part II – point 15 a (new)
Annex III – Part II – point 15 a (new)
15 a. Smart home products, including smart home servers and virtual assistants;
Amendment 340 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – Part II – point 15 b (new)
Annex III – Part II – point 15 b (new)
15 b. Smart security devices, including smart door locks, cameras and alarm systems;
Amendment 341 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – Part II – point 15 c (new)
Annex III – Part II – point 15 c (new)
15 c. Smart toys and similar devices likely to interact with children;
Amendment 342 #
2022/0272(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – Part II – point 15 d (new)
Annex III – Part II – point 15 d (new)
15 d. Personal health appliances and wearables.
Amendment 47 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35 a (new)
Recital 35 a (new)
Amendment 48 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) In order to prevent children from falling victim of abuse, providers of very large online platforms which have identified the risk of use of their service for the purpose of online child sexual abuse in line with Article 3 should provide reasonable assistance, by putting in place alert and alarm mechanisms in a prominent way on their platforms. The alert mechanism could consist of, for example, linking potential victims to the local organisations such as helplines, victims` right organisations or hotlines. Providers of very large online platforms should ensure adequate follow-up, when a report or alert is made, in the language chosen by the user for using their service. Given the impact on the rights of victims depicted in such known child sexual abuse material and the typical ability of providers of hosting services to limit that impact by helping ensure that the material is no longer available on their services, those providers should assist victims who request the removal or disabling of access of the material in question. That assistance should remain limited to what can reasonably be asked from the provider concerned under the given circumstances, having regard to factors such as the content and scope of the request, the steps needed to locate the items of known child sexual abuse material concerned and the means available to the provider. The assistance could consist, for example, of helping to locate the items, carrying out checks and removing or disabling access to the items. Considering that carrying out the activities needed to obtain such removal or disabling of access can be painful or even traumatic as well as complex, victims should also have the right to be assisted by the EU Centre in this regard, via the Coordinating Authorities. receive adequate psycho-social, age appropriate, child-friendly support and to be assisted by the EU Centre and its relevant partners, such as child helplines or other psycho-social support mechanisms in this regard, via the Coordinating Authorities. Member States should establish and improve the functioning of child helpline and missing children hotline, including through funding and capacity building, in line with Article 96 of Directive (EU) 2018/1972. Victim identification is key not only for tracking down online child sexual abuse, but also for preventing victimisation, stopping the further spread of damaging material and ensuring that victims can benefit from available assistance. However, such victim identification requires a high degree of specialisation and adequate resources. Therefore, the European Cybercrime Centre`s efforts in victim identification should be complemented at national level.
Amendment 53 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) In order to provide clarity and enable effective, efficient and consistent coordination and cooperation both at national and at Union level, where a Member State designates more than one competent authority to apply and enforce this Regulation, it should designate one lead authority as the Coordinating Authority, whilst the designated authority should automatically be considered the Coordinating Authority where a Member State designates only one authority. For those reasons, the Coordinating Authority should act as the single contact point with regard to all matters related to the application of this Regulation, without prejudice to the enforcement powers of other national authoritieand related to achieving the objective of this Regulation, including prevention matters without prejudice to the enforcement powers of other national authorities. It is essential to ensure the training of officials who could be in close contact with victims, including law enforcement officers, judges, prosecutors, lawyers and forensic experts and social workers, in order to ensure that such officials are able to understand the problems that child victims can face, and in order to ensure that the situation is prevented and mitigated if necessary. The Coordinating Authority should therefore also act as single point of contact with regard to all matters related to the achievement of the objective of this Regulation, including prevention, with regard to awareness raising and training of officials.
Amendment 54 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45 a (new)
Recital 45 a (new)
(45 a) Given the EU Centre’s particular expertise with regard to the generation and sharing of knowledge, Member States should ensure that such information is shared and promoted at national level. For this purpose, they should cooperate with partner organisations, including with semi-public organisations and hotlines, as well as with civil society. It is important to ensure that practitioners who get in close contact with child victims are adequately trained to deal with such victims, and that the situation of the victim is adequately mitigated. Therefore, the Coordinating authority should ensure that officials such as law enforcement officers, judges, prosecutors, lawyers and forensic experts and social workers cooperate with civil society and semi-public organisations.
Amendment 70 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 67
Recital 67
(67) Given its central position resulting from the performance of its primary tasks under this Regulation and the information and expertise it can gather in connection thereto, the EU Centre should also contribute to the achievement of the objectives of this Regulation by serving as a hub for knowledge, expertise and research on matters related to the prevention and combating of online child sexual abuse. In this connection, the EU Centre should, including education and awareness raising, and prevention programmes available for potential offenders and offenders during and after criminal proceedings. The collection and analysis of data should include the list of education and awareness raising material made part of the official curricula. In this connection, the EU Centre should bring together practitioners and researchers. The EU Centre should also cooperate with relevant stakeholders from both within and outside the Union and allow Member States to benefit from the knowledge and expertise gathered, including best practices and lessons learned.
Amendment 76 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 70
Recital 70
(70) Longstanding Union support for both INHOPE and its member hotlines recognises that hotlines are in the frontline in the fight against online child sexual abuse. The EU Centre should leverage the network of hotlines and encourage that they work together effectively with the Coordinating Authorities, providers of relevant information society services and law enforcement authorities of the Member States. The hotlines’ expertise and experience is an invaluable source of information on the early identification of common threats and solutions, as well as on regional and national differences across the Union. Child helplines are equally in the frontline in the fight against online child sexual abuse. Therefore, the EU Centre should also recognise the work of child helplines in victim response, and the existing referral mechanisms between child helplines and hotlines. The EU Centre should coordinate services for victims.
Amendment 94 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point w a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point w a (new)
(w a) `very large online platform` means online platforms which have a number of average monthly active recipients of the service in the Union equal to or higher than 45 million, and which are designated as very large online platforms pursuant to paragraph 4 of Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065;
Amendment 105 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – title
Article 21 – title
Victims’ right of assistance and support for removal
Amendment 106 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. The providers of very large online platforms that have identified the risk of use of their service for the purpose of online child sexual abuse in line with Article 3 shall provide reasonable assistance, on request, to persons residing in the Union that seek to report potential abuse, by putting in place reporting functions in a prominent way on their platform. Such providers shall ensure adequate follow-up, when a report or alert is made, in the language that the user has chosen for their service. Providers of hosting services shall provide reasonable assistance, on request, to persons residing in the Union that seek to have one or more specific items of known child sexual abuse material depicting them removed or to have access thereto disabled by the provider.
Amendment 110 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Member States shall establish and improve the functioning of child helpline and missing children hotline, including through funding and capacity building, in line with Article 96 of Directive (EU) 2018/1972.
Amendment 111 #
2022/0155(COD)
4 b. Member States shall ensure that law enforcement authorities have adequate technical, financial and human resources to carry out their tasks, including for the purpose of identification of victims.
Amendment 113 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The Coordinating Authority shall be responsible for all matters related to the application and enforcement of this Regulation, and to the achievement of the objective of this regulation in the Member State concerned, unless that Member State has assigned certain specific tasks or sectors to other competent authorities.
Amendment 114 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
The Coordinating Authority shall in any event be responsible for ensuring coordination at national level in respect of those matters, including matters related to prevention and for contributing to the effective, efficient and consistent application and enforcement of this Regulation throughout the Union.
Amendment 117 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 5
Article 25 – paragraph 5
5. Each Member State shall ensure that a contact point is designated or established within the Coordinating Authority’s office to coordinate prevention within the Member State and to handle requests for clarification, feedback and other communications in relation to all matters related to the application and enforcement of this Regulation in that Member State. Member States shall make the information on the contact point publicly available and communicate it to the EU Centre. They shall keep that information updated.
Amendment 119 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 a (new)
Article 25 a (new)
Article 25 a Cooperation with partner organisations Where necessary for the performance of its tasks under this Regulation, including the achievement of the objective of this Regulation, and in order to promote the generation and sharing of knowledge in line with Article 43 (6), the Coordinating Authority shall cooperate with organisations and networks with information and expertise on matters related to the prevention and combating of online child sexual abuse, including civil society organisations and semi-public organisations and practitioners.
Amendment 129 #
2022/0155(COD)
(a) collecting, recording, analysing and providing information, providing analysis based on anonymised and non-personal data gathering, and providing expertise on matters regarding the prevention and combating of online child sexual abuse, in accordance with Article 51 , including education and awareness raising programmes, and intervention programmes;
Amendment 131 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b
(b) supporting the development and dissemination of research and expertise on those matters and on assistance to victims, including by serving as a hub of expertise to support evidence-based policy and by linking researchers to practitioners;
Amendment 161 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Given the central importance of relevant information society services, those aims can only be achieved by ensuring that providers offering such services in the Union behave responsibly and take reasonable measures to minimise the risk of their services being misused for the purpose of child sexual abuse, those providers often being the only ones in a position to prevent and to help combat such abuse. The measures taken should be targeted, carefully balanced and proportionate, effective, evidence- based proportionate , and subject to constant review, so as to avoid any undue negative consequences for the fight against crime and for those who use the services for lawful purposes, in particular for the exercise of their fundamental rights protected under Union law, that is, those enshrined in the Charter and recognised as general principles of Union law, and so as to avoid directly or indirectly imposing any excessive burdens on the providers of the services.
Amendment 164 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Member States are increasingly introducing, or are considering introducing, national laws to prevent and combat online child sexual abuse, in particular by imposing requirements on providers of relevant information society services. In the light of the inherently cross-border nature of the internet and the service provision concerned, those national laws, which diverge, may have a direct negative effect on the internal market. To increase legal certainty, eliminate the resulting obstacles to the provision of the services and ensure a level playing field in the internal market, the necessary harmonised requirements should be laid down at Union level.
Amendment 165 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Therefore, this Regulation should contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market by setting out clear, uniform and balanced rules to prevent and combat child sexual abuse in a manner that is demonstrably and durably effective and that respects the fundamental rights of all parties concerned. In view of the fast- changing nature of the services concerned and the technologies used to provide them, those rules should be laid down in technology-neutral and future- proof manner, so as not to hamper innovationthe fight against crime .
Amendment 169 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) In order to achieve the objectives of this Regulation, it should cover providers of services that have the potential to bare misused for the purpose of online child sexual abuse. As they are increasingly misused to a significant extent for that purpose, those services shcould include publicly available number- independent interpersonal communications services, such as messaging services and web-based e-mail services, in so far as those services asre publicly available. As serviconline games which enable direct interpersonal and interactive exchange of information merely as a minor ancillary feature that is intrinsically linked to another service, such as chat and similar functions as part of gaming, image-sharing and video-hosting are equallyare also at risk of misuse, they should also be covered by this Regulation. However, given the inherent differences between the various relevant information society services covered by this Regulation and the related varying risks that those services are misused for the purpose of online child sexual abuse and varying ability of the providers concerned to prevent and combat such abuse, the obligations imposed on the providers of those services should be differentiated in an appropriate manner.
Amendment 170 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Online child sexual abuse frequentlycan also involves the misuse of information society services offered in the Union by providers established in third countries. In order to ensure the effectiveness of the rules laid down in this Regulation and a level playing field within the internal market, those rules should apply to all providers, irrespective of their place of establishment or residence, that offer services in the Union, as evidenced by a substantial connection to the Union.
Amendment 173 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Article 15(1) of Directive 2002/58/EC allows Member States to adopt legislative measures to restrict the scope of the rights and obligations provided for in certain specific provisions of that Directive relating to the confidentiality of communications when such restriction constitutes a necessary, appropriate and proportionate measure within a democratic society, inter alia, to prevent, investigate, detect and prosecute criminal offences, provided certain conditions are met, including compliance with the Charter , which, inter alia, requires the specific measures to be provided for by law and genuinely achieve objectives of general interest. Applying the requirements of that provision by analogy, this Regulation should limit the exercise of the rights and obligations provided for in Articles 5(1), (3) and 6(1) of Directive 2002/58/EC, insofar as strictly necessary in line with Article 52 of the Charter to execute detecinvestigation orders issued in accordance with this Regulation with a view to prevent and combat online child sexual abuse.
Amendment 175 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) A substantial connection to the Union should be considered to exist where the relevant information society services has an establishment in the Union or, in its absence, on the basis of the existence of a significant number , in relation to population size of users in one or more Member States, or the targeting of activities towards one or more Member States. The targeting of activities towards one or more Member States should be determined on the basis of all relevant circumstances, including factors such as the use of a language or a currency generally used in that Member State, or the possibility of ordering products or services, or using a national top level domain. The targeting of activities towards a Member State could also be derived from the availability of a software application in the relevant national software application store, from the provision of local advertising or advertising in the language used in that Member State, or from the handling of customer relations such as by providing customer service in the language generally used in that Member State. A substantial connection should also be assumed where a service provider directs its activities to one or more Member State as set out in Article 17(1), point (c), of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council44. Mere technical accessibility of a website from the Union shouldcannot, alone, be considered as establishing a substantial connection to the Union. _________________ 44 Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ L 351, 20.12.2012, p. 1).
Amendment 178 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) With a view to minimising the risk that their services are misused for the dissemination of known or onlinew child sexual abuse material or the solicitation of children, providers of hosting services and providers of publicly available number- independent interpersonal communications services should assess such risk for eachthat are exposed to substantial amount of child sexual abuse material should assess the existence of a significant risk stemming from the design and functioning of of the services that they offer in the Union. To guide their risk assessment, a non- exhaustive list of elements to be taken into account should be provided. To allow for a full consideration of the specific characteristics of the services they offer, providers should be allowed to take account of additional elements where relevant. As risks evolve over time, in function of developments such as those related to technology and the manners in which the services in question are offered and used, it is appropriate to ensure that the risk assessment is, as well as the effectiveness and proportionality of specific measures are updated regularly and when needed for particular reasons.
Amendment 179 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Some of those providers of relevant information society services in scope of this Regulation may also be subject to an obligation to conduct a risk assessment under Regulation (EU) …/… [on a Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC] with respect to information that they store and disseminate to the public , which should form the basis for the risk assessment under this instrument. For the purposes of the present Regulation, those providers may draw on such a risk assessment and complement it with a more specific assessment of the risks of use of their services for the purpose of online child sexual abuse, as required by this Regulation.
Amendment 182 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) In order to prevent and combat online child sexual abuse effectively, providers of hosting services and providers of publicly available number-independent interpersonal communications services should take reasonable specific measures to mitigate the risk of their services being misused for such abuse, as identified through the risk assessmentthe dissemination of known child sexual abuse material. Providers subject to an obligation to adopt mitigation measures pursuant to Regulation (EU) …/… [on a Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC] may consider to which extent mitigation measures adopted to comply with that obligation, which may include targeted measures to protect the rights of the child, including age verification and parental control tools, may also serve to address the risk identified in the specific risk assessment pursuant to this Regulation, and to which extent further targeted mitigation measures may be required to comply with this Regulation.
Amendment 187 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) To allow for innovation and ensure proportionality and technological neutrality, no exhaustive list of the compulsory mitigationspecific measures should be established. Instead, providers should be left a degree of flexibility to design and implement measures tailored to the risk identifiedexposure and the characteristics of the services they provide and the manners in which those services are used. In particular, providers are free to design and implement, in accordance with Union law, measures based on their existing practices to detect online child sexual abuse . Specific measures could include providing their services and indicate as part of the risk reporting their willingness and preparedness to eventually being issued a detection order under this Regulation, if deemed necessary by the competent national authorityechnical measures and tools that allow users to manage their own privacy visibility, reachability and safety, such as mechanisms for users to block or mute other users, mechanisms that ask for confirmation before displaying certain content, tools that prompt or warn users.
Amendment 191 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new)
Recital 17 a (new)
(17 a) Relying on providers for risk mitigation measures comes with inherent problems, as business models, technologies and crimes evolve continuously. As a result, clear targets, oversight, review and adaptation, led by national supervisory authorities are needed, to avoid measures becoming redundant, disproportionate, ineffective, counterproductive and outdated.
Amendment 195 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) In order to ensure that the objectives of this Regulation are achieved, that flexibility should be subject to the need to comply with Union law and, in particular, the requirements of this Regulation on mitigation measures. Therefore, providers of hosting services and providers of publicly available number-independent interpersonal communications services should, when designing and implementing the mitigationspecific measures, give importance not only to ensuring their effectiveness, but also to avoiding any undue negative consequences for other affected parties, notably for the exercise of users’ fundamental rights. In order to ensure proportionality, when determining which mitigationspecific measures that should reasonably be taken in a given situation, account should also be taken of the ongoing effectiveness of the measures and the financial and technological capabilities and the size of the provider concerned. When selecting appropriate mitigationspecific measures, providers should at least duly consider the possible measures listed in this Regulation, as well as, where appropriate, other measures such as those based on industry best practices, including as established through self-regulatory cooperation, and those contained in guidelines from the Commission. When no risk has been detected after a diligently conducted or updated risk assessment, providers should not be required to take any mitigation measuresquantifying the expected impact of the available measures. Objective data on ongoing effectiveness must be provided, in order for any measure to be recognised as best practice.
Amendment 196 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) In the light of their role as intermediaries facilitating access to software applications that may be misused for online child sexual abuse, providers of software application stores should be made subject to obligations to take certain reasonable measures to assess and mitigate that risk. The providers should make that assessment in a diligent manner, making efforts that are reasonable under the given circumstances, having regard inter alia to the nature and extent of that risk as well as their financial and technological capabilities and size, and cooperating with the. The providers should only make available on their platform software applications if prior to the use of their service they have obtained the contact details of the provider of software application developing team with the cooperation of the specific providers of the services offered through the software application where possible.
Amendment 198 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) With a view to ensuring effective prevention and fight against online child sexual abuse, when mitigating measures are deemed insufficient to limit the risk of misuse of a certain service for the purpose of online child sexual abusdata on the impact of specific measures demonstrate that their impact is below pre-determined targets e, the Coordinating Authorities designated by Member States under this Regulation should be empowered to request the issuance of detection ordersmplementation of additional targeted and proportionate risk mitigation measures . In order to avoid any undue interference with fundamental rights and to ensure proportionality, that power should be subject to a carefully balanced set of targets, limits and safeguards. For instance, considering that child sexual abuse material tends to be disseminated through hosting services and publicly available number-independent interpersonal communications services, and that solicitation of children mostly takes place in publicly available number-independent interpersonal communications services, it should only be possible to address detecinvestigation orders to providers of such services in relation to specific suspects or specific group of suspects or a specific incident .
Amendment 201 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Furthermore, as parts of those limits and safeguards, detecinvestigation orders should only be issued after a diligent and objective assessment leading to the finding of a significant risk of the specific service concerned being misused for a given type of online child sexual abuse covered by this Regulation. One of the elements to be taken into account in this regard is the likelihood that the service is used to an appreciable extent, that is, beyond isolated and relatively rare instances, for such abuse. The criteria should vary so as to account of the different characteristics of the various types of online child sexual abuse at stake and of the different characteristics of the services used to engage in such abuse, as well as the related different degree of intrusiveness of the measures to be taken to execute the detection orderthat the order is necessary and proportionate .
Amendment 203 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) However, the finding of such a significant risk should in itself be insufficient to justify the issuance of a detection order, given that in such a case the order might lead to disproportionate negative consequences for the rights and legitimate interests of other affected parties, in particular for the exercise of users’ fundamental rights. Therefore, it should be ensured that detecIt should be ensured that investigation orders can be issued only after the Coordinating Authorities and the competent judicial authority or independent administrative authority having objectively and diligently assessed, identified and weighted, on a case-by-case basis, not only the likelihood and seriousness of the potential consequences of the service being misused for the type of online child sexual abuse at issue, but also the specific results anticipated by the measure, the likelihood and seriousness of any potential negative consequences for other parties affected. With a view to avoiding the imposition of excessive burdens, the assessment should also take account of the financial and technological capabilities and size of the provider concerned.
Amendment 205 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) In addition, to avoid undue interference with fundamental rights and ensure proportionality, when it is established that those requirements have been met and a detecinvestigation order is to be issued, it should still be ensured that the detection order is targeted and specifiedc enough so as to ensure that any such negative consequences for affected parties do not go beyond what is strictly necessary to effectively address the significant risk identified. This should concern, in particular, a limitation to an identifiable part or component of the service where possible without prejudice to the effectiveness of the measure, such as specific types of channels of a publicly available number-independent interpersonal communications service, or to specific users or specific groups of users, to the extent that they can be taken in isolation for the purpose of detection, as well as the specification of the safeguards additional to the ones already expressly specified in this Regulation, such as independent auditing, the provision of additional information or access to data, or reinforced human oversight and review, and the further limitation of the duration of application of the detection order that the Coordinating Authority deems necessary. To avoid unreasonable or disproportionate outcomes, such requirements should be set after an objective and diligent assessment conducted on a case-by-case basis.
Amendment 208 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) The competent judicial authority or the competent independent administrative authority, as applicable in accordance with the detailed procedural rules set by the relevant Member State, shouldshould have the data necessary to be in a position to take a well-informed decision on requests for the issuance of detecinvestigations orders. That is of particular importance to ensure the necessary fair balance of the fundamental rights at stake and a consistent approach, especially in connection to detecinvestigation orders concerning the solicitation of children. Therefore, a procedure should be provided for that allows the providers concerned, the EU Centre on Child Sexual Abuse established by this Regulation (‘EU Centre’) and, where so provided in this Regulation, the competent data protection authority designated under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 to provide their views on the measures in question. They should do so as soon as possiblewithout undue delay , having regard to the important public policy objective at stake and the need to act without undue delay to protect children. In particularFurthermore, data protections authorities should do their utmost to avoid extending the time period set out in Regulation (EU) 2016/679 for providing their opinions in response to a prior consultation. Furthermore, they should normally be able to provide their opinion well within that time periodin a timely manner in situations where the European Data Protection Board has already issued guidelines regarding the technologies that a provider envisages deploying and operating to execute a detecinvestigation order addressed to it under this Regulation.
Amendment 210 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
Amendment 212 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) The measures taken by providers of hosting services and providers of publicly available number-independent interpersonal communications services to execute detecinvestigation orders addressed to them should remain strictly limited to what is specified in this Regulation and in the detection orders issued in accordance with this Regulation. In order to ensure the effectiveness of those measures, allow for tailored solutions, remain technologically neutral, and avoid circumvention of the detection obligations, those measures should be taken regardless of the technologies used by the providers concerned in connection to the provision of their services. Therefore, t. This Regulation leaves to the provider concerned the choice of the technologies to be operated to comply effectively with detection orders and should not be understood as incentivising or disincentivising the use of any given technology, provided that the technologies and accompanying measures meet the requirements of this Regulationare not undermined . That includes the use of end-to-end encryption technology, which is an important tool to guarantee the security and confidentiality of the communications of users, including those of children. When executing the detection order, providers should take all available safeguard measures to ensure that the technologies employed by them cannot be used by them orAny weakening of encryption could potentially be abused by malicious their employees for purposes other than compliance withd parties. Nothing in this Regulation, n should therefore by third parties, and thus to avoid undermining the security and confidentiality of the communications of userse interpreted as prohibiting or weakening end-to-end encryption.
Amendment 214 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) In order to facilitate the providers’ compliance with the detection obligationinvestigation orders, the EU Centre should make available to providers detectionapproved technologies that they may choose to use, on a free-of-charge basis, for the sole purpose of executing the detecinvestigation orders addressed to them. The European Data Protection Board should be consulted on the acceptability or otherwise of those technologies and the ways in which they should be best deployed to ensure, if at all, in compliance with applicable rules of Union law on the protection of personal data. The advice and with the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The authoritative position of the European Data Protection Board should be fully taken into account by the EU Centre when compiling the lists of available technologies and also by the Commission when preparing guidelines regarding the application of the detection obligations. The providers may operate the technologies made available by the EU Centre or by others or technologies that they developed themselves, as long as they meet the requirements of this Regulation and other applicable EU law, such as Regulation 2016/679.
Amendment 215 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) With a view to constantly assess the performance of the detection technologies and ensure that they are sufficiently reliableaccurate , as well as to identify false positives and avoid to the extentfalse negatives and to avoid erroneous reporting to the EU Centre, providers should ensure adequate human oversight and, where necessary, human intervention, adapted to the type of detection technologies and the type of online child sexual abuse at issue. Such oversight should include regular assessment of the rates of false negatives and positives generated by the technologies, based on an analysis of anonymised representative data samples. In particular where the detection of the solicitation of children in publicly available interpersonal communications is concerned, service providers should ensure regular, specific and detailed human oversight and human verification of conversations identified by the technologies as involving potential solicitation of children.
Amendment 216 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) Providers of hosting services and providers of publicly available interpersonal communications services are uniquely positioned to detect potential online child sexual abuse involving their services. The information that theyThe information providers may obtain when offering their services is often indispensable to effectively investigate and prosecute child sexual abuse offences. Therefore, they should be required to report on potential online child sexual abuse on their services, whenever they become aware of it, that is, when there are reasonable grounds to believe that a particular activity may constitute online child sexual abuse. Where such reasonable grounds exist, doubts about the potential victim’s age should not prevent those providers from submitting reports. In the interest of effectiveness, it should be immaterial in which manner they obtain such awareness. Such awareness could, for example, be obtained through the execution of detection orders, information flagged by users or organisations acting in the public interest against child sexual abuse, or activities conducted on the providers’ own initiativeIn the interest of effectiveness, it should be immaterial in which manner they obtain such awareness. Those providers should report a minimum of information, as specified in this Regulation, for competent law enforcement authorities to be able to assess whether to initiate an investigation, where relevant, and should ensure that the reports are as complete as possible before submitting them.
Amendment 220 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) The obligations of this Regulation do not apply to providers of hosting services that do not offer their services in the Union. However, such services may still be used to disseminate child sexual abuse material to or by users in the Union, causing harm to children and society at large, even if the providers’ activities are not targeted towards Member States and the total numbers of users of those services in the Union are limited. For legal and pIn view of the very high number of ractical reasons, it may not be reasonably possible to have those providers remove or disable access to the material, not even through cooperation with the competent authorities of the third country where they are established. Therefore, in line with existing practices in severalfications of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child or its optional Protocol on Child Pornography globally, it should always be possible to have those providers remove or disable access to the material. Where problems arise in relation to specific jurisdictions, Commission and Member States, it should be possible to require providers of internet access services to take reasonable measures to block the access of users in the Union to the materialuse all reasonable means at their disposal to encourage and lead international efforts to remedy the situation.
Amendment 221 #
2022/0155(COD)
Amendment 225 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) In order to provide clarity and enable effective, efficient and consistent coordination and cooperation both at national and at Union level, where a Member State designates more than one competent authority to apply and enforce this Regulation, it should designate one lead authority as the Coordinating Authority, whilst the designated authority should automatically be considered the Coordinating Authority where a Member State designates only one authority. For those reasons, the Coordinating Authority should act as the single contact point with regard to all matters related to the application of this Regulationcontributing to the achievements of the objective of this Regulation, , including for trusted organisations providing assistance to victims and providing education and awareness raising, without prejudice to the enforcement powers of other national authorities.
Amendment 226 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) In order to verify that the rules of this Regulation, in particular those on mitigationspecific measures and on the execution of detecinvestigation orders, removal orders or blocking orders that it issued, are effectively complied in practicewith, each Coordinating Authority should be able to carry out searches, using the relevant indicators provided by the EU Centre, to detect the dissemination of known or new child sexual abuse material through publicly available material in the hosting services of the providers concernedrelevant searches.
Amendment 227 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
Amendment 228 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55
Recital 55
(55) It is essential for the proper functioning of the system of mandatory detection and blocking of online child sexual abuse set up by this Regulation that the EU Centre receives, via the Coordinating Authorities, anonymised specific items of material identified as constituting child sexual abuse material or transcripts of conversations identified as constituting the solicitation of children related to a specific person or a specific group of people or specific incident , such as may have been found for example during criminal investigations, so that that material or conversations can serve as an accurate and reliable basis for the EU Centre to generate indicators of such abuses. In order to achieve that result, the identification should be made after a diligent assessment, conducted in the context of a procedure that guarantees a fair and objective outcome, either by the Coordinating Authorities themselves or by a court or another independent administrative authority than the Coordinating Authority. Whilst the swift assessment, identification and submission of such material is important also in other contexts, it is crucial in connection to new child sexual abuse material and the solicitation of children reported under this Regulation, considering that this material can lead to the identification of ongoing or imminent abuse and the rescuing of victims. Therefore, specific time limits should be set in connection to such reporting.
Amendment 229 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55 a (new)
Recital 55 a (new)
(55 a) All communications containing illegal material should be encrypted to state of the art standards, all access by staff to such content should be limited to what is necessary and thoroughly logged.
Amendment 230 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) With a view to ensuring that the indicators generated by the EU Centre for the purpose of detection are as complete as possible, the submission of relevant material and transcripts should be done proactively by the Coordinating Authorities. However, the EU Centre should also be allowed to bring certain material or conversations to the attention of the Coordinating Authorities for those purposes.
Amendment 234 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 78
Recital 78
(78) Regulation (EU) 2021/1232 of the European Parliament and of the Council45provides for a temporary solution in respect of the use of technologies by certain providers of publicly available interpersonal communications services for the purpose of combating online child sexual abuse, pending the preparation and adoption of a long-term legal framework.This Regulation provides that long-term legal framework. Regulation (EU) 2021/1232 should therefore be repealed. _________________ 45 Regulation (EU) 2021/1232 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 July 2021 on a temporary derogation from certain provisions of Directive 2002/58/EC as regards the use of technologies by providers of number- independent interpersonal communications services for the processing of personal and other data for the purpose of combating online child sexual abuse (OJ L 274, 30.7.2021, p. 41).
Amendment 235 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
This Regulation lays down uniform rules to address the misuse of relevant information society services for online child sexual abuse in the internal market. order to contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market and to create a safe, predictable and trusted online environment that facilitates innovation and in which fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter are effectively protected.
Amendment 239 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b
(b) obligations on providers of hosting services and providers of publicly available number-independent interpersonal communication services to idetectntify and report online child sexual abuse;
Amendment 244 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point e a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point e a (new)
(e a) Obligations on providers of online games;
Amendment 247 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 4
Article 1 – paragraph 4
4. This Regulation limits the exercise of the rights and obligations provided for in 5(1) and (3) and Article 6(1) of Directive 2002/58/EC insofar as necessary for the execution of the detecinvestigation orders issued in accordance with Section 2 of Chapter 1 of this Regulation.
Amendment 250 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) ‘hosting service’ means an information society service as defined in Article 23, point (fg), third indent, of Regulation (EU) …/… [on a Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC];
Amendment 252 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) ‘number-independent interpersonal communications service’ means a publicly available service as defined in Article 2, point 57, of Directive (EU) 2018/1972, including services which enable direct interpersonal and interactive exchange of information merely as a minor ancillary feature that is intrinsically linked to another service;
Amendment 256 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) ‘number-independent interpersonal communications service within games’ means any service defined in Article 2, point 7 of Directive (EU) 2018/1972 which is part of a game.
Amendment 259 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e
Amendment 261 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – point ii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – point ii
(ii) an publicly available number- independent interpersonal communications service;
Amendment 262 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – point iv
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – point iv
Amendment 264 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – point iv a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – point iv a (new)
(iv a) online games;
Amendment 268 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
(h a) ‘hotline’ means an organisation providing a mechanism, other than the reporting channels provided by law enforcement agencies, for receiving anonymous report from the public about alleged child sexual abuse material and online child sexual exploitation, which is officially recognised by the Member State of establishment and has the mission of combatting child sexual abuse;
Amendment 269 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h b (new)
(h b) ‘help-line’ means an organisation providing services for children in need as recognised by the Member State of establishment;
Amendment 278 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of hosting services and providers of interpersonal communications services shall identify, analyse and assess, for each such service that they offer, the risk of usepublicly available number- independent interpersonal communications services that are exposed to substantial amount of child sexual abuse material shall identify, analyse and assess, for each such service that they offer, risks stemming from the design, functioning , including algorithmic systems of the service for the purpose of online child sexual abuse.
Amendment 280 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. A hosting service provider or publicly available number-independent interpersonal communication service is exposed to child sexual abuse material where the coordinating authority of the Member State of its main establishment or where its legal repr esentative resides or is established has: a) taken a decision, on the basis of objecti ve factors, such as the provider having rec eived two or more final removal orders in the previous 12 m onths, finding that the provider is exposed to child sexual abuse material;and b) notified the decision referred to in point (a) to the provider.
Amendment 281 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 282 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(a a) any actual or foreseeable negative effects for the exercise of fundamental rights
Amendment 283 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – introductory part
(b) the existence and implementation by the provider of a policy and the availability and effectiveness of functionalities to address the risk referred to in paragraph 1, including through the following:
Amendment 284 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – indent 1
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – indent 1
Amendment 285 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – indent 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – indent 2
Amendment 289 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – indent 3
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – indent 3
— functionalities enabling age verificationthe effective protection of children online ;
Amendment 296 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 297 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) the manner in which the provider designed and operates the service, including the business model, governance and relevant systems and processes, the design of their recommender systems and any other relevant algorithmic system and the impact thereof on that risk;
Amendment 298 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point e – point i
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point e – point i
Amendment 299 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point e – point ii
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point e – point ii
Amendment 300 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point e – point iii – indent 1
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point e – point iii – indent 1
— enabling users to publicly search for other users and, in particular, for adult users to search for child users;
Amendment 302 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point e – point iii – indent 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point e – point iii – indent 2
— enabling users to establishinitiate unsolicited contact with other users directly, in particular through private communications;
Amendment 311 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The provider may request the EU Centre to perform an analysis of representative, anonymized data samples to identify potential online child sexual abuse,methodology for risk assessment in order to support the risk assessment.
Amendment 313 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The costs incurred by the EU Centre for the performance of such an analysis shall be borne by the requesting provider. However, the EU Centre shall bear those costs where the provider is a micro, small or medium-sized enterprise, provided the request is. The Centre may reject the request on the basis that it is not reasonably necessary to support the risk assessment.
Amendment 314 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 317 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point a
(a) for a service which is subject to a detecinvestigation order issued in accordance with Article 7, the provider shall update the risk assessment at the latest two months before the expiry of the period of application of the detection order;
Amendment 319 #
Amendment 320 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers of hosting services and providers of publicly available number- independent interpersonal communications services sthall take reasonable mitigationt are exposed to substantial amount of child sexual abuse material shall take proportionate and effective specific measures, tailored to the serious risk identified pursuant to Article 3, to minimise that risk. Such measures shall include some or all of the following:
Amendment 325 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) adapting, through appropriate technical and operational measures and staffing, the provider’s content moderation or recommender systems, its decision- making processes, the operation or functionalities of the service, or the content or enforcement of its terms and conditions;
Amendment 326 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) providing technical measures and tools that allow users to manage their own privacy, visibility, reachability and safety , and that are set to the most secure levels by default;
Amendment 329 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
(a b) informing users about external resources and services in the user’s region on preventing child sexual abuse, counselling by help-lines, victim support and educational resources by hotlines and child protection organisation;
Amendment 331 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a c (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a c (new)
(a c) providing tools in a prominent way on their platform that allow users and potential victims to seek help from their local help-line
Amendment 332 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a d (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a d (new)
(a d) automatic mechanisms and interface design elements to inform users about external preventive intervention programmes
Amendment 333 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) reinforcadapting the provider’s internal processes or the internal supervision of the functioning of the service;
Amendment 340 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The mitigationspecific measures shall be:
Amendment 341 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) effective and proportionate in mitigating the identified serious risk;
Amendment 343 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(a a) subject to an implementation plan with clear objectives and methodologies for identifying and quantifying impacts on the identified serious risk and on the exercise of the fundamental rights of all affected parties. The implementation plan shall be reviewed every six months.
Amendment 345 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) targeted and proportionate in relation to that risk, taking into account, in particular, the seriousness of the risk , any impact on the functionality of the service as well as the provider’s financial and technological capabilities and the number of users;
Amendment 348 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Amendment 355 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Any requirement to take specific measures shall be without prejudice to Article 8 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 and shall entail neither a general obligation for hosting services providers to monitor the information which they transmit or store, nor a general obligation actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity.
Amendment 357 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. PWhere appropriate providers of hosting services and providers of interpersonal communications services shall clearly describe in their terms and conditionsof service the mitigation measures that they have taken. That description shall not include information that mayis likely to reduce the effectiveness of the mitigation measures.
Amendment 359 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 5
Article 4 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission, in cooperation with Coordinating Authorities and the EU Centre and after having conducted a public consultation, may issue guidelines on the application of paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 42, having due regard in particular to relevant technological developments and in the manners in which the services covered by those provisions are offered and used.
Amendment 361 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4 a Specific measures for platforms primarily used for the dissemination of pornographic content Where an online platform is primarily used for the dissemination of user generated pornographic content, the platform shall take the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure a. user-friendly reporting mechanisms to report alleged child sexual abuse material; b. adequate professional human content moderation to rapidly process notices of alleged child sexual abuse material; c. automatic mechanisms and interface design elements to inform users about external preventive intervention programmes in the user’s region.
Amendment 362 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 b (new)
Article 4 b (new)
Article 4 b Specific measures for number- independent interpersonal communications service within games Providers of online games that operate number-independent interpersonal communications service within their games shall take the necessary technical and organisational measures a) preventing users from initiating unsolicited contact with other users; b) facilitating user-friendly reporting of alleged child sexual abuse material; c) providing technical measures and tools that allow users to manage their own privacy, visibility reachability and safety. and that are set to the most secure levels by default; d) providing tools in a prominent way on their platform that allow users and potential victims to seek help from their local help-line.
Amendment 363 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers of hosting services and providers of publicly available number- independent interpersonal communications services shall transmit, by three months from the date referred to in Article 3(4), to the Coordinating Authority of establishment a report specifying the following:
Amendment 365 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the process and the results of the risk assessment conducted or updated pursuant to Article 3, including the assessment of any potential remaining serious risk referred to in Article 3(5);
Amendment 366 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) any mitigationspecific measures taken pursuant to Article 4.
Amendment 367 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Within three months after receiving the report, the Coordinating Authority of establishment shall assess it and determine, on that basis and taking into account any other relevant information available to it, whether the risk assessment has been carried out or updated and the mitigation measurespecific measures and implementation plans have been taken in accordance with the requirements of Articles 3 and 4.
Amendment 369 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Where necessary for that assessment, that Coordinating Authority may require further information from the provider, within a reasonable time period set by that Coordinating Authority. That time period shall not be longer than two weeksto be provided without undue delay .
Amendment 370 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 371 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Without prejudice to Articles 7 and 27 to 29, where the requirements of Articles 3 and 4 have not been met, that Coordinating Authority shall require the provider to re-conduct ormake specific updates to the risk assessment or to introduce, review, discontinue or expand, as applicable, the mitigation measures, within a reasonable time period set by that Coordinating Authority. That time period shall not be longer than one month.
Amendment 372 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 6
Article 5 – paragraph 6
Amendment 377 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) make reasonable efforts to assess, where possible together with the providers ofto ensure that software applications, whether each service offered through the software applications that they intermediate presents a risk of being used for the purpose of the socan only make available on their platform software applications if prior to the use of their service they have obtained the contact details of the provider of software applicitation of childrendeveloping team ;
Amendment 378 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 380 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 382 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Amendment 383 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Amendment 384 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Amendment 388 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6 a Security of communications and services Nothing in this regulation shall be construed as encouraging the prohibition, restriction, circumvention or undermining of the provision or the use of encrypted services.
Amendment 391 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter II – Section 2 – title
Chapter II – Section 2 – title
2 DetecInvestigation obligations
Amendment 393 #
Amendment 396 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. The Coordinating Authority of establishment shall have the power to request the competent judicial authority of the Member State that designated it or another independent administrative authority of that Member State to issue a detecto issue an investigation order requiring a provider of hosting services or a provider of publicly available number-independent interpersonal communications services under the jurisdiction of that Member State to take the measures specified in Article 10 to detectassist in investigations of a specific person, specific group of people, or a specific incident related to online child sexual abuse on a specific service.
Amendment 401 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The Coordinating Authority of establishment shall, before requesting the issuance of a detecn investigation order, carry out the investigations and assessments necessary to determine whether the conditions of paragraph 4 have been met.
Amendment 403 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Where the Coordinating Authority of establishment takes the preliminary view that the conditions of paragraph 4 have been met, it shall:
Amendment 404 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) establish a draft request for the issuance of a detecn investigation order, specifying the factual and legal grounds upon which the request is based, the main elements of the content of the detecinvestigation order it intends to request and the reasons for requesting it;
Amendment 406 #
2022/0155(COD)
Amendment 408 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Where, having regard to the comments of the provider and the opinion of the EU Centre, that Coordinating Authority continues to be of the view that the conditions of paragraph 4 havare met, it shall re-submit the draft request, adjusted where appropriate, to the provider. In that case,quest the judicial validation of the inquiry/investigation order from the competent judicial authority responsible for the issuing of such orders pursuant to paragraph 4. Upon receipt of judicial validation of the order, the Coordinating Authority shall submit the order, adjusted where appropriate, to the provider. Prior to requesting the judicial validation of the investigation order, the Coordinating Authority shall request the provider shallto do all of the following, within a reasonable time period set by that Coordinating Authority: :
Amendment 410 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point a
(a) draft an implementation plan setting out the incident that the authority intends to investigate, the measures it envisages taking to execute the intended detecinvestigation order, including detailed information regarding the envisaged technologies and safeguards;
Amendment 412 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point b
(b) where the draft implementation plan concerns an intended detecinvestigation order concerning the solicitation of children other than the renewal of a previously issued detecinvestigation order without any substantive changes, conduct a data protection impact assessment and a prior consultation procedure as referred to in Articles 35 and 36 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, respectively, in relation to the measures set out in the implementation plan;
Amendment 414 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point c
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point c
(c) where point (b) applies, or where the conditions of Articles 35 and 36 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 are met, adjust the draft implementation plan, where necessary in view of the outcome of the data protection impact assessment and in order to take intoutmost account of the opinion of the data protection authority provided in response to the prior consultation;
Amendment 415 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point d
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – point d
(d) submit to that Coordinating Authority the implementation plan, where applicable attaching the opinion of the competent data protection authority and specifying how the implementation plan has been adjusted in viewto take full account of the outcome of the data protection impact assessment and of that opinion.
Amendment 417 #
2022/0155(COD)
Where, having regard to the implementation plan of the provider and taking taking utmost account of the opinion of the data protection authority, that Coordinating Authority continues to beis of the view that the conditions of paragraph 4 have met, it shall submit the request for the validation and issuance of the detectioninvestigation order, adjusted where appropriate, to the competent judicial authority or independent administrative authority. It shall attach the implementation plan of the provider and the opinions of the EU Centre and the data protection authority to that request.
Amendment 421 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Based on a reasoned justification, The Coordinating Authority of establishment shall request the issuance of the detecinvestigation order, and the competent judicial authority or independent administrative authority shall issue the detecinvestigation order where it considers that the following conditions are met:
Amendment 422 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) there is evidence of a signpecificant risk of the service being used for the purpose of online child sexual abuse by one or more suspects , within the meaning of paragraphs 5, 6 and 7, as applicable;
Amendment 424 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) the reasons for issuing of the detection orderthe investigation order is necessary and proportionate and outweighs negative consequences for the rights and legitimate interests of all parties affected, having regard in particular to the need to ensure a fair balance between the fundamental rights of those parties.
Amendment 426 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 427 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Amendment 428 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point b
Amendment 429 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point c
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point c
Amendment 430 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point d
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point d
Amendment 431 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 433 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. As regards detecinvestigation orders concerning the dissemination of known child sexual abuse material, the signpecificant risk referred to in paragraph 4, first subparagraph, point (a), shall be deemed to exist where the following conditions are met:
Amendment 435 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) it is likely, despite any mitigation measures that the provider may have taken or will take, that the service is usedbeing used by the suspect or suspects, to an appreciable extent for the dissemination of known child sexual abuse material;
Amendment 437 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – point b
(b) there is evidence of the service, or of a comparable service if the service has not yet been offered in the Union at the date of the request for the issuance of the detection order, having been used in the past 12 months and to an appreciable extentby one or more suspects for the dissemination of known child sexual abuse material.
Amendment 438 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Amendment 442 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 7
Article 7 – paragraph 7
Amendment 446 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1
The Coordinating Authority of establishment when requesting the judicial validation and the issuance of detecinvestigation orders, and the competent judicial or independent administrative authority when issuing the detecinvestigation order, shall target and specify it in such a manner that the negative consequences referred to in paragraph 4, first subparagraph, point (b), remain limited to what is strictly necessary to effectively address the significant risk referred to in point (a) thereofand proportionate to obtain the information required to to effectively investigate the case, and collect the information required to assess the existence of a criminal offence.
Amendment 449 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 2
To that aimend, they shall take into account all relevant parameters, including the availability of sufficiently reliable detectioninvestigative technologies in that they limit to the maximum extent possible the rate of errors regarding the detecinvestigation and their suitability and effectiveness for achieving the objectives of this Regulation, as well as the impact of the measures on the rights of the users affected, and require the taking of the least intrusive measures, in accordance with Article 10, from among several equally effective measures.
Amendment 450 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 3 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 3 – point b
(b) where necessary, in particular to limit such negative consequences, effective and proportionate safeguards additional to those listed in Article 10(4), (5) and (65) are provided for;
Amendment 455 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 1
The competent judicial authority or independent administrative authority shall specify in the detecinvestigation order the period during which it applies, indicating the start date and the end date.
Amendment 456 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 2
The start date shall be set taking into account the time reasonably required for the provider to take the necessary measures to prepare the execution of the detection order. It shall not be earlier than three months from the date at which the provider received the detection order and not be later than 12 months from that dateinvestigation order.
Amendment 457 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 3
The period of application of detection orders concerning the dissemination of known or new child sexual abuse material shall not exceed 24 months and that of detection orders concerning the solicitation of children shall not exceed 12 monthsinvestigation orders shall be proportionate, taking all relevant factors into account.
Amendment 459 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – title
Article 8 – title
Additional rules regarding detecinvestigation orders
Amendment 462 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The competent judicial authority or independent administrative authority shall issue the detecinvestigation orders referred to in Article 7 using the template set out in Annex I. DetecInvestigation orders shall include:
Amendment 463 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) information regarding the measures to be taken to execute the detecinvestigation order, including the person, group of person or incident concerned, the temporal scope, the indicators to be used and the safeguards to be provided for, including the reporting requirements set pursuant to Article 9(3) and, where applicable, any additional safeguards as referred to in Article 7(8);
Amendment 466 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 468 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the specific service in respect of which the detecinvestigation order is issued and, where applicable, the part or component of the service affected as referred to in Article 7(8);
Amendment 469 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) whether the detecinvestigation order issued concerns the dissemination of known or newpreviously unknown child sexual abuse material or the solicitation of children;
Amendment 470 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) the start date and the end date of the detecinvestigation order;
Amendment 471 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) a sufficiently detailed statement of reasons explaining why the detecinvestigation order is issued;
Amendment 472 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) the factual and legal grounds justifying the issuing of the order, and a reference to this Regulation as the legal basis for the detection order;
Amendment 475 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point i
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) the date, time stamp and electronic signature of the judicial or independent administrative authority issuing the detecinvestigation order;
Amendment 476 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point j
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) easily understandable information about the redress available to the addressee of the detecinvestigation order, including information about redress to a court and about the time periods applicable to such redress.
Amendment 479 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The competent judicial authority or independent administrative authority issuing the detecinvestigation order shall address it to the main establishment of the provider or, where applicable, to its legal representative designated in accordance with Article 24.
Amendment 480 #
2022/0155(COD)
The detecinvestigation order shall be securely transmitted to the provider’s point of contact referred to in Article 23(1), to the Coordinating Authority of establishment and to the EU Centre, through the system established in accordance with Article 39(2).
Amendment 481 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
The detecinvestigation order shall be drafted in the language declared by the provider pursuant to Article 23(3).
Amendment 482 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 3
3. If the provider cannot execute the detecinvestigation order because it contains manifest errorserrors , or it appears unnecessary or disproportionate, or does not contain sufficient information for its execution, the provider shall, without undue delay, request the necessary correction or clarification to the Coordinating Authority of establishment, using the template set out in Annex II.
Amendment 483 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8 a (new)
Amendment 484 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 c (new)
Article 8 c (new)
Article 8 c Notification mechanism 1. Providers of hosting services and providers of interpersonal communication services shall establish mechanisms that allow users to notify to them the presence on their service of specific items or activities that the user considers to be potential child sexual abuse material, in particular previously unknown child sexual abuse material and solicitation of children. Those mechanisms shall be easy to access and user-friendly, child-friendly and shall allow for the submission of notices exclusively by electronic means. 2. Where the notice contains the electroni c contact information of the user who submitted it , the provider shall without undue delay send a confirmation or receipt to the user. 3. Providers shall ensure that such notices are processed without undue delay.
Amendment 486 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – title
Article 9 – title
Redress, information, reporting and modification of detecinvestigation orders
Amendment 487 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of hosting services and providers of publicly available number- independent interpersonal communications services that have received a detecinvestigation order, as well as users affected by the measures taken to execute it, shall have a right to effective redress. That right shall include the right to challenge the detecinvestigation order before the courts of the Member State of the competent judicial authority or independent administrative authority that issued the detecinvestigation order.
Amendment 492 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
When the detecinvestigation order becomes final, the competent judicial authority or independent administrative authority that issued the detecinvestigation order shall, without undue delay, transmit a copy thereof to the Coordinating Authority of establishment. The Coordinating Authority of establishment shall then, without undue delay, transmit a copy thereof to all other Coordinating Authorities through the system established in accordance with Article 39(2).
Amendment 493 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
For the purpose of the first subparagraph, a detecn investigation order shall become final upon the expiry of the time period for appeal where no appeal has been lodged in accordance with national law or upon confirmation of the detecinvestigation order following an appeal.
Amendment 494 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Where the period of application of the detecinvestigation order exceeds 12 months, or six months in the case of a detecinvestigation order concerning the solicitation of children, the Coordinating Authority of establishment shall require the provider to report to it on the execution of the detecinvestigation order at least once, halfway through the period of application.
Amendment 495 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Those reports shall include a detailed description of the measures taken to execute the detecinvestigation order, including the safeguards provided, and information on the functioning in practice of those measures, in particular on their effectiveness in detecting the dissemination of known or new child sexual abuse material or the solicitation of children, as applicable, and on the consequences of those measures for the rights and legitimate interests of all parties affected.
Amendment 496 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
In respect of the detecinvestigation orders that the competent judicial authority or independent administrative authority issued at its request, the Coordinating Authority of establishment shall, where necessary and in any event following reception of the reports referred to in paragraph 3, assess whether any substantial changes to the grounds for issuing the detection orders occurred and, in particular, whether the conditions of Article 7(4) continue to be met. In that regard, it shall take account of additional mitigation measures that the provider may take to address the significant risk identified at the time of the issuance of the detecinvestigation order.
Amendment 501 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
That Coordinating Authority shall request to the competent judicial authority or independent administrative authority that issued the detecinvestigation order the modification or revocation of such order, where necessary in the light of the outcome of that assessment. The provisions of this Section shall apply to such requests, mutatis mutandis.
Amendment 504 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of hosting services and providers of publicly available number- independent interpersonal communication services that have received a detecn investigation order shall execute it by installing and operating technologies to detectto collect evidence on the dissemination of known or newpreviously unknown child sexual abuse material or the solicitation of children, as applicable, using the corresponding indicators provided, if necessary specific technologies approved for this purpose by the EU Centre in accordance with Article 46.
Amendment 505 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. The provider shall be entitled to acquire, install and operate, free of charge, technologies specified in the orders and made available by the EU Centre in accordance with Article 50(1), for the sole purpose of executing the detection order. The provider shall not be required to use any specific technology, including those made available by the EU Centre, as long as the requirements set out in this Article are met. The use of the technologies made available by the EU Centre shall not affect the responsibility of the provider to comply with those requirements and for any decisions it may take in connection to or as a result of the use of the technologiesinvestigation order.
Amendment 506 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The technologies specified in the investigation orders shall be:
Amendment 507 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) effective in detcollecting evidence on the dissemination of known or new child sexual abuse material or the solicitation of children, as applicable;
Amendment 508 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) not be able to extract any other information from the relevant communications than the information strictly necessary to detect,investigate , including using the indicators referred to in paragraph 1, patterns pointing to the dissemination of known or newpreviously unknown child sexual abuse material or the solicitation of children, as applicable;
Amendment 510 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) in accordance with the technological state of the art in the industry and the least intrusive in terms of the impact on the users’ rights to private and family life, including the confidentiality of communication, and to protection of personal data;
Amendment 511 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point d
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – point d
(d) sufficiently reliable, in that they limit to the maximum extent possible the rate of errors regarding the detecinvestigation.
Amendment 513 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. The providerissuing authority shall:
Amendment 514 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – point a
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) take all the necessary measures to ensure that the technologies and indicators, as well as the processing of personal data and other data in connection thereto, are usedspecified in investigation orders and indicators, are proportionate for the sole purpose of detecinvestigating the dissemination of known or new child sexual abuse material or the solicitation of children, as applicable, insofar asnd strictly necessary to execute the detecinvestigation orders addressed to themthey issue ;
Amendment 516 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) establish effectiveinclude in investigation orders specific internal procedures for providers to prevent and, where necessary, detect and remedy any misuse of the technologies, indicators and personal data and other data referred to in point (a), including unauthorized access to, and unauthorised transfers of, such personal data and other data;
Amendment 517 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – point c
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – point c
(c) include in investigation orders specific obligations on providers to ensure regular human oversight as necessary to ensure that the technologies operate in a sufficiently reliable manner and, where necessary, in particular when potential errors and potential solicitation of children are detected, human intervention;
Amendment 520 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – point d
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – point d
(d) establish and operate an accessible, age-appropriate and user-friendly mechanism that allows users to submit to it, within a reasonable timeframe, complaints about alleged infringements of itsproviders’ obligations under this Section, as well as any decisions that the provider may have taken in relation to the use of the technologies, including the removal or disabling of access to material provided by users, blocking the users’ accounts or suspending or terminating the provision of the service to the users, and process such complaints in an objective, effective and timely manner;
Amendment 522 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – point e
Article 10 – paragraph 4 – point e
(e) inform the Coordinating Authority, as appropriate, at the latest one month before the start date specified in the detecinvestigation order, on the implementation of the envisaged measures set out in the implementation plan referred to in Article 7(3);
Amendment 525 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Amendment 526 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Amendment 528 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
The provider shall not provide information to users that may reduce the effectiveness of the measures to execute the detecinvestigation order.
Amendment 529 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6
Article 10 – paragraph 6
Amendment 531 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – title
Article 11 – title
Guidelines regarding detecinvestigation obligations
Amendment 532 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
The Commission, in cooperation with the Coordinating Authorities and the EU Centre and after having conducted a public consultation, may issue guidelinedelegated acts on the application of Articles 7 to 10, having due regard in particular to relevant technological developments and the manners in which the services covered by those provisions are offered and used.
Amendment 533 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Where a provider of hosting services or a provider of interpersonal communications services becomes aware in any manner other than through a removal order issued in accordance with this Regulation of any information indicating potential online child sexual abuse on its services, it shall promptly submit a report thereon to the EU Centre in accordance with Article 13publicly available number-independent interpersonal communications services has actual knowledge of alleged online child sexual abuse on its services in any manner other than through a removal order issued in accordance with this Regulation, it shall promptly submit using state of the art encryption a report to the EU Centre in accordance with Article 13 and shall expeditiously remove such content , once the EU Centre confirms this will not prejudice an ongoing investigation . It shall do so through the system established in accordance with Article 39(2).
Amendment 536 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Where the provider submits a report pursuant to paragraph 1, it shall inform the user concerned, providingrequest authorisation from the EU Centre to inform the user concerned, , which shall reply without undue delay, at maximum within two days. The notification to the user shall include information on the main content of the report, on the manner in which the provider has become aware of the potentialalleged child sexual abuse concerned, on the follow-up given to the report insofar as such information is available to the provider and on the user’s possibilities of redress, including on the right to submit complaints to the Coordinating Authority in accordance with Article 34.
Amendment 537 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 538 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 544 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers of hosting services and providers of publicly available number- independent interpersonal communications services shall submit the report referred to in Article 12 using the template set out in Annex III. The report shall include:
Amendment 545 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) all content data, including images, videos and textencrypted versions of all content data, being reported;
Amendment 546 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) a list of all available data other than content data related to the potential online child sexual abuse preserved in line with the preservation order in Article 8a;
Amendment 547 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(d a) a list of all traffic data and metadata retained in relation to the potential online child sexual abuse, which could be made available to law enforcement authorities, together with information concerning default storage periods.
Amendment 548 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point e
Amendment 549 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point f
Amendment 550 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point g
Amendment 551 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point i
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) where the potentialalleged online child sexual abuse concerns the dissemination of known or newpreviously unknown child sexual abuse material, whether the provider has removed or disabled access to the material;
Amendment 552 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point j
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) whether the provider considersan indication that the report requires urgent action;
Amendment 555 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Before issuing a removal order, the Coordinating Authority of establishment shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that implementing the order will not interfere with activities for the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of child sexual abuse offences.
Amendment 561 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point c
Amendment 567 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) the reasons for the removal or disabling, providing a copy of the removal order upon the user’s request;
Amendment 568 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Amendment 575 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19
Article 19
Amendment 580 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 5
Article 25 – paragraph 5
5. Each Member State shall ensure that a contact point is designated or established within the Coordinating Authority’s office to handle requests for clarification, feedback and other communications in relation to all matters related to the application and enforcement of this Regulation in that Member Statecontributing to the achievements of the objective of this Regulation in that Member State , including for trusted organisations providing assistance to victims and providing education and awareness raising. Member States shall make the information on the contact point publicly available and communicate it to the EU Centre. They shall keep that information updated.
Amendment 582 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
Article 25 – paragraph 7 – introductory part
7. Coordinating Authorities may, where necessary for the performance of their tasks under this Regulation, request the assistance of the EU Centre in carrying out those tasks, in particular by requesting the EU Centre to:
Amendment 583 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 7 – point a
Article 25 – paragraph 7 – point a
Amendment 584 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 7 – point b
Article 25 – paragraph 7 – point b
Amendment 585 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 7 – point c
Article 25 – paragraph 7 – point c
Amendment 586 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 7 – point d
Article 25 – paragraph 7 – point d
Amendment 588 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 8
Article 25 – paragraph 8
8. The EU Centre shall provide such assistance free of charge and in accordance with its tasks and obligations under this Regulation and insofar as its resources and priorities allow.
Amendment 599 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 5
Article 26 – paragraph 5
5. Without prejudice to national or Union legislation on whistleblower protection, The management and other staff of the Coordinating Authorities shall, in accordance with Union or national law, be subject to a duty of professional secrecy both during and after their term of office, with regard to any confidential information which has come to their knowledge in the course of the performance of their tasks. Member States shall ensure that the management and other staff are subject to rules guaranteeing that they can carry out their tasks in an objective, impartial and independent manner, in particular as regards their appointment, dismissal, remuneration and career prospects.
Amendment 602 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the power to carry out remote or on-site inspections of any premises that those providers or the other persons referred to in point (a) use for purposes related to their trade, business, craft or profession, or to request other public authorities to do so, in order to examine, seize, take or obtain copies of information relating to a suspected infringement of this Regulation in any form, irrespective of the storage medium;
Amendment 603 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the power to request information, including to assess whether the measures taken to execute a detection order, removal order or blocking order complyto assess the compliance with the requirements of this Regulation.
Amendment 604 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the power to order specific measures to bring about the cessation of infringements of this Regulation and, where appropriate, to impose remedies proportionate to the infringement and necessary to bring the infringement effectively to an end;
Amendment 605 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the infringement persists and;
Amendment 606 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i
(i) adopt and submit an action plan setting out the necessary measures to terminate the infringement , subject to the approval of the Coordinating Authority;
Amendment 608 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – point b – point ii
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – point b – point ii
(ii) the infringement persists and causes serious harm that is greater than the likely harm to users relying on the service for legal purposes and;
Amendment 609 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3 – point a
Article 29 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3 – point a
(a) the provider has failed to take the necessary and proportionate measures to terminate the infringement;
Amendment 610 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2
Article 30 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that any exercise of the investigatory and enforcement powers referred to in Articles 27, 28 and 29 is subject to adequate safeguards laid down in the applicable national law to respect the fundamental rights of all parties affected. In particular, those measures shall onlybe targeted and precise, be taken in accordance with the right to respect for private life and the rights of defence, including the rights to be heard and of access to the file, and subject to the right to an effective judicial remedy of all parties affected.
Amendment 611 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1
Coordinating Authorities shall have the power to carry out searches on publicly accessible material on hosting services to detect the dissemination of known or new child sexual abuse material, using the indicators contained in the databases referred to in Article 44(1), points (a) and (b), where necessary to verify whether the providers of hosting services under the jurisdiction of the Member State that designated the Coordinating Authorities comply with their obligations under this Regulation.
Amendment 612 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32
Article 32
Amendment 615 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the maximum amount of penalties imposed for an infringement of this Regulation shall not exceed 6 % of the annual income or globalworldwide turnover of the preceding business year of the provider.
Amendment 616 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 3
Article 35 – paragraph 3
3. Penalties for the supply of incorrect, incomplete or misleading information, failure to reply or rectify incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or to submit to an on-site inspection shall not exceed 1% of the annual income or globalworldwide turnover of the preceding business year of the provider or the other person referred to in Article 27.
Amendment 617 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 4
Article 35 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that the maximum amount of a periodic penalty payment shall not exceed 5 % of the average daily globalworldwide turnover of the provider or the other person referred to in Article 27 in the preceding financial year per day, calculated from the date specified in the decision concerned.
Amendment 619 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) anonymised specific items of material and transcripts of conversations related to a specific person, specific group of people,or specific incident that Coordinating Authorities or that the competent judicial authorities or other independent administrative authorities of a Member State have identified, after a diligent assessment, as constituting child sexual abuse material or the solicitation of children, as applicable, for the EU Centre to generate indicators in accordance with Article 44(3);
Amendment 620 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) exact uniform resource locators indicating specific items of material related to a specific person, specific group of people,or specific incident that Coordinating Authorities or that competent judicial authorities or other independent administrative authorities of a Member State have identified, after a diligent assessment, as constituting child sexual abuse material, hosted by providers of hosting services not offering services in the Union, that cannot be removed due to those providers’ refusal to remove or disable access thereto and to the lack of cooperation by the competent authorities of the third country having jurisdiction, for the EU Centre to compile thea public list of uniform resource locators in accordance with Article 44(3)states that facilitate crimes against children by not ensuring expeditious removal of child sexual abuse material.
Amendment 621 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the Coordinating Authorities that they designated receive, without undue delay,the encrypted copies of the material identified as child sexual abuse material, the transcripts of conversations related to a specific person, specific group of people,or specific incident identified as the solicitation of children, and the uniform resource locators, identified by a competent judicial authority or other independent administrative authority than the Coordinating Authority, for submission to the EU Centre in accordance with the first subparagraph.
Amendment 622 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Where the Commission has reason, in the reasoned opinion of the Commission , there are grounds to suspect that a provider of relevant information society services infringed this Regulation in a manner involvcausing harm ing at least three Member States, it may recommend that the Coordinating Authority of establishment assess the matter and take the necessary investigatory and enforcement measures to ensure compliance with this Regulation.
Amendment 623 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 37 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) any other information that the Coordinating Authority that sent the request, or the Commission, considers relevant, including, where appropriate, information gathered on its own initiative and suggestions for specific investigatory or enforcement measures to be taken.
Amendment 624 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 37 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The Coordinating Authority of establishment shall assess the suspected infringement, taking into utmost account the request or recommendation referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 625 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 37 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Where it considers that it has insufficient information to asses the suspected infringement or to act upon the request or recommendation and has reasons to consider that the Coordinating Authority that sent the request, or the Commission, could provide additional information, it may request such information. The time period laid down in paragraph 4 shall be suspended until that additional information is provided.
Amendment 626 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 4
Article 37 – paragraph 4
4. The Coordinating Authority of establishment shall, without undue delay and in any event not later than two months following receipt of the request or recommendation referred to in paragraph 1, communicate to the Coordinating Authority that sent the request, or the Commission, the outcome of its assessment of the suspected infringement, or that of any other competent authority pursuant to national law where relevant, and, where applicable, an explanationdetails of the investigatory or enforcement measures taken or envisaged in relation thereto to ensure compliance with this Regulation.
Amendment 636 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(d a) a Survivors‘ Advisory Board as an advisory group, which shall exercise the tasks set out in Article 66a (new).
Amendment 637 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 57 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) adopt rules for the prevention and management of conflicts of interest in respect of its members, as well as for the members of the Technological Committee and of any other advisory group it may establishthe Survivors’ Advisory Board and publish annually on its website the declaration of interests of the members of the Management Board;
Amendment 638 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 57 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) appoint the members of the Technology Committee, and of any other advisory group it may establishthe Survivors’ Advisory Board;
Amendment 639 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 57 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
(h a) consult the Survivors’ Advisory Board as regards the obligations referred to in points (a) and (h) of this Article.
Amendment 640 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 66 a (new)
Article 66 a (new)
Amendment 641 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers of hosting services, providers of publicly available number- independent interpersonal communications services and providers of internet access services shall collect data on the following topics and make that information available to the EU Centre upon requestpublic:
Amendment 642 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
(a) where the provider has been subject to a detecn investigation order issued in accordance with Article 7:
Amendment 643 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point a – indent 1
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point a – indent 1
— the measures taken to comply with the order, including the technologies used for that purpose and the safeguards provided;
Amendment 644 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point a – indent 2
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point a – indent 2
— the error rates of false positives and false negatives the technologies deployed to detect online child sexual abuse and measures taken to prevent or remedy any errors;related to specific person, specific group of people or specific incident and steps taken to mitigate the harm caused by any inaccuracy
Amendment 646 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the number of removal orders issued to the provider in accordance with Article 14 and the average time needed for removing or disabling access to the item or items of child sexual abuse material in question , counting from the moment the order entered the provider’s system ;
Amendment 648 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) the number and duration of delays to removals as a result of requests from competent authorities or law enforcement authorities;
Amendment 649 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the total number of items of child sexual abuse material that the provider removed or to which it disabled access, broken down by whether the items were removed or access thereto was disabled pursuant to a removal order or to a notice submitted by a judicial authority, Competent Authority, the EU Centre or, a third partynational hotline, a trusted flagger or a private individual or at the provider’s own initiative;
Amendment 650 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(c a) The number of instances the provider was asked to provide additional support to law enforcement authorities in relation to content that was removed;
Amendment 651 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 83 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 652 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 83 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Coordinating Authorities shall collect data on the following topics and make that information publicly available redacting operationally sensitive data as appropriate and proving an unredacted version to the EU Centre upon request:
Amendment 653 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 4 a (new)
Article 83 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 4 a (new)
- the nature of the report and its key characteristics such as if the security of the hosting service was allegedly breached;
Amendment 654 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 83 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the most important and recurrent risks of online child sexual abuse encountered , as reported by providers of hosting services and providers of publicly available number -independent interpersonal communications services in accordance with Article 3 or identified through other information available to the Coordinating Authority;
Amendment 655 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 83 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) a list of the providers of hosting services and providers of interpersonal communications services to which the Coordinating Authority addressed a detecinvestigation order in accordance with Article 7;
Amendment 656 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 83 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) the number of detecinvestigation orders issued in accordance with Article 7, broken down by provider and by type of online child sexual abuse, and the number of instances in which the provider invoked Article 8(3);
Amendment 657 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 2 – point f
Article 83 – paragraph 2 – point f
(f) the number of removal orders issued in accordance with Article 14, broken down by provider, the time needed to remove or disable access to the item or items of child sexual abuse material concerned, , including the time it took the Coordinating Authority to process the order and the number of instances in which the provider invoked Article 14(5) and (6);
Amendment 658 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 2 – point g
Article 83 – paragraph 2 – point g
Amendment 659 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 83 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The EU Centre shall collect data and generate statistics on the detectioninvestigation order, reporting, removal of or disabling of access to online child sexual abuse under this Regulation. The data shall be in particular on the following topicsinclude:
Amendment 660 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 83 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) the number of indicators in the databases of indicators referred to in Article 44 and the developmentchange of that number as compared to previous years;
Amendment 661 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 83 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) the number of submissions of child sexual abuse material and solicitation of children referred to in Article 36(1), broken down by Member State that designated the submitting Coordinating Authorities, and, in the case of child sexual abuse material, the number of indicators generated on the basis thereof and the number of still active uniform resource locators included in the list of uniform resource locators in accordance with Article 44(3);
Amendment 662 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 83 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) the total number of reports submitted to the EU Centre in accordance with Article 12, broken down by provider of hosting services and provider of publicly available number-independent interpersonal communications services that submitted the report and by Member State the competent authority of which the EU Centre forwarded the reports to in accordance with Article 48(3);
Amendment 663 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 3 – point d
Article 83 – paragraph 3 – point d
(d) the online child sexual abuse to which the reports relate, including the number of items of potential known and new child sexual abuse material and instances of potential solicitation of children, the Member State the competent authority of which the EU Centre forwarded the reports to in accordance with Article 48(3), and type of relevant information society service that the reporting provider offers;
Amendment 664 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 3 – point e
Article 83 – paragraph 3 – point e
(e) the number of reports that the EU Centre considered unfounded or manifestly unfounded, as referred to in Article 48(2);
Amendment 665 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 3 – point f
Article 83 – paragraph 3 – point f
(f) the number of reports relating to potential newpreviously unknown child sexual abuse material and solicitation of children that were assessed as not constituting child sexual abuse material of which the EU Centre was informed pursuant to Article 36(3), broken down by Member State;
Amendment 666 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 3 – point h
Article 83 – paragraph 3 – point h
(h) where materially the same item of potential child sexual abuse material was reported more than once to the EU Centre in accordance with Article 12 or detected more than once through the searches in accordance with Article 49(1), the number of times that that item was reported or detected in that manner.
Amendment 667 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 4
Article 83 – paragraph 4
4. The providers of hosting services, providers of interpersonal communications services and providers of internet access services, the Coordinating Authorities and the EU Centre shall ensure that the data referredstored pursuant to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, respectively, is stored no longer than is necessary for the transparency reporting referred to in Article 84. The data stored shall not contain any personal data.
Amendment 668 #
2022/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 83 – paragraph 5
Article 83 – paragraph 5
5. They shall ensure that the data is stored in a secure manner and that the storage is subject to appropriate technical and organisational safeguards. Those safeguards shall ensure, in particular, that the data can be accessed and processed only for the purpose for which it is stored, that a high level of security is achieved and that the information is deleted when no longer necessary for that purpose. All access to this data shall be logged and the logs securely stored for five years. They shall regularly review those safeguards and adjust them where necessary.
Amendment 114 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In order to create an effective and future-proof regulatory framework, it is necessary to allow for the setting of ecodesign requirements on all physical goods placed on the market or put into service, including components and intermediate products. This should allow the Commissions to take into account the broadest range of products possible when prioritising the establishment of ecodesign requirements and thereby maximise their effectiveness. Where needed, specific exemptions should be made when setting ecodesign requirements, for example for products with a particular purpose that could not be fulfilled when complying with ecodesgin requirements or for second- hand products that were placed or made available on the market before the entry into force of this Regulation or of the relevant Delegated Act. In addition, exemptions should be made at the level of the framework for those products for which it is already clear that ecodesign requirements would not be suitable or where other frameworks provide for the setting of such requirements. This should be the case for food and feed as defined in Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council44 , medicinal products for human use as defined in Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council45 , veterinary medicinal products as defined in Regulation (EU) 2019/6 of the European Parliament and of the Council46 , living plants, animals and micro-organisms, products of human origin, and products of plants and animals relating directly to their future reproduction. _________________ 44 Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety (OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1). 45 Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use (OJ L 311, 28.11.2001, p. 67). 46 Regulation (EU) 2019/6 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on veterinary medicinal products and repealing Directive 2001/82/EC (OJ L 4, 7.1.2019, p. 43).
Amendment 183 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 46 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 46 a (new)
Amendment 206 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 66 to supplement this Regulation by establishing ecodesign requirements for, or in relation to, products to improve their environmental sustainability. Those requirements shall include the elements listed in Annex VI and shall be established in accordance with Articles 5, 6 and 7 and Chapter III. The empowerment to adopt ecodesign requirements includes the power to establish that no performance requirements, no information requirements or neither performance nor information requirements are necessary for certain specified product parameters referred to in Annex I, as well as specify rules applicable to second-hand products that were placed or made available on the market before the entry into force of this Regulation or of the relevant delegated act. Where relevant, delegated acts shall specify rules applying to second-hand economic operators with regard to their obligations, especially with regard to product's compliance with performance and information requirements.
Amendment 214 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
(c a) requiring products placed on the market to be able to replace the operating system without artificial restrictions, limitations or obstacles by services and users with an operating system of a third- party, including free and open-source software
Amendment 263 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a (new)
Amendment 268 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b – paragraph 1 – point ii a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b – paragraph 1 – point ii a (new)
(ii a) information for consumers and other end-users on how to install third- party operating systems, including free and open-source software, in order to facilitate reusability, upgradability and reparability of electronical devices as required in Article 5(1);
Amendment 360 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Manufacturers shall ensure, that a product covered by a delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 4 is accompanied by instructions that enable consumers and other end-users to safely install, develop and maintain third-party operating systems, including free and open-source software, in a language that can be easily understood by consumers and other end-users, as determined by the Member State concerned. Such instructions shall be clear, understandable and legible and include at least the information specified in the delegated acts adopted pursuant to Article 4 and pursuant to Article 7(2)(b), point (ii).
Amendment 381 #
2022/0095(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 a (new)
Article 24 a (new)
Article 24 a Obligations of second-hand economic operators 1. When making available a second-hand product covered by a delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 4,second economic operators shall act with due care with regard to the specific requirements of the product set out in that act. Before making available a product on the market, they shall verify the following: a) The second-hand product is labelled or linked to a digital product passport in accordance with requirements set under Article 4. b) The second-hand product is accompanied by the required documents and instructions stored in the Digital Product Passport, provided that they are granted access to them, to enable the consumer to assemble, install, operate, store, maintain and dispose of the product, in a language that can be easily understood by consumers and other end- users. 2. Second-hand economic operators shall ensure that storage or transport conditions do not jeopardise its compliance with requirements set out in the delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 4. 3. Where second-hand economic operators replace a component of a second-hand product in view of making it available on the market, they shall ensure that the component comply with theecodesign requirements under this Regulation. 4. For cases where the second-hand economic operator has reasons to believe that the product, or a component introduced in the product before making it available on the market, is not inconformity with the ecodesign requirements as set under the delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 4 of this Regulation, it shall inform the competent authority of it and take corrective measures to bring the product in question into conformity, including withdrawal or recall. 5. Further to a reasoned request by a competent national authority, second- hand economic operators shall submit all information and required documents to demonstrate that they comply with the obligations under this Article.
Amendment 184 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a a (new)
Directive 2005/29/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
(aa) in paragraph 2, point (c) is replaced by the following: ‘(c) any marketing of a good, in one Member State, as bewith seemingly identical to a goodpresentation to another good, which is marketed, in other Member States, while that good has significantlyunder the same brand, trademark or designation, while that good presents differentces in composition or characteristics, unless justified by legitimate and objective factors.including its sensory profile;’
Amendment 313 #
2022/0092(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Directive 2005/29/EC
Annex I – point 13 a (new)
Annex I – point 13 a (new)
(3a) the following point 13a is inserted: 13a. Any marketing of a good as being identical or seemingly identical to the other good marketed in one or various Member State, while those goods have different composition or characteristics which have not been clearly marked on the packaging, so as to be visible to the consumer.
Amendment 5 #
2022/0021(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) In the past years, the practices in the European standardisation organisations as regards their internal governance and decision-making procedures have changed. As a result, the European standardisation organisations have increased their co- operation with international and European stakeholders. Such cooperation is welcome as it contributes to the transparent, open, impartial and consensus-built standardisation process. However, when European standardisation organisations execute standardisation requests to support Union legislation and policies, unrestricted participation of any stakeholder in their internal decision-making may lead to decisions that do not entirely take into account the interests, policy objectives, and values of the Union as well as public interests in general. In order to prevent this scenario, the positions of European stakeholders should be duly reflected in the decisions of the European standardisation organisations and of the national standardisation bodies. Furthermore, the participation of legal entities which are not incorporated in the Member State concerned shall not amount to impede the adoption of any decision concerning European standards and European standardisation deliverables supported by the majority of all the other stakeholders participating in the national standardisation bodies.
Amendment 10 #
2022/0021(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) National standardisation bodies play an essential role in the standardisation system, both, at the Union level, in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012, and at the level of Member States. National standardisation bodies are therefore best placed to make sure that the interests, policy objectives and values of the Union as well as the views of all stakeholders, including SMEs, consumer organisations, environmental and social stakeholders, and public interests in general are duly taken into account in European standardisation organisations. It is therefore necessary to strengthen their role in decision-making bodies of the European standardisation organisations when those bodies take decisions concerning European standards and European standardisation deliverables requested by the Commission under Article 10(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012.
Amendment 19 #
2022/0021(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012
Article 10 – paragraph 2a a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2a a (new)
Amendment 172 #
2021/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88 a (new)
Paragraph 88 a (new)
88 a. Deeply regrets that some parliamentary committee secretariats require Members to exclusively use proprietary software from Microsoft or Apple; believes that all Members should remain able to use any IT equipment they wish, including open-source technology;
Amendment 173 #
2021/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88 b (new)
Paragraph 88 b (new)
88 b. Recalls the added-value of free and open-source software in improving security since they make it possible for Parliament to identify and fix weaknesses, keep control over the data by hosting in its servers and designing solutions according to its own specifications, while being able to avoid vendor lock-in effects;
Amendment 174 #
2021/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88 c (new)
Paragraph 88 c (new)
88 c. Recalls its preference for free and open-source software solutions as against proprietary ones when considering new internal applications; asks for situations to be reported to the ICT governing bodies when open source solutions are not chosen;
Amendment 175 #
2021/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88 d (new)
Paragraph 88 d (new)
88 d. In line with the previous Parliament discharge resolution and in order to significantly increase the confidentiality of its internal communication, asks the relevant services to test the integration and deployment of solutions for instant messaging and virtual meetings that are open source based, hosted in the Parliament's servers, and which enable secure communication such as Matrix and Jitsi;
Amendment 176 #
2021/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88 e (new)
Paragraph 88 e (new)
88 e. Appreciates that Parliament's services are working to further improve the quality and accessibility of the publicly available data of the institution by adopting open data principles for re- use and redistribution, which were presented to the Bureau working group on ICT Innovation in April 2021; welcomes Parliament’s open data portal initiative, which aims to accommodate publicly available datasets in an easily accessible and user-friendly way, as well as provide data in an interoperable, machine-readable format and thus put into practice the open data principles on technical, legal, practical and social openness;
Amendment 177 #
2021/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88 f (new)
Paragraph 88 f (new)
88 f. Welcomes the fact that the Security-General adopted the information security policy in June 2020, identifying the different categories of data and establishing the related conditions that must be observed for their handling and storage, based on a data protection impact assessment and security assessment; notes the Commission’s intension to propose for a regulation covering the information security and aiming at improved harmonisation of treatment among the different institutions, bodies and agencies;
Amendment 5 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas although intellectual property rights (IPR) are well regulated in most Member States, infringements and hold-backs are jeopardising the open system exceptions and limitations are still lacking in many areas, infringements are jeopardising the exclusivity of these rights, while thate leads to innovations; whereas counterfeit products are still abundant in the single market, with most of them entgal framework would deserve more openness, especially in a post-Covid world, in order to allow for more legal uses serving the EU through the digital market, causing financial losses of approximately EUR 60 billion per yearinnovation, not only for the benefit of society as a whole but also in the aim of placing the EU in a leading innovation position in the world;
Amendment 17 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the importance of better cooperation between the European Union and the Member States to harmonise IP legislation and facilitate the access of economic operators to IPR registration at EU level; recommends that the current legislation be adaptreformed in order to improve the functioning of the digital single market for IP; ; urges the Commission to issue its guidelines on the implementation of article 17 of Directive (EU) 2019/790, in order to assist Member States in implementing the Directive in line with fundamental rights, especially the right to freedom of expression and the right to privacy and data protection;
Amendment 22 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to formulate a strategy to tackle and minimise infringements, hold-backs, counterfeiting and piracy, which continue to thrive and have proven to be even more dangerous during the COVID-19 pandemic by fostering the circulation of quality content across the EU including by eliminating geo-blocking of copyright protected content or by open licences; warns against offensive IPR strategies which have proven to be even more dangerous during the COVID-19 pandemic, which resulted in lower access to essential protective equipment and vaccines;
Amendment 26 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Warns against any upload filtering measures; reminds that according to the Commission’s own impact assessment, these tools are not consistently accurate and there are very few possibilities to inspect their reliability; reminds that the use of such tools, although they are able to remove large volumes of content very fast, brings at the same time a set of challenges in particular with regard to more context-sensitive content; asks that any additional measures aimed at removing or disabling access to illegal content shall not be decided before the DSA will be fully implemented; in this respect calls for the Commission to issue guidelines on article 17 of Directive (EU) 2019/790; reminds that the European Commission defended the legal interpretation of Article 17 before the European Court of Justice, according to which only manifestly infringing uses of copyrighted content may be blocked;
Amendment 32 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that a green and digital recovery and resilience in the single market must be based on the full use of intangible assetcould be based on among others the use of intangible assets supported by a clear legal framework on the full implementation of limitations and exceptions to IPRs; highlights that different industries might require different approaches, as for instance in the ICT sector patents are often used for other reasons than to protect inventions resulting from research and development investments; warns that litigation and threat thereof can also be a burden on the patent system when abusive behaviour is widespread, notes that this has a negative impact on innovative business behaviour; therefore calls to improve the transparency of patent ownership, raising awareness of the advantages of the legal protection of computer programmes by copyright in line with Directive 2009/24/EC and to limit abusive litigation practices; highlights the importance of disseminating information about the benefits of IPopen innovation and the Commission’s support programmes for all economic operators, in particular SMEs;
Amendment 38 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the Commission to cooperate with the Member States to facilitate access to financial support and credits based on intangible assets in order to encourage SMEs to register their IP and reap the full benefits,; reminds that lowering barriers of access to data is essential to encourage the development of new services, therefore emphasises the need to address remaining uncertainties related to the legal performance of text and data mining that developers of AI may still face following the adoption of Directive (EU) 2019/790; calls on the Commission to issue guidance on how to reserve the right other than by machine readable means in order to make it publicly available for all, in a centralised way ensuring a faster and better economic recovery. ;
Amendment 43 #
2021/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Reminds that the Commission’s data strategy already foresees the re- evaluation of the IPR framework with a view to further enhance data access and use accordingly; recalls in this regard that the first evaluation of Directive 96/9/EC on the legal protection of databases stated that the introduction of the new “sui generis right” has achieved a decrease in the production of European databases, therefore encourages the Commission to repeal the directive;
Amendment 28 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Political advertising can be disseminated or published through various means and media across borders, both online and offline. It can be disseminated or published via traditional offline media such as newspapers, television and radio, and also increasingly via online platforms, websites, mobile applications, computer games and other digital interfaces. The latter are not only particularly prone to be offered cross- border, but also raise novel and difficult regulatory and enforcement challenges. The use of online political advertising is strongly increasing, and certain linear offline forms of political advertising, such as radio and television, are also offered online as on-demand services. Political advertising campaigns tend to be organised to make use of a range of media and forms.
Amendment 47 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The publication or dissemination by other actors of a message that is liable to influence the outcome of an election or referendum, legislative or regulatory process or voting behaviour should also constitute political advertising. In order to determine whether the publication or dissemination of a message is liable to influence the outcome of an election or referendum, a legislative or regulatory process or, voting behaviour or public opinion on broad political issues, account should be taken of all relevant factors such as the content of the message, the language used to convey the message, the context in which the message is conveyed, the objective of the message and the means by which the message is published or disseminated. Messages on societal or controversial issues may, as the case may be, be liable to influence the outcome of an election or referendum, a legislative or regulatory process or voting behaviour or public opinion on broad political issues.
Amendment 75 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42 a (new)
Recital 42 a (new)
(42 a) Given the context of political advertisement and its impact on democratic processes, it requires further public accountability and regulatory supervision to enable individuals to make informed political decisions free from interference or manipulation. A European advertisement repository is therefore established to ensure public access to advertisements presented on online interfaces of all political advertisement publishers, which are not very large online platforms within the meaning of Article 25 of Regulation (EU) 2021/xxx [the DSA], to facilitate supervision and research into emerging risks brought about by the distribution of advertising online, for example in relation to illegal advertisements or manipulative techniques and disinformation with a real and foreseeable negative impact on public security, civil discourse, political participation, equality and free and fair elections or referendums.
Amendment 84 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) to protect natural personseffectively protect fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, in particular with regard to the processing of personal data.
Amendment 94 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
(b) which is liablekely to influence the outcome of an election or referendum, a legislative or regulatory process or voting behaviour.
Amendment 96 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b a (new)
(b a) which is likely to influence public opinion on broad political issues.
Amendment 104 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11
11. ‘political advertising publisher’ means a natural or legal person that broadcasts, makes available through an interface or otherwise brings to the public domaindisseminates, places, promotes, publishes or delivers political advertising through any medium;
Amendment 128 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the identity of the sponsor or of the entity ultimately controlling the sponsor and contact details;
Amendment 135 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) where applicable, an indication of elections or, referendums, or the legislative or regulatory process with which the advertisement is linked;
Amendment 140 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Political advertising publishers shall make reasonablebest efforts to ensure that the information referred to in paragraph 1 and 2 is complete, and where they find this is not the case, they shall not make available the political advertisement.
Amendment 145 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. Transparency notices shall be kept up to date and presented in a format which is easily accessible and, where technically possible, machine readable, clearly visible and user friendly, including through the use of plain language, accessible for people with disabilities. The information shall be published by the political advertising publisher with the political advertisement from its first publication until one year after its last publication.
Amendment 150 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Political advertising publishers, which are not very large online platforms within the meaning of Article 25 of Regulation (EU) 2021/xxx [the DSA] shall ensure that they make available for each political advertisement the information as referred in Article 7(2) in the repository set out in Article 7(6b)
Amendment 151 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6 b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. The Commission shall establish and maintain a European political advertisement repository to compile and make publicly available, through a searchable, machine-readable and reliable tool that allows multicriteria queries, and through application programming interfaces, political advertisements published or disseminated online until seven years after the advertisement was presented for the last time on an online interface of a publisher of political advertisement.
Amendment 153 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6 c (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 6 c (new)
Amendment 154 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6 d (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 6 d (new)
6 d. The Commission shall ensure that the repository does not contain any personal data of the recipients of the service to whom the advertisement was or could have been presented.
Amendment 155 #
2021/0381(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 7
Article 7 – paragraph 7
Amendment 22 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6 a) It is important to consider that digital skills will remain unobtainable so long as there are such large gaps in basic skills levels, particularly affecting disadvantaged groups and a high number of adults. Similarly it is important that the impartation of digital skills conforms to societal needs and not the other way around and that the population must not end up as passive technology consumers but be actively in charge of their technologies; Furthermore, successful digitalisation lies in the potential of accessible, open, social and personalised technologies that can bring about more inclusive learning paths and a learning continuum between formal, non-formal and informal learning.
Amendment 30 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Digital skills, basic and advanced, are essential to reinforce the collective resilience of the Union’s society. Digitally empowered and capable citizens will be able to take advantage of the opportunities of the Digital Decade. Moreover, digital training and education should support athe development of a more gender balanced and diverse workforce in which people can acquire specialised digital skills to get quality jobs and rewarding careers in much greater numbers than today, with convergence between women and men. In addition, an essential enabler for taking advantage of the benefits of digitisation, for further technological developments and for Europe’s digital leadership is a sustainable digital infrastructure for connectivity, microelectronics and the ability to process vast data. ExcellenReliable, fast and secure connectivity for everybody and everywhere in Europe including in rural and remote areas40 is needed. Societal needs for upload and download bandwidth are constantly growing. By 2030, networks with gigabit speeds should become available at accessible conditions for all those who need or wish such capacity. Moreover, microprocessors which are already today at the start of most of the key, strategic value chains are expected to be in even higher demand in the future, in particular the most innovative ones. Climate neutral highly secure edge node guaranteeing access to data services with low latency wherever businesses are located and quantum capacity are also expected to be critical enablers. _________________ 40 Long-term Vision for the EU’s Rural Areas. COM(2021) 345 final.
Amendment 59 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The cooperative dialogue between the Commission and the Member States should commence with the assessment of their national Digital Decade strategic roadmaps and should be based on the data provided and assessment made in the report of the state of the Digital Decade, as well as on the feedback received by relevant stakeholders, including civil society.
Amendment 61 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) In order to ensure transparency and public participation, the Commission should engage with all interested stakeholders. To that end, the Commission should closely cooperate with stakeholders including private and public actors, such as bodies governed by public laws of the educational or health sector, and civil society and consult them on measures to accelerate the digital transformation at Union level. The involvement of stakeholders would be important at the level of Member States as well, in particular when adopting their national Digital Decade strategic roadmaps and their adjustments.
Amendment 65 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) promote a human-centered, inclusive, secure and open digital environment where digital technologies and services respect and enhance Union principles, rights and values;
Amendment 69 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) reinforce Member States’ collective resilience and bridge the digital divide notably by promoting basic and specialisdigital skills for all, as well as advanced digital skills for all, and fostering the development of high-performinginclusive digital education and training systems;
Amendment 84 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) ensure that democratic life, public services and health and care services are easily accessible online for everyone, in particular disadvantaged groups including persons with disabilities, offering inclusive, efficient and personalised services and interoperable tools with high security and privacy standards, including free and open software;
Amendment 90 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
(h a) facilitate collaboration among formal, non-formal and informal education providers in the provision of digital education, to foster a lifelong and lifewide learning approach to skills development, in a manner consistent with Digital Competence Framework 2.0.
Amendment 95 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
(5 a) ‘basic digital skill’ means a basic ability to use digital devices, communication and online applications, and networks, to access and manage information in order to, inter alia, create and share digital content, communicate and collaborate, and solve problems as well as identify and critically evaluate AI technologies
Amendment 99 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 b (new)
(5 b) ‘advanced digital skill’ means a specialised ability to use digital technologies, such as skills in designing, developing, managing and deploying technologies.
Amendment 104 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) at least 90 % of all teachers and trainers from both formal and non-formal organisations and the VET sector teachers are provided with the time and resources to be adequately trained, during working hours, to use technology effectively in their teaching and to teach digital technologies;
Amendment 107 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a b (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a b (new)
(a b) internet connectivity, including Gigabit connectivity, is ensured in all schools, in particular as regards internet access and the presence of the necessary digital equipment;
Amendment 109 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
(b) at least 20 million employ, diverse and gender-balanced information and communications technology (ICT) specialists are employed, with convergence between women and men;
Amendment 117 #
2021/0293(COD)
(a a) all digital infrastructures are environmentally friendly and sustainable by design
Amendment 129 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point c
(c) at least 8100% of Union citizens use ahave access to digital identification (ID) solution.
Amendment 130 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point c a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point c a (new)
(c a) 100% of learners have access to free and highspeed broadband and other necessary digital infrastructure
Amendment 142 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
(1) The Commission shall closely cooperate with private and public stakeholders, including social partners and civil society, to collect information and develop recommended policies, measures and actions for the purposes of the implementation of this Decision.
Amendment 145 #
2021/0293(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
(2) The Member States shall cooperate with private and public stakeholders, including social partners and civil society, in line with the national legislation, when adopting their national Digital Decade strategic roadmaps and their adjustments.
Amendment 13 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The Commission Communication of 19 February 2020, entitled “Shaping Europe’s Digital Future”16 announces a revision of Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council with the aim of improving its effectiveness, extend its benefits to the private sector and promote trusted digital identities for all Europeanscitizens and other residents as defined by national law. _________________ 16 COM/2020/67 final
Amendment 19 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) It is necessary to set out the harmonised conditions for the establishment of a framework for European Digital Identity Wallets to be issued by Member States, which should empower all Union citizens and other residents as defined by national law to retain full control over their choice to use the Wallet, to store data and to share securely data related to their identity in a user friendly and convenient way under the sole control of the user. Technologies used to achieve those objectives should be developed aiming towards the highest level of security, user convenience and wide usdata protection, user convenience, wide usability and extensive interoperability. Member States should ensure equal access to digital identification to all their nationals and residents, including vulnerable persons, such as persons with disabilities, persons who experience functional limitations, such as elderly persons, and persons with limited access to digital technologies. They should not, directly or indirectly, limit access to government services, government-funded services, labour or business rights of individuals who do not use the European Digital Identity Wallet and should develop and ensure free availability of alternative solutions for such individuals.
Amendment 24 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order to ensure compliance within Union law or national law compliant with Union law, service providers should communicate their intent to rely on the European Digital Identity Wallets to Member States. That will allow Member States to protect users from fraud and prevent the unlawful use of identity data and electronic attestations of attributes as well as to ensure that the processing of sensitive data, like health data, can be verified by relying parties in accordance with Union law or national law. Entities that are not established in a Member State may therefore not become relying parties.
Amendment 25 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) All European Digital Identity Wallets should allow users , in a manner that is transparent and traceable, to securely request and obtain, store, select, combine and share the necessary legal person identification data and electronic attestation of attributes, while ensuring that selective disclosure is possible to electronically identify and authenticate online and offline across borders for accessing a wide range of public and private services and to create and use qualified electronic signatures and seals which are accepted across the Union. Without prejudice to Member States’ prerogatives as regards the identification of their nationals and residents, Wallets can also serve the institutional needs of public administrations, international organisations and the Union’s institutions, bodies, offices and agencies. Offline use would be important in many sectors, including in the health sector where services are often provided through face-to-face interaction and ePrescriptions should be able to rely on QR-codes or similar technologies to verify authenticity. The European Digital Identity Wallet should also allow the user to consult the history of the transactions, transfer the wallet's data, restore the access on a different device and block access to the wallet in case of a security breach that leads to its suspension, revocation or withdrawal, and offer the possibility to contact support services of the wallet's issuer. Relying on the level of assurance “high”, the European Digital Identity Wallets should benefit from the potential offered by tamper-proof solutions such as secure elements, to comply with the security requirements under this Regulation. The European Digital Identity Wallets should also allow users to create and use qualified electronic signatures and seals which are accepted across the EU. To achieve simplification and cost reduction benefits to persons and businesses across the EU, including by enabling powers of representation and e- mandates, Member States should issue European Digital Identity Wallets relying on common standards to ensure seamless interoperability and a high level of security. Those European Digital Identity Wallets should be developed in a manner that ensures a high level of security, including the encryption of content. They should ensure their seamless interoperability by relying for instance on the use of open-source technology or reflecting the ability to function on major operating systems. Only Member States’ competent authorities can provide a high degree of confidence in establishing the identity of a person and therefore provide assurance that the person claiming or asserting a particular identity is in fact the person he or she claims to be. It is therefore necessary that the European Digital Identity Wallets rely on the legal identity of citizens, other residents or legal entities. Trust in the European Digital Identity Wallets would be enhanced by the fact that issuing parties are required to implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure a level of security commensurate to the risks raised for the rights and freedoms of the natural persons, in line with Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 31 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12 a) It is essential to use open source principles and transparency to achieve better security and faster development.
Amendment 34 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Streamlining of the current notification, in particular by diligent ongoing assessment by the Commission and peer-review procedures, will prevent heterogeneous approaches to the assessment of various notified electronic identification schemes and facilitate trust- building between Member States. New, simplified, mechanisms should foster Member States’ cooperation on the security and interoperability of their notified electronic identification schemes.
Amendment 36 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Service providers use the identity data provided by the set of person identification data available from electronic identification schemes pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 in order to match users from another Member State with the legal identity of that user. However, despite the use of the eIDAS data set, in many cases ensuring an accurate match requires additional information about the user and specific unique identification procedures at national level. To further support the usability of electronic identification means, this Regulation should require Member States to take specific measures to ensure a correct identity match in the process of electronic identification. For the same purpose, this Regulation should also extend the mandatory minimum data set and require the use of a unique and persistentcryptographically verifiable electronic identifier in conformity with Union law in those cases where it is necessary to legally identify the user upon his/her request in a unique and persistent way.
Amendment 40 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) In line with Directive (EU) 2019/88222 , persons with disabilities should be able to use the European digital identity wallets, trust services and end-user products used in the provision of those services on an equal basis, with an emphasis on ensuring that the quality of user experience is on a par with that of other users. _________________ 22 Directive (EU) 2019/882 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on the accessibility requirements for products and services (OJ L 151, 7.6.2019, p. 70).
Amendment 50 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Wide availability and usability of the European Digital Identity Wallets require their acceptance and trust by both private individuals and by private service providers. Private relying parties providing services in the areas of transport, energy, banking and financial services, social security, health, drinking water, postal services, digital infrastructure, education or telecommunications should accept the use of European Digital Identity Wallets for the provision of services where strong user authentication for online identification is required by national or Union law or by contractual obligation. Where very large online platforms as defined in Article 25.1. of Regulation [reference DSA Regulation] require users to authenticate to access online services, those platforms should be mandated to accept the use of European Digital Identity Wallets upon voluntary request of the user. Users should be under no obligation to use the wallet to access private services, but i and should not be discriminated against for not using the wallet. If they wish to do so, large online platforms should accept the European Digital Identity Wallet for this purpose while respecting the principle of data minimisation and other legal safeguards. Given the importance of very large online platforms, due to their reach, in particular as expressed in number of recipients of the service and economic transactions this is necessary to increase the protection of users from fraud and secure a high level of data protection. The Commission should assess the effectiveness of these provisions for the availability and usability for the user of the European Digital Identity Wallets after 18 months of their deployment and propose revision of their provisions to ensure their acceptance by means of delegated acts in the light of this assessment. Self- regulatory codes of conduct at Union level (‘codes of conduct’) should be developed, with clear targets, in order to contribute to wide availability and usability of electronic identification means including European Digital Identity Wallets within the scope of this Regulation. The codes of conduct should facilitate wide acceptance of electronic identification means including European Digital Identity Wallets by those service providers which do not qualify as very large platforms and which rely on third party electronic identification services for user authentication. They should be developed within 12 months of the adoption of this Regulation. The Commission should assess the effectiveness of these provisions for the availability and usability for the user of the European Digital Identity Wallets after 18 months of their deployment and revise the provisions to ensure their acceptance by means of delegated acts in the light of this assessment.
Amendment 55 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) Website authentication services provide users with assurance that there is a genuine and legitimate entity standing behind the website. Those services contribute to the building of trust and confidence in conducting business online, as users will have confidence in a website that has been authenticated. The use of website authentication services by websites is voluntary. However, in order for website authentication to become a means to increasing trust, providing a better experience for the user and furthering growth in the internal market, this Regulation lays down minimal security and liability obligations for the providers of website authentication services and their services. To that end, web-browsers should ensure support and interoperability with Qualified certificates for website authentication pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 910/2014. They should recognise and display Qualified certificates for website authentication to provide a high level of assurance,additional rules for qualified certificates for website authentication pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 and establishes an EU Digital Identity Compliance Label, certifying that the owner of the website in question has been properly identified. This will allowing website owners to assert their identity as owners of a website and users to identify the website owners with a high degree of certainty. To further promote their usage, public authorities in Member States should consider incorporating QEU Digital Identity Compliance Label and qualified certificates for website authentication in their websites.
Amendment 57 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) In order to avoid fragmentation and barriers, due to diverging standards and technical restrictions, and to ensure a coordinated process to avoid endangering the implementation of the future European Digital Identity framework, a process for close and structured cooperation between the Commission, Member States, civil society, academics and the private sector is needed. To achieve this objective, Member States should cooperate within the framework set out in the Commission Recommendation XXX/XXXX [Toolbox for a coordinated approach towards a European Digital Identity Framework]26 to identify a Toolbox for a European Digital Identity framework. The Toolbox should include a comprehensive technical architecture and reference framework for the decentralised self sovereign architecture of the European Digital Identity Wallet, a set of common standards and technical references and a set of guidelines and descriptions of best practices covering at least all aspects of the functionalities and interoperability of the European Digital Identity Wallets including eSignatures and of the qualified trust service for attestation of attributes as laid out in this regulation. In this context, Member States should also reach agreement on common elements of a business model and fee structure of the European Digital Identity Wallets, to facilitate take up, in particular by small and medium sized companies in a cross-border context. The content of the toolbox should evolve in parallel with and reflect the outcome of the discussion and process of adoption of the European Digital Identity Framework. _________________ 26 [insert reference once adopted]
Amendment 65 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point i
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point i
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 48
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 48
(48) ‘qualified electronic archiving service’ means a service ensuring the receipt, storage, deletion and transmission of electronic data or documents, guaranteeing their integrity, the accuracy of their origin and legal features throughout the conservation period and that meets the requirements laid down in Article 45g;
Amendment 66 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point i
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point i
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 49
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 49
(49) ‘EU Digital Identity Wallet Trust MarkCompliance Label’ means an indication in a simple, recognisable and clear manner that a Digital Identity Wallet has been issued in accordance with this Regulation;
Amendment 70 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 6 – paragraph 1a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1a (new)
1 a. The European Digital Identity Wallet shall have the following characteristics: (a) use a decentralised identity architecture, including decentralised identifiers; (b) provide access to cryptographically verifiable, specific, discrete parts of the wallet and personal identity; (c) allow creation of unique, private and secure peer-to-peer connections between two parties; (d) be under full control of the person or entity to whom it belongs, including revocability and self certification.
Amendment 76 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 Regulation (EU) 910/2014
(a) securely request and obtain, store, select, combine and share, in a manner that is transparent to, controlled and traceable by the user, the necessary legal person identification data and electronic attestation of attributes to authenticate online and offline in order to use online public and private services;
Amendment 79 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 6a – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 6a – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) sign by means of qualified electronic signatures.
Amendment 80 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 6a – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
Article 6a – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
(b a) make an informed decision about the sharing of personal information with relying parties. This includes identification of the relying party, complete or partial refusal of information requests from relying parties, a full transaction history and information about the exercise of their rights.
Amendment 84 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 6a – paragraph 4 – point a – subpoint (iv)
Article 6a – paragraph 4 – point a – subpoint (iv)
(4) for the user to allow interaction with the European Digital Identity Wallet and display an “EU Digital Identity Wallet Trust MarkCompliance Label”;
Amendment 85 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 6a – paragraph 4 – point a – subpoint iv a (new)
Article 6a – paragraph 4 – point a – subpoint iv a (new)
(4 a) for relying parties to be uniquely identified and limited to requesting information based on their approval from their Member State of establishment in accordance with Article 6b(1);
Amendment 86 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 6a – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 6a – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) ensure that trust service providers of qualified attestations of qualified or non-qualified attributes cannot receive any information about the use of these attributes;
Amendment 87 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 6a – paragraph 4 – point d
Article 6a – paragraph 4 – point d
(d) provide a mechanism to ensure that the relying party is able to authenticate the user andor to receive electronic attestations of attributes; via selective disclosures that are not linkable to the user and that minimise the processing of personal data. Where attestations of attributes are adequate for the purposes of the relying party, no prior electronic authentication or identification shall take place;
Amendment 90 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 6a – paragraph 4 – point e
Article 6a – paragraph 4 – point e
(e) ensure that the person identification data referred to in Articles 12(4), point (d) uniquely and persistently represent the natural or legal person is associated with it.
Amendment 115 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
1. Where relying parties intend to rely upon European Digital Identity Wallets issued in accordance with this Regulation, they shall communicate it torequest approval from the Member State where the relying party is established to ensure compliance with requirements set out in Union law or national law for the provision of specific services. When communicating their intention to rely on European Digital Identity wallets, they shall also inform about the intended use of the European Digital Identity Wallet.
Amendment 118 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 6b – paragraph 3
Article 6b – paragraph 3
3. Relying parties shall be responsible for communicating their unique identifier in every interaction with the European Digital Identity Wallet and carrying out the procedure for authenticating person identification data and electronic attestation of attributes originating from European Digital Identity Wallets.
Amendment 125 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 11a – title
Article 11a – title
Amendment 127 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 11a – paragraph 1
Article 11a – paragraph 1
1. When notified electronic identification means and the European Digital Identity Wallets are used for authentication, Member States shall ensure unique identificationthat cryptographically verifiable identifiers are used.
Amendment 128 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 11a – paragraph 2
Article 11a – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall, for the purposes of this Regulation, include in the minimum set of person identification data referred to in Article 12.4.(d), a unique and persistentthat cryptographically verifiable identifiers are used in conformity with Union law, to identify the user upon their request in those cases where identification of the user is required by law.
Amendment 132 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16
3. Where very large online platforms as defined in Regulation [reference DSA Regulation] Article 25.1. require users to authenticate to access online services, alongside their own authentication systems, they shall also accept the use of European Digital Identity Wallets issued in accordance with Article 6a strictly upon voluntary request of the user and in respect of the minimum attributes necessary for the specific online service for which authentication is requested, such as proof of age. In this case, revocable pseudonyms can be generated and used in connection to an identifiable European Digital Identity Wallets.
Amendment 139 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 12b – paragraph 5
Article 12b – paragraph 5
Amendment 160 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 45 – paragraph 2
Article 45 – paragraph 2
2. Qualified certificates for website authentication referred to in paragraph 1 shall be recogaccompanised by web-browsers. For those purposes web-browsers shall ensure that the identity data provided using any of the methods is displayed in a user friendly manner. Web-browsers shall ensure support and interoperability with qualified certificates for websitean EU Digital Identity Compliance Label, certifying that the owner of the website in question has been properly identified. Website owners will authenomatication referred to in paragraph 1, with the exception of enterprises, considered to be microenterprises and small enterprises in accordance with Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC in the first 5 years of oplly receive the right to use the EU Digital Identity Compliance Label once they have been issued with qualified cerating as providers of web- browsing servicficates.
Amendment 161 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 45 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 45 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. For the purpose of enhancing security and trust, a EU database of trusted websites shall be established by the Commission. The issuers of qualified certificates for website authentication will automatically feed the appropriate data into the database.
Amendment 162 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 45 – paragraph 3
Article 45 – paragraph 3
3. Within 12 months of the entering into force of this Regulation, the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, provide the specifications and reference numbers of standards for qualified certificates for website authentication referred to in paragraph 1 and the design and mechanisms for the EU Digital Identity Compliance Label and the EU database detailed above. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 48(2).;
Amendment 164 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 45c – paragraph 3
Article 45c – paragraph 3
3. Where a qualified electronic attestation of attributes has been revoked after initial issuance, it shall lose its validity from the moment of its revocation, and its status shall not in any circumstances be reverted. Only relying parties with which the user shares this attribute shall be able to obtain knowledge of its revocation.
Amendment 171 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 48a – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 48a – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) the number of security incidents reported, categorised by type;
Amendment 173 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Regulation (EU) 910/2014
Article 48a – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
Article 48a – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
(c b) the number of user complaints, categorised by type.
Amendment 177 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex V – paragraph 1 – point f
Annex V – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) the attestation identity coderyptographically verifiable character string, which must be unique for the qualified trust service provider and if applicable the indication of the scheme of attestations that the attestation of attributes is part of;
Amendment 181 #
Amendment 182 #
Amendment 183 #
2021/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex VI – paragraph 1 – point 5
Annex VI – paragraph 1 – point 5
Amendment 103 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 a (new)
Recital 24 a (new)
(24 a) The use of AI systems to infer emotions of a natural person should be prohibited, except for the cases of use related to health and research purposes. Misuses of such AI systems might lead to serious infringements of person’s privacy and to their manipulation. Such technologies rely on a presumed link between emotions, facial expressions and other external physiological reactions, which does not take into account cultural differences and wrongly assumes existing universal patterns of expressing emotions.
Amendment 104 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 b (new)
Recital 24 b (new)
(24 b) The placing on the market, putting into service or use of certain AI systems that are used on minors to monitor or detect prohibited behaviour during tests at educational and training institutions should be forbidden. The use of such intrusive monitoring and flagging technologies, such as e-proctoring software, in a relationship of power, for example where education institutions have a relationship of power over their pupils, poses an unacceptable risk to the fundamental rights of minors. Notably these practices affect their private life, data protection rights and a right for human dignity.
Amendment 147 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) harmonised transparency rules for AI systems intended to interact with natural persons, emotion recognition systems and biometric categorisation systems, and AI systems used to generate or manipulate image, audio or video content;
Amendment 184 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(c a) The placing on the market, putting into service or use of emotion recognition systems unless such use is strictly for the purposes of the Regulation 2016/679 Article 9 (2) h), i) and j)
Amendment 185 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
(c b) The placing on the market, putting into service or use of AI systems targeting minors intended to be used for monitoring or detecting prohibited behaviour of minors during tests at educational and training institutions
Amendment 449 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The use of AI systems for ‘real- time’ remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement is consideredis particularly intrucorrosive into the rights and freedoms of the concerned persons, to the extent that it ma and can ultimately affect the private life of a large part of the population, evoke a feeling of constant surveillanceleave society with a justifiable feeling of constant surveillance, give parties deploying biometric identification in publicly accessible spaces a position of uncontrollable power and indirectly dissuade individuals from the exercise of their freedom of assembly and other fundamental rights. In addition, the immediacy of the impact and the limited opportunities for further checks or corrections in relation to the use of such systems operating in ‘real-time’ carry heightened risks for the rights and freedoms of the persons that are concerned by law enforcement activities at the core to the Rule of Law. Biometric identification not carried out in real time carries different but equally problematic risks. Due to the increase in pervasiveness, functionality and memory capacities of relevant devices, this would amount to a "surveillance time machine", which could be used to track movements and social interactions stretching back an indeterminate period into the past.
Amendment 470 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) The use of thoseAI systems for the purpose of law enforcement should therefore be prohibited, except in three exhaustively listed and narrowly defined situations, where the use is strictly necessary to achieve a substantial public interest, the importance of which outweighs the risks. Those situations involve the search for potential victims of crime, including missing children; certain threats to the life or physical safety of natural persons or of a terrorist attack; and the detection, localisation, identification or prosecution of perpetrators or suspects of the criminal offences referred to in Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA38 if those criminal offences are punishable in the Member State concerned by a custodial sentence or a detention order for a maximum period of at least three years and as they are defined in the law of that Member State. Such threshold for the custodial sentence or detention order in accordance with national law contributes to ensure that the offence should be serious enough to potentially justify the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems. Moreover, of the 32 criminal offences listed in the Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA, some are in practice likely to be more relevant than others, in that the recourse to ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification will foreseeably be necessary and proportionate to highly varying degrees for the practical pursuit of the detection, localisation, identification or prosecution of a perpetrator or suspect of the different criminal offences listed and having regard to the likely differences in the seriousness, probability and scale of the harm or possible negative consequences. _________________ 38 Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (OJ L 190, 18.7.2002, p. 1).remote biometric identification of individuals should therefore be prohibited
Amendment 476 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
Amendment 484 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
Amendment 492 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
Amendment 502 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The use of AI systems for ‘real- time’ remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement necessarily involves the processing of biometric and biometrics- based data. The rules of this Regulation that prohibit, subject to certain exceptions, such use, which are based on Article 16 TFEU, should apply as lex specialis in respect of the rules on the processing of biometric data contained in Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680, thus regulating such use and the processing of biometric data involved in an exhaustive manner. Therefore, such use and processing should only be possible in as far as it is compatible with the framework set by this Regulation, without there being scope, outside that framework, for the competent authorities, where they act for purpose of law enforcement, to use such systems and process such data in connection thereto on the grounds listed in Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680. In this context and Article 9 of Regulation 2016/679, thius Rregulation is not intended to provide the legal basis for the processing of personal data under Article 8 of Directive 2016/680. However, the use of ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible spaces for purposes other than law enforcement, including by competent authorities, should not be covered by the specific framework regarding such use for the purpose of law enforcement set by this Regulation. Such use for purposes other than law enforcement should therefore not be subject to the requirement of an authorisation under this Regulation and the applicable detailed rules of national law that may give effect to itng such use and the processing of biometric data involved in an exhaustive manner.
Amendment 513 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Any processing of biometric data, biometrics-based data and other personal data involved in the use of AI systems for biometric identification, other than in connection to the use of ‘real- time’ remote biometric identification systems in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement as regulated by this Regulation, including where those systems are used by competent authorities in publicly accessible spaces for other purposes than law enforcementas regulated by this Regulation, should continue to comply with all requirements resulting from Article 9(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Article 10(1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 and Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680, as applicable.
Amendment 551 #
2021/0106(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) Technical inaccuracies of, as well as conscious or subconscious design decisions, and the use of training data which codify and reinforce structural inequalities, mean that AI systems intended for the remote biometric identification of natural persons can lead to biased results and entail discriminatory effects. This is particularly relevant when it comes to age, ethnicity, sex or disabilities. ThereforeAs a result, ‘real-time’ and ‘post’ remote biometric identification systems should be classified as high-risk. In view of the risks that they pose, both types of remote biometric identification systems should be subject to specific requirements on logging capabilities and human oversightundermine the essence of fundamental rights and therefore must be prohibited.
Amendment 102 #
2021/0105(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) Notes that it is in the public interest to harmonise the environmental standards for powering some of the relevant machinery products, such as electrical bicycles. Calls on the Commission to explore in cooperation with the manufactures the possibility of a unique charger for electrical bicycles placed on the market, with the view to ensure common health and safety requirements for charging across the EU.
Amendment 1 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission communication on a European strategy for data (COM(2020)0066) and endorses its objective to increase and improve the use of data in the EU and to create a single market for non-personal data in order to harness economic growth, competitiveness, innovation, job creation and societal progres, social and territorial cohesion in the EU by supporting job creation, competitiveness, sustainable development, research and innovation, and by making improvements to EU citizens’ quality of life, while preserving appropriate privacy safeguards;
Amendment 6 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that in order to create a free and secure data flow with personal data and the protection of privacy at its core, it must be supported by data savvy and well-informed citizens across the Member States; points outPoints out that high level of digital skills is crucial for a person to fully participate in the digital economy and society; recalls that there are currently significant divffergences between Member States with regard to the digital literacy of their citizens; calls on the Commission to propose ambitious targets for digital literacy in the EU through the Digital Education Action Plan and to provide substantial support to the Member States to help them to achieve these targets; requests that special attention be paid to equal access to environmentally-friendly by design digital infrastructure, internet coverage and digital tools, without prejudice to the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality;
Amendment 9 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Highlights that the digital sector needs to put sustainability at its heart; reminds in that regard that both the green and digital transformation must go hand in hand and that investment in research and development of technologies is needed in order to reduce the carbon footprint;
Amendment 13 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the EU should prioritise digital literacy and competencies in its cohesion policy for 2021 and beyond, with a focus on supporting teachers and the heads of education institutions in implementing digital education throughout common curricula and on sharing best practices and know-how, without creating additional administrative or financial burdens; considers that educationstresses that diverse software, especially Free and Open Source Software (FOSS), should be focuspromoted oin practical skills for the future and be based on a long-term and comprehensive analysis of labour market needscurricula to avoid deepening of vendor lock-in; considers that education is a life long learning process aiming at empowering citizens through personal development, creativity and well-being; welcomes the Commission’s proposal to develop a common European skills database;
Amendment 18 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights the urgent need to close the EU’s digital skills gap and considers that enhancanonymised graduate tracking and labourmechanisms at education system level can be used by services that help new students market data sharing will be invaluable tools to achieve this end informed choices about what to study, by teaching staff and institutional management as input for the design of courses and by government authorities to inform decisions about how to steer education systems; stresses the importance of fully abiding by EU rules on personal data protection when using these tools;
Amendment 25 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines the fact that while the increased use of anonymised data will transform our education systems, it will nevertheless be essential to maintain a human-centred and personalised approach to students and their needs; considers that open access to education and to scientific data and publications based on the FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable, reusable) data principles is essential for successful innovation and science;
Amendment 34 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises that the implementation of the European data strategy should take account of the specific needs of vulnerable groups; recalls that almost 100 million persons with disabilities in the EU are facing particular challenges in accessing digital tools and quality education such as people with disabilities, elderly people, people with fewer opportunities, refugees and others; calls on the Member States to make every effort to ensure that persons with disabilitiesno one is left behind and have full access to digital tools and infrastructure in order to harness the full potential of digitalisation and prevent a widening of gapsdivide between different parts of society in terms of access to digital education;
Amendment 38 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to explore the potential merits and scope of creating a common European data space for the cultural and creative industrysector at large; believes that the digitalisation of cultural heritage could be useful and beneficial in a wide variety of ways, by for instance facilitating physical protection and preservation or enabling three- dimensional virfor research purposes, education, tourism, cultural applications which could be suitable for a number of sectors, including tourism, linguistic and knowledge development; calls for the development of a common European data space on cultural heritage, which could be built on the basis of the Europeana Digital Service Infrastructure.
Amendment 4 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas substantial barriers still exist for the realisation of the full potential of the digital single market, and whereas a common, human and environmental centric, EU approach is essential for its success;
Amendment 5 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas digitalisation done with citizen and sustainable environment goals in mind has the potential to add significant value to the single market as a whole, and is important for both traditional and non- traditional sectors and can be a competitive advantage on the global market;
Amendment 7 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that AI should be used in a fair and ethical manner fully compliandt with due respect for Union values and principles, human rights, freedom of expression, the right to privacy, data protection, non- discrimination, media pluralism and cultural diversity;
Amendment 8 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the digital transition requires increased investment in key enablers of the digital economy and coordination with Green transition policies;
Amendment 11 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas AI is, to a certain extent, already subject to many existing legislative requirements;
Amendment 12 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas we need to build public trust in AI whileby including by default the full respect of fundamental rights, consumer protection, data protection and security and fostering innovation in Europe;
Amendment 13 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the crucial importance of a coherent visionstrategy at Union level in order to address the challenges of achieveing a genuine digital single market within an AI-powered society that would fully benefit users; believes that AI must be human-centred and trustworthy in order to truly empower citizens and society as a whole;
Amendment 16 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes the EU needs to become a world leader in digital innovation; considers that the digital single market is about removing national barriers and synergies and enhancing the benefits for the European citizens, therefore having a better organised and common European approach for market integration and harmonisation can contribute to that result; believes that further actions are needed at both Member State and EU level to achieve this, including by eliminating unjustified geo-blocking;
Amendment 27 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. DeploresWarns against the omission of culture from AI strategies and policy recommendations at both national and Union level; stresses the need to set up a clear legal framework that prioritisesconsidering culture in order to bring the Union to the forefront of AI-driven innovation and value creation worldwide and to maximise its benefits, while assessing its potential risks for society;
Amendment 29 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that human and environmental centric digitalisation and technologies such as AI will be important for achieving the objectivetargets of the Green Deal and for economic recovery from the COVID-19 crisisto overcome some of the difficulties created by the COVID-19 crisis; points out the potential of digital solutions, such as teleworking and AI applications, to support the participation of people with disabilities in the Digital Single Market; considers that the COVID-19 crisis also offers an opportunity to speed up digitalisation, and that the digital transformation must serve the public interest overall;
Amendment 36 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Amendment 38 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights that the Commission should adopt a balancn evidence based approach to legislation in order to create a digital single market that is competitive, accessible, technologically neutral, innovation- friendly, human-centric and trustworthy, and that builds a secure data society and economy;
Amendment 40 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Points out that SMEs and other economic actors should use cooperation as much as possible, working in an ecosystem that benefits citizens and is able to support growth. The use of open source is a path towards open and sustainable digital transformation, both through open source software and open hardware - progressing towards European strategic autonomy in digital;
Amendment 41 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Calls on the Commission to assess the environmental impact of data sharing and the infrastructures required to ensure a sustainable digital deployment in line with the Green Deal; stresses that, despite the current high carbon footprint of development, deployment and use of artificial intelligence and machine learning, robotics and related technologies, those technologies can contribute to the reduction of the current environmental footprint; calls for the introduction of an EU digital sustainability index based on an analysis of product life cycles;
Amendment 42 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 48 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that AI can be an effective tool for tool to help enforcing the rules on online content, such as illegal content or fake news, through automated content filtering, andlagging, which can also be used to implement the ‘notice, take down and stay down’ and action' mechanisms; stresses, however, that AI may poses significant challenges to fundamental rights, in particular freedom of expression, as well as access to information, cultural diversity and media pluralism;
Amendment 49 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to increase support for key enableing sectors of the digital economy; stresses the need to avoid service provider or technological lock-in for public data collection processes and calls for all Union public procurement processes and funding programmes to include open data access, mandatory interoperability and portability requirements, as well as to promote the use of open-source software and hardware;
Amendment 51 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Reminds that Article 13 of Charter of fundamental rights in the EU on Freedom of the arts and sciences states that the arts and scientific research must be free of constraint and that academic freedom must be respected; recalls the violation of artistic freedoms in Europe summarised in "the state of artistic freedom 2020" report;
Amendment 56 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls, therefore, for a balancedn approach between the deployment of automated enforcement andrespecting fundamental rights, and in line with the applicable regulatory framework, such as the AVMSD, the Copyright Directive and the future DSA.
Amendment 70 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Stresses that enabling sharing and access to essential and well-defined data sets will be key to fully unlock the potential of the Green Deal; calls on the Commission to assess which datasets are essential for the ecological transition in the context of sustainable products and services, inter alia in product manufacturing, transportation, carbon, energy and biodiversity impact, as well as their end-of life handling; calls on the Commission to consider extending the scope of the high value datasets defined in Directive(EU) 2019/1024 on Open Data to private actors;
Amendment 71 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11b. Believes that there is an urgent need to incentivise access to the data that is currently locked in the private sector, while ensuring that the use of public money always result in public data; in that regard, calls for the establishment of a “public money, public data” principle and call for incentives meant to give SMEs access to non personal data produced by other private stakeholders in a voluntary and mutually benefiting process;
Amendment 72 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Recalls that we need a data economy that works for the entire EU, as it is a key enabler of digitalisation; believes that it is important for the EU to guarantee a high degree of control over data, with clear and balanced rules on intellectual property rights (IPR), but considers it essential to maintain openness towards third countries, and that the free flow of non-personal data across borders is important; considers it essential to maintain openness towards third countries;
Amendment 81 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. WBelcomesieves that the Digital Services Act proposed by the Commission; believes that this should contribute to supporting innovation, and removing unjustified and disproportionate barriers and restrictions to the provision of digital services while improving consumer protection;
Amendment 83 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls for further support for European trade competition regulation making sure that European market will be active, highly competitive and resistant to foreign take overs; considers that further support is needed on screening procedures for further investment, with special scrutiny to be given to take overs of technological companies including SMEs and start-ups;
Amendment 89 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Highlights that the sharing of data should be used to enhance competition; emphasises the need for adequate safeguards against market failures on data markets; suggests that the Commission takes advantage of the review of horizontal and vertical competition guidelines to introduce new tools to counter excessive market concentration, inherent to data markets, including, inter alia ongoing monitoring for at-risk- markets and, where necessary, ex-ante regulation;
Amendment 93 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Calls to avoid encouraging a business model based on restricting access to data and knowledge, which is especially harmful to SMEs; therefore cautions against pushing for new IPR limitations and the use of trade secrets as a barrier, while advocating for removing restrictions on databases and ensuring that public data maintains its open character and cannot be privatised; reminds that according to the first evaluation of Directive 96/9/EC on the legal protection of databases, the introduction of a new “sui generis right” has led to a decrease in the production of European produced databases; therefore encourages the Commission to repeal Directive 96/9/EC;
Amendment 96 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Strongly believes that AI can be a force for goodhas the potential to improve certain areas for all European citizens, and offer significant benefits and value for the economy, safety, security, education, healthcare, transport and the environmentbenefits for the economy; believes the security, inclusivenessnon- discrimination, accessibility and fairness, especially for groups in vulnerable situations, of AI-driven products and services need to be ensured;
Amendment 123 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Welcomes the Commission’s white paper on AI, and calls on the Commission to develop a common EU regulatory framework for AI that is risk-based, proportionatemore detailed than high and low risk, and clear;
Amendment 127 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Calls to safeguard that there is always human control over algorithms and ensure that proper and effective redress mechanisms are in place; in that regard, calls to ensure that algorithms are openly auditable; calls for a ban on facial recognition algorithms for the wide damage they pose to fundamental rights of individuals;
Amendment 133 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Notes that, to varying degrees, AI is already subject to current European legislation, and calls on the Commission to issue clear guidance on the functioning and synergy between any current applicable legislation and any proposed new measures; considers it important not to over-regulate AI;
Amendment 139 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Considers that AI is a fast moving technology that requires effective legislation; believes that achieve this AI needs to be functionally and broadly defined in a manner that covers all automated decision- making, complex algorithmic-based systems and machine or deep learning processes so any regulatory measures can remain flexible and adaptable in order to take into account future developments;
Amendment 150 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Believes that such a framework should be based on an ethical, human- centric and principle-basedfundamental rights approach throughout the design, development and life cycle of AI products based on the preservation of fundamental rights and the principles of transparency, explainability (when relevant), and accountability;
Amendment 154 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Believes that the scope of new regulatory requirements should be scaled so that AI deemed to pose the highest risk is subject to the most stringent regulatory requirements; calls on the Commission to develop an objective methodology for calculating the risk of harm, in addition to what already by exists in current consumer legislation; believes that such a methodology should avoid a restrictive, binary approach that could quickly become obsolete, and instead focus on the context, application and specific use of AI;
Amendment 162 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Considers that a voluntary labelling scheme for trustworthy AI, based on clear and common guidance drawn up by the Commissionhigh level of protection of data and open technology for trustworthy AI, could help improve consumer trust;
Amendment 169 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. cCalls on the Commission and the Member States to makevaluate the use of innovative regulatory tools such as ‘regulatory sandboxes’ to help provide a clear path to scale-up for start-ups and small companies, regardless of the risk profile of their product; believes that these tools can help encourage innovation if applied in a controlled environment and without any detriment to consumer protection and other applicable rights;
Amendment 173 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29a. Points out that the most efficient way of reducing bias in data based systems is by ensuring that the maximum of non-personal data is available to train them, for which it is necessary to limit any unnecessary barrier to text-and-data mining, and to facilitate cross-border uses; notes in addition that public domain or freely licensed data are often used by AI and machine learning developers when selecting training data, both for ease of access and to avoid potential infringement liability exposure; believes therefore that publishing data under free licenses should be encouraged in order to prevent selection bias in training data, as it could lead to harmful bias in results; emphasises the need to address remaining uncertainties related to the legal performance of text and data mining that developers may still face;
Amendment 179 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Believes that the use of high-risk AI should be limited to specific and clearly warranted purposesclearly defined, multi-level , in full respect of the applicable law and subject to transparency obligations; underlines that this will be decisive for ensuring public trust and support for the necessity and proportionality of the deployment of such technologies; calls on the Commission to carefully consider whether there are certainconsider use cases, situations or practices for which specific technical standards, including underlying algorithms, should be adopted; deems necessary, should such technical standards be adopted, that these are regularly reviewed by competent authorities and re-evaluated, given the fast pace of technological development;
Amendment 183 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Calls on the Member States to encourage and support the establishment of specialised review boards for AI products and services in the Member States to assess the potential benefits and potential harm stemming from high-risk, impactful AI- based projects;
Amendment 191 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32a. Calls for impact assessments on the consequences of a digital future on people; recalls that those without digital skills are left behind and digital infrastructure cannot evolve and function without proper operators; calls for mitigation of negative impact through reskilling and upskilling; underlines that the gender dimension needs to be taken into account, given the insufficient representation of women in STEM and digital companies;
Amendment 78 #
2020/2141(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65 a (new)
Paragraph 65 a (new)
65 a. Underlines its obligation to manage directly or at least have direct control over the management of its critical infrastructures and sensitive, confidential data; instructs its administration to implement that obligation;
Amendment 81 #
2020/2141(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65 d (new)
Paragraph 65 d (new)
65 d. Recognises the inherent risks to information security and privacy when Members and staff use third-party- dependent solutions for sharing sensitive data without Parliament being able to control how the data is handled; in compliance with the cybersecurity strategic orientations approved by the Bureau and in order to remedy that situation, requests to host in its servers its own, open source-based and secure solutions for virtual meetings and instant messaging, as it is now the case in core institutions among Member States such as the French central administration and the German Bundeswehr;
Amendment 83 #
2020/2141(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 71
Paragraph 71
71. Requests that it be ensured that appropriate security measures are taken regarding the implementation of cloud solutions for Parliament to allow workloads to move between onsite and cloud-based computincluding those enabling its institutional sovereignty; insists that the latter should be obtained by ensuring data ownership, data localisation on Union territory, no vendor lock-in effects and a multi-vendor approach allowing workloads and data to be migrated seamlessly between the different layers of the hybrid cloud (on premises, private and public cloud) as well as between cloud service providers as needs change and to provide therefore greater agility and more data deployment options via a hybrid cloud strategynot only during the cloud services exit phase, in order to achieve greater agility and more data deployment options, as agreed by the ICT Innovation Strategy Working Group and confirmed at the Bureau last year;
Amendment 8 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas in the digital era education systems need to conform to the needs of learners and not the other way around: whereas learners must not end up as passive technology consumers but be actively in charge of their technologies;
Amendment 10 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
A b. whereas the impact of digitalisation lies in the potential of accessible, open, social and personalised technologies that can bring about more inclusive learning paths and a learning continuum between formal, non-formal and informal learning;
Amendment 11 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
A c. whereas innovative education methodologies, enhanced through digital technologies, can equip citizens with life skills such as creative thinking, curiosity and problem-solving skills.
Amendment 13 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas digital technologies are reshaping society, making basic digital skills and digital literacy now essential for all citizens of all ages; whereas learners will never be on an equal footing to acquire digital skills as long as there are such large gaps in basic skills levels, particularly affecting disadvantaged groups and a high number of adults;
Amendment 28 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas digital technologies harbour substantial potential for teachechallenges and opportunities for teachers, educators and learners across education sectors and settings;
Amendment 39 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the sudden shift to online and distance learning also revealed alarming gaps in the digital skills of teachers, educators, parents and learners and in their ability to use digital technologies effectively;
Amendment 57 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
H a. whereas teacher-student interaction is crucial to the well-being and development of students; whereas educational technologies should remain a support and not a replacement for the in- person education provided;
Amendment 108 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the Commission’s scheduled mid-term review of the plan and its intention to ramp up non-personal data collection; reiterates the need for a clear implementation timetable; remains convinced that the plan needs a clearer governance and coordination structure, in which Parliament should be involved, to monitor developments and performance on an ongoing basis; calls on the Commission, therefore, to establish a forum bringing together the Member States, Parliament and other relevant stakeholders and experts; urges the Commission to better integrate digital education into the European Semester exercise;
Amendment 119 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to pay attention to the validation of digital skills as well as to innovative digital validation tools and methods in the Digital Education Action Plan;
Amendment 120 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Recommends that the Commission merge the two separate platforms planned, the European Exchange Platform and the European Digital Education Hub given that they seem to have the same aim of sharing training materials and resources in digital education.
Amendment 123 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7 c. Underlines that the post-pandemic recovery and revitalisation of European education policy is strictly connected to the other challenges that the European Union and the world are facing, starting with the climate crisis; is convinced that future education policy has to be deeply interconnected with social challenges as well as to the Green and digital transitions;
Amendment 124 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 d (new)
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7 d. Encourages Member States to embrace innovation and include technologies in their education and training systems in a smart, learner- centred way, without forgetting that technology is to complement in-person learning and not to replace it;
Amendment 134 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Insists that broadband should be considered a public good and be universally accessible as a critical step in closing the digital divide; calls for specific measures to enhance access for remote, rural and mountain areas with low connectivity and limited access to emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), robotics, blockchain, new educational devices or gamification, in the light of their growing importance and potential; calls for a new initiative on AI and robotics for education;inclusion of AI and robotics for education in the future AI legislation; encourages Member States to use available sources under the recovery funds to strengthen digital infrastructure and access to digital technologies for vulnerable groups
Amendment 148 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Recalls that the rise of digital merchandising of educational resources poses risks in to the pedagogical freedom of teachers and educators, as well as data security and privacy concerns; believes that possible ways to balance out the digital space and ensure fairer outcomes for all would be to incentivise free and open source solutions and the interoperability of hardware and software;
Amendment 168 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Believes that, in partnership with parents, health professionals, civil society and non-formal education providers, educational institutions need to develop an age-appropriate curriculum, to train people to be critical users of electronic media, to be able to make relevant and informed choices and avoid harmful behaviour; considers that there is a need to reflect on the negative impacts of prolonged “screen time” on the well-being of learners;
Amendment 172 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11 b. Notes that training should involve courses on Free and Open Source Software in order to prevent vendor lock- ins in society and to clarify the principles of open technologies; underlines that open technologies support a sense of cooperation and thanks to new technologies such as 3D printing, facilitate access to research and to scientific and innovation communities;
Amendment 176 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)
Paragraph 11 c (new)
11 c. Recalls the importance of offering teachers, students and parents high- quality, accessible digital education contents from diversified sources; demands that sufficient funding is allocated to the acquisition of professionally produced contents to complement investments in infrastructures and teachers training
Amendment 201 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Underlines the need to enhance tools at Union level to open up lifelong learning opportunities and to enable full and quality access to university and post- university courses and materials; calls on the Commission to create an Oonline European Universityplatform with distance and online education and diverse content available across Europe;
Amendment 213 #
2020/2135(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Recalls that apart from digital proficiency courses, special focus should be given to awareness raising and training on how to detect fake news, disinformation and deep fake due to their detrimental effect on democratic principles and the functioning of our society;
Amendment 7 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the SME strategy and shares the Commission’s view that SMEs are essential to the European economy and central to achieving the green and digital transition of the EU economy in line with the objectives of the European Green Deal and the EU’s commitment under the Paris Agreement; Insists on sustainability to remain at the core objectives of relevant EU programmes to allow SMEs to take advantage of the green transition in terms of competitiveness, cost reduction and jobs creation; Stresses in this respect the need for increased financial budget to promote a SME-friendly environment and reiterates its position under the MFF Single Market Programme to double the allocation for COSME;
Amendment 12 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that the implementation of the SME strategy should focus on supporting SMEs to help them maintain their existence, creating an enabling regulatory environment and enhanced advice and technical support while further promoting innovative and sustainable solutions; calls for facilitating as much as possible their access to finance, including easy access to R&D funds, and providing enhanced technical support, such as in form of reinforced one-stop-shops and streamlined and easily accessible regulatory and administrative procedures, with a view to accelerate and take advantage of the green and digital transition, as the COVID-19 crisis has delivered a shock to many SMEs and their role in the everyday life of Europeans; , including in form of advantageous loans or bank guarantees;
Amendment 21 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. NoteInsists that SMEs should be burdened as little as possible and encourages the Commission to use strong enforcement action to ensure that the single market benefits all businesses and consumers and to counter gold-plating and other regulatory restrictionreceive targeted support - i.e. technical, administrative and skills support - when implementing EU regulatory framework in order to ensure compliance with single market rules whilst administrative burden should be reduced to the minimum, including the threat of aggressive patent litigation, encourages the Commission to use strong enforcement action to ensure that the single market benefits all businesses and consumers; calls in this regard for particular attention to be given by the Commission to fighting unfair market practices within the internal market and better protection of SMEs;
Amendment 29 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Highlights that beside access to finance, SMEs encounter obstacles in terms of skills, including managerial skills, digital and sustainability related skills and knowledge; Calls for specific programmes to be financed at EU and national levels to enhance SME access to training and mentoring: Adds that particular attention should be given to promote female entrepreneurship;
Amendment 38 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights the crucial role of datanon- personal data and transfer of technology from the academia to SMEs as the lifeblood of the digital economy; supports the Commission in establishing European data spaces for trusted and secure non- personal data sharing to ramp up data flows between businesses and with government, NGOS and public sector; Stresses the importance of open data and knowledge sharing via open technologies for SMEs;
Amendment 51 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Encourages Member States to implement the single digital gateway in an SME-friendly way by cooperating closely with regional and local authorities and by providing easy digital access to information, procedures, assistance and services linked to doing business across borders, including advice on public procurement and funding sources;
Amendment 59 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission and Member States to simplify procurement tendering processes by using the flexibility of the EU’s new procurement framework and to enhance opportunities for SMEs including by using digital tools and platforms to expand national and cross- border procurement; stresses that green public procurement can make an important contribution to building a sustainable economyis a strategic tool to boost sustainable production and consumption patterns while supporting innovation from SMEs and calls for mandatory minimum targets to make systematic use of social and environmental criteria; Considers that national and European public administration is relatively risk-averse, and frequently lacks the skill set to procure innovation; emphasises that public administration should lead by example in procuring, products and services from innovative SMEs at public procurement procedure, and reminds that publicly financed code developed for the public sector should be made publicly available under free and open source software licence;
Amendment 73 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the fact that late payments account for a quarter of all SME bankruptcies in the EU; urges the Commission to swiftly equip the Late Payment Directive1 with strong monitoring and enforcement tools and to take appropriate binding measures to reinforce the current framework, so as to ensure and promote prompt payments as a norm across the single market. _______________________________ 1Directive 2011/7/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 on combating late payment in commercial transactions, OJ L 48, 23.2.2011, p. 1.
Amendment 12 #
2020/2019(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomesTakes note of the “CPC Common Position COVID-19”3 issued by the Commission and the Consumer Protection Cooperation (CPC) authorities of the Member States on the most recent reported scams and unfair practices in relation to the COVID-19 outbreak; calls on all platforms to cooperate with the Commission and the competent authorities to better identify illegal practices, take down scams and asks the Commission to constantly review the common guidelines for instead of general descriptions in order to speed up the tackling of the placement and/or sale of items and services of a false, misleading or otherwise abusive content for consumers; believes such guidelines should not only seek to applythat the current scrutiny of Union and national consumer law, but to proactively seek to should put in place the means to react to the crisis in the market rapidly; __________________ 3 European Commission / Consumer Protection Cooperation (CPC) Network, Common Position of CPC Authorities, “Stopping scams and tackling unfair business practices on online platforms in the context of the Coronavirus outbreak in the EU”.
Amendment 16 #
2020/2019(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls on the Commission to introduce a notice and action legislation, in order to make the removal of illegal content faster and more efficient; stresses that in order to uphold the right to effective remedy, notice and action procedures shall provide users with the right to appeal decisions honouring removal requests, but also decisions denying such requests;
Amendment 18 #
2020/2019(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Recalls that in line with Directive (EU) 2018/18081a (AVMS Directive) ex- ante control measures or upload filtering of content do not comply with Article 15 of the Directive 2000/31/EC; underlines therefore that the future Digital Services Act should prohibit imposing mandatory automated technologies to control content on hosting service providers or other intermediary services; __________________ 1a Directive (EU) 2018/1808 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 November 2018 amending Directive 2010/13/EU on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audio-visual media services (Audio- visual Media Services Directive) in view of changing market realities (OJ L 303, 28.11.2018, p. 69).
Amendment 20 #
2020/2019(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Asks the Commission to improve consumer rights in the future Digital Services Act, by introducing safeguards to prevent violations of fundamental rights of users, which are missing from Directive 2000/31/EC; notes that those should include, as a minimum, internal and external dispute mechanisms, and the clearly stated possibility of judicial redress;
Amendment 21 #
2020/2019(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Welcomes efforts to bring transparency to content removal; in order to verify compliance with the rules, underlines that the requirement to publish periodic transparency reports should be mandatory, and should include the number of notices, type of entities notifying content, nature of the content subject of complaint, response time by the intermediary, the number of appeals;
Amendment 22 #
2020/2019(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 e (new)
Paragraph 1 e (new)
1e. In order to verify such transparency reports and compliance with legal obligations, and in line with the Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec(2018)2, Member States should equally make available, publicly and in a regular manner, comprehensive information on the number, nature and legal basis of content restrictions or disclosures of personal data that they have addressed to intermediaries, including those based on international mutual legal assistance treaties, and on steps taken as a result of those requests;
Amendment 26 #
2020/2019(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes efforts to bring transparency to advertising online and considers that further clarity and guidance is needed as regards professional diligence and obligations for platforms; believes that where advertisers and intermediaries are established in a third country, they should designate a legal representative, established in the Union, who can be held accountable for the content of advertisements, in order to allow for consumer redress in the case of false or misleading advertisementthe functioning of online advertising ecosystem in order to establish professional diligence and obligations;
Amendment 37 #
2020/2019(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Asks the Commission to clarify what sanctions or other restrictions those advertisement intermediaries and platforms should be subject to if they knowingly accept false or misleading advertisements; believes that online platforms should actively monitor the advertisements shown on their sites, in order to ensure they do not profit from false or misleading advertisements, including from influencer marketing content which is not being disclosed as sponsored; underlines that advertisements for commercial products and services, and advertisements of a political or other naturenature, or public interest announcements are different in form and function and therefore should be subject to different guidelines and rules;
Amendment 43 #
2020/2019(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Underlines that video sharing platforms and social media have the capacity to amplify illegal content; calls on companies to make recommendation algorithms transparent, in order to give consumers and researchers insight into those processes, in particular on the data used, the purpose of the algorithm, personalisation, its outcomes and potential dangers, while respecting the principles of explicability, fairness and responsibility; stresses the need to guarantee and properly implement the right of users to opt in for recommended and personalised services;
Amendment 60 #
2020/2019(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines that EULAs should always make the sharing of allny data with third parties optional unless vital to the functioningbased on the consent of the uservices; asks the Commission to ensure that consumers can still use a connected device for all its primary functions even if a consumer withdraws their consent to share non- operational data with the device manufacturer or third parties; calls for development of enforcement mechanisms providing monitoring of the consumer´s right to informed consent and freedom of choice when submitting data;
Amendment 67 #
2020/2019(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that the Directive (EU) 2019/770 and Directive (EU) 2019/771 are still to be properly transposed and implemented; asks the Commission to take this into account before taking additional measures;
Amendment 73 #
2020/2019(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes the rise of “smart contracts”, such as those based on distributed ledger technologies; asks the Commission to analyse if certain aspects of “smart contracts” should be clarified and if guidance should be given in order to ensure legal certainty for businesses and consumers; asks especially for the Commission to work to ensure that such contracts with consumers are valid and binding throughout the Union; that they meet the standards of consumer law, for example the right of withdrawal under Directive 2011/83/EU4 ; and that they are not subject to national barriers to application, such as notarisation requirements; __________________ 4 Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 304, 22.11.2011, p. 64).
Amendment 80 #
2020/2019(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that any future legislative proposals should seek to remove current and prevent potentially new barriers, lock- ins and reduced competition in the supply of digital services by online platforms; underlines, at the same time, that new Union obligations on platforms must have the public good at their core, be proportional and clear in nature in order to avoid unnecessary regulatory burdens or unnecessary restrictions; underlines the need to prevent gold-plating practices of Union legislation by Member States.
Amendment 84 #
2020/2019(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Welcomes the Commission’s agreement with collaborative economy platforms allowing Eurostat to publish key data on tourism accommodation, as a first steps; asks the Commission to introduce further information obligations for collaborative economy platforms in line with data protection rules, as this is essential for local authorities, in order to ensure the availability of affordable housing.
Amendment 4 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers it necessary to adopt uniform, Union-wide rules to combat hatred and disinformation and to protect children and youth as well as rules governing online advertising and fair e- commerce and at the same time calls for a strict distinction to be made between illegal , illegally shared and harmful content and cases of disinformation, as different rules are applicable in each case;
Amendment 9 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Emphasises that the issue of the amplification of illegal content should be tackled by uniform rules on advertising and transparency measures for social networks about the ways they remove, hide or prioritise users’ contributions;
Amendment 16 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on platform operators not only to immediately delete illegal content expeditiously after positive identification following a notification, but also to continuously transmit it to the law enforcement authorities for the purpose of further prosecution, including the metadata necessary for this purpose, and in all cases content providers have to be notified about the content removed, the legal basis and the possibility of redress;
Amendment 31 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Insists that the protection and promotion of freedom and diversity of opinion, information, the press and cultural forms of expression, as well as the protection of the privacy of communication between individuals, form the basis of liberal democracy and that this applies online without restriction; demands therefore that the use of allutomated technologically feasible means of combating harmful, illegal or illegally shared content on the internet in this context be subjected to careful prior constitutional vetting and therefore rejects prior checks on content as disproportiprohibition as disproportionate; and calls on the Commission to adopt uniform rules on notice and action procedure in order to speed up the removal of illegal or illegally shared conatent;
Amendment 37 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Emphasises that content, that is legal and legally shared under Union or national law, has to stay online and that any removal of content shall not lead to the identification of individual users nor to the processing of personal data;
Amendment 42 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Calls on the Commission to ensure that platform operators make available complaint and redress mechanisms for users and process them without undue delay;
Amendment 45 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Calls on the Commission to ensure that transparency reports are made available by platform operators which contain information about the number of cases where content was misidentified as illegal or as illegally shared and that competent authorities should make available information about the number of cases where removals lead to the investigation, and prosecution of crime;
Amendment 50 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises that open, network and technology-neutral access to the internet must be particularly protected by law because it forms the basis for the necessary interoperability of services and systems, ensures diversity, enables fair competition and the creation of a digital service infrastructure that includes access for every single citizen of the Union to quality information, educational, scientific and cultural offers; calls therefore on the Commission to step up efforts to ensure the equal, non-discriminatory treatment of all data traffic in the Union and to critically re-examine the impact of zero-rated offers on competition in the Union.; reminds that open source software, open standards, and open techn ologies are best suited to ensure interoperability, fair competition, and accessibility;
Amendment 224 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to require service providers to verifyrequire the information and identity of the business partners with whom they have a contractual commercial relationship, and to ensure that the information they provide is accurate and up-to-date; s defined in Regulation(EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services (‘P2B Regulation’), while preserving consumers’ anonymity; reminds that the verification of the identity of individual users would place extensive administrative burden on EU start-ups and SMEs competing on a global market;
Amendment 247 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the Commission to introduce enforceable obligations on internethosting service providers aimed at increasing transparency and information; considers that these obligations should be enforced by appropriate, effective and dissuasive penalties;
Amendment 275 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Believes that while AI-driven services, currently governed by the E- commerce Directive, have enormous potential to deliver benefits to consumers and service providers, the new Digital Services Actfuture legislation on artificial intelligence should also address the challenges they present in terms of ensuring non-discrimination, transparency and explainability of algorithms, as well as liability; points out the need to monitor algorithms and to assess associated risks, to use high quality and unbiased datasets, as well as to help individuals acquire access to diverse content, opinions, high quality products and services;
Amendment 369 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Stresses that maintaining safeguards from the legal liability regime for hosting intermediaries with regard to user-uploaded content and the general monitoring prohibition set out in Article 15 of the E-Commerce Directive are still relevant and need to be preserved; reminds that in line with Directive (EU) 2018/1808 (AVMS Directive) ex-ante control measures do not comply with article 15 of the Directive 2000/31/EC; underlines therefore that the future Digital Services Act should prohibit imposing on hosting service providers or other intermediary services mandatory automated technologies to control content;
Amendment 568 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part II – paragraph 7
Annex I – part II – paragraph 7
The Digital Services Act should apply without prejudice to the rules set out in other instruments, such as the General Data Protection Regulation2 (“GDPR”), the Copyright Directive3 and the Audio Visual Media Services Directive4 . __________________ 2Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 3Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market and amending Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC (OJ L 130, 17.5.2019, p. 92). 4Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) (OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1).
Amendment 609 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – indent 1
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – indent 1
- the information requirements in Article 5 of the E-Commerce Directive should be reinforced and the “Know Your Business Customer” principle should be introduced for business users of online market places; services providers should verify the identity of their business partners, including their company registration number or any equivalent means of identification including, if necessary, the verified national identity of their ultimate beneficial owner; that information should be accurate and up-to- date, and service providers should not be allowed to provide their services when they are notified that the identity of their business customer is false, misleading or otherwise invalid;
Amendment 628 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – indent 2
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – indent 2
- explicitly mentioning in the contract terms and general conditions what is to be understood as illegal content according to the Union or national law applicable to the service(s) being provided;
Amendment 656 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4
Amendment 658 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4
Amendment 660 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4 – indent 1
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4 – indent 1
Amendment 665 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4 – indent 2
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4 – indent 2
Amendment 667 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4 – indent 3
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4 – indent 3
Amendment 692 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 1 – indent 1
Annex I – part V – paragraph 1 – indent 1
- clarify that any removal or disabling access to illegal content should not affect the fundamental rights and the legitimate interests of users and consumers; and that legal content should stay online;
Amendment 705 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 1 – indent 3
Annex I – part V – paragraph 1 – indent 3
- preserve the underlying legal principle that online intermediaries should not be held directly liable for the acts of their users and that online intermediaries can continue moderating illegal content under fair and transparent terms and conditions of service, provided that they are applicable in a non-discriminatory manner;
Amendment 712 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 1 – indent 4
Annex I – part V – paragraph 1 – indent 4
- introduce new transparency and independent oversight of the content moderation procedures and voluntary tools related to the removal of illegal content online; such systems and procedures should be available for auditing and testing by independent authorities.
Amendment 733 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 – indent 5
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 – indent 5
- clarify, in an intelligible way, existing concepts and processes such as “expeditious action” which should not result in extreme timeframes such as one hour removal time that is unfeasible especially for smaller intermediaries, “actual knowledge and awareness”, “targeted actions”, “notices' formats”, and “validity of notices”;
Amendment 743 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 – indent 8
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 – indent 8
- allow for the submission of anonymous complaintsnotices for certain manifestly illegal content as that can help increasing the removal of illegal content;
Amendment 750 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 – indent 11
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 – indent 11
- create an obligation for the online intermediaries to verify the notified content and reply to the notice provider and the content uploader with a reasoned decision, such a requirement to reply should include the reasoning behind the decision, how the decision was made, if the decision was made by a human or an automated decision agent and information about the possibility to appeal this decision by either party with the intermediary, courts or other entities;
Amendment 754 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 – indent 12
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 – indent 12
- provide remedies to contest the decision via a counter-notice, including if the content has been removed via voluntary automated solutions, unless such a counter- notice would conflict with an ongoing investigation by law enforcement authorities.
Amendment 833 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VI – paragraph 2 – indent 7
Annex I – part VI – paragraph 2 – indent 7
Amendment 836 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VI – paragraph 2 – indent 8
Annex I – part VI – paragraph 2 – indent 8
Amendment 885 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VII – paragraph 2 – indent 6
Annex I – part VII – paragraph 2 – indent 6
- impose high levels of interoperability and interconnectivity measures requiring “systemic platforms” to share appropriate tools, data, expertise, and resources deployed in order to limit the risks of users and consumers’ lock-in and the artificially binding users to one systemic platform with no possibility or incentives for switching between digital platforms or internet ecosystems. As part of those measures, the Commission should explore different technologies and open standards and protocols, including the possibility of a mechanical interface (Application Programming Interface) that allows users of competing platforms to dock on to the systemic platform and exchange information with it.
Amendment 1 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the functioning of the digital single market should be improved by reinforcing legal certainty for providers of artificial intelligence (AI), and reinforcing users’ trust by strengthening safeguards to ensure the rule of law and fundamental rights in particular the right to privacy and protection of personal data, right to equality and non-discrimination, and the right to good administration and a fair trial;
Amendment 5 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. Whereas the testing and use of AI by police and judicial authorities is wide- spread, with different type of uses, consequences and risks that these entail namely, facial recognition systems, DNA profiling, predictive crime mapping, and mobile phone data extraction, advanced case-law search engines, online dispute resolution, and machine learning for administration of justice;
Amendment 8 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
A b. Whereas according to the report from the Fundamental Rights Agency there is still only limited information currently available on the possible use or testing of facial recognition technologies in Member States1a; __________________ 1aEuropean Union Agency for Fundamental Rights: Facial recognition technology: fundamental rights considerations in the context of law enforcement, (FRA Focus), 27 November 2019 https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_ uploads/fra-2019-facial-recognition- technology-focus-paper-1_en.pdf
Amendment 10 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
A c. Whereas in those Member States where some information was available on the use of facial recognition technologies, data protection authorities found that the use of these technologies did not comply with data protection law and lacked legal basis for their deployment;
Amendment 12 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A d (new)
Recital A d (new)
A d. Whereas discrimination in data - driven algorithmic decision-making can occur during the design, testing, and implementation phase, through the biases that are incorporated in the datasets or the algorithms;
Amendment 15 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A e (new)
Recital A e (new)
A e. Whereas certain uses of AI technologies are particularly sensitive and prone to abuse, which recently made some technology companies decide to stop offering related software;
Amendment 21 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that AI used by police and judicial authorities has to be categorised as high-risk, given that the role of these authorities is to defend the public interest and in view of the nature of their responsibility; considers that the EU should take the lead in laying down basic rules on the development and use of AI to ensure the same high level of consumer protection and uniform industry standards across the EU;
Amendment 27 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Calls on the Commission to assess the AI technology available on the market and the level of use by police and judicial authorities on a country-by-country basis.
Amendment 36 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Calls on the Commission to issue binding rules for companies to document the development of AI systems; notes in this regard that it is essential for the risk assessment documentation, the software documentation, the algorithms and data sets used to be fully accessible to market surveillance authorities, while respecting Union law;
Amendment 40 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that Articles 18(2), 42 and 43, and Annex X of Directive 2014/24/EU on public procurement need to be updated so that police and judicial authorities can require that such tools should be released as open source software under the public procurement procedure, and that a fundamental rights audit should be part of a prior conformity assessment; believes that – while ensuring the respect of EU law and values and the applicable data protection rules, and without jeopardising investigations or criminal prosecutions – training data must be open data;
Amendment 53 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Insists that Member States shall ensure that citizens are informed when they are subject to the use of artificial intelligence and that effective complaint and redress procedures, including judicial redress should be made available to citizensthem;
Amendment 58 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls the high risk of abuse of certain types of AI, including facial recognition technologies in public spaces, automated behaviour detection and profiling to divide people into risk categories at borders, and calls on the Commission to ban them; utonomous lethal weapons, biometric detection and recognition for mass surveillance, mass- scale citizen scoring, and predictive policing, and calls on the Commission to ban all applications that are in the highest risk category and welcomes the fact that some technology companies already enacted such bans;
Amendment 6 #
2020/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that artificial intelligence (AI) should serve humanity and that its benefits should be widely shared; stresses that, in the long-term, AI may surpass human intellectual capacity; stresses the need thereforee need to establish safeguards such as human control, transparency and verification of AI decision-making;
Amendment 10 #
2020/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses that before launching any new initiative on copyright, ongoing international negotiations should be unblocked at WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights focusing on limitations and exceptions for libraries and archives and limitations and exceptions for education;
Amendment 17 #
2020/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that the EU should play an essential role in laying down basic principles on the development, programming and use of AI, notably in its regulations and codes of conduct;
Amendment 25 #
2020/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 35 #
2020/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Considers that intellectual property rights for the development of artificial intelligence technologies should be distinguished from the IPR for content generated by AI; stresses the need to remove unnecessary legal barriers to AI development in order to unlock the potential of such technologies in culture and education;
Amendment 36 #
2020/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 48 #
2020/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. ExpStresses concern about the vacuum left between IPR and the development of AI, which could make cultural and creative industries vulnerable to AI-generated copyright-protected workthe need to monitor the evidence of substantial market failure or harm occurred due to the use of AI, in particular in cultural and creative industries; calls on the Commission to support a horizontal, evidence-based and technologically neutral approach to IPR applicable to AI- generated works;
Amendment 52 #
2020/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Points out that the most efficient way of reducing bias in AI systems is by ensuring that the maximum of data is available to train them, for which it is necessary to limit any unnecessary barrier to text-and-data mining and to facilitate cross-border uses;
Amendment 57 #
2020/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises the need to address the issue of liability for copyright infringements made by AI systems, as well as the issue of data ownership.remaining uncertainties related to the legal performance of text and data mining that developers of AI may still face following the adoption of Directive (EU) 2019/790; calls on the Commission to issue guidance on how reserving the rights other than by machine readable means shall be made publicly available for all in a centralised way; considers that the issue of data ownership goes against further enhancing data access and use of data;
Amendment 63 #
2020/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses that access to and use of data can equally be prevented by other type of protection measures protecting data as property, such as sui generis rights protection of data basis; reminds that according to the first evaluation of Directive 96/9/EC on the legal protection of databases, the introduction of new “sui generis right” has achieved a decrease in the production of European databases; therefore encourages the Commission to repeal the Directive in line with the Commission's one in, one out principle;
Amendment 66 #
2020/2015(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Recalls the EU’s ethical duty to support development around the world by facilitating cross-border cooperation on AI, including through limitations and exceptions for cross-border research and text-and-data mining, and therefore urges the speeding up of international action at the World Intellectual Property Organization to achieve this;
Amendment 19 #
2020/2014(INL)
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the complexity of AI applications can make it nearly impossible to prove fault or damage in certain cases, presents new challenges as regards the burden of proof;
Amendment 30 #
2020/2014(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Highlights that any update of the Product liability framework should go hand in hand with the update of Directive 2001/95/EC (the Product Safety Directive) in order to ensure that AI systems integrate safety and security by design principles;
Amendment 32 #
2020/2014(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Highlights incentivisation of increased ex-ante investment in security by developers of AI systems as a suggested approach in order to improve security; highlights that public source code disclosure would incentivise secure software development while making it economically and legally more attractive;
Amendment 37 #
2020/2014(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that any revision of the existing liability framework should aim to further harmonise liability rules in order to avoid fragmentation of the single market; stresses, however, the importance of ensuring that Union regulation remains limited to clearly identified problems for which feasible solutions exist and leaves room for further technological developments, including free and open source software;
Amendment 47 #
2020/2014(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Urges the Commission to scrutinise whether it is necessary to include software in the definition of ‘products’ under the Product Liability Directive and to update concepts such as ‘producer’, ‘damage’ and ‘defect’, and if so, to what extent; asks the Commission to also examine whether the product liability framework needs to be revised in order to protect injured parties efficiently as regards products that are purchased as a bundle with related services and to consider privacy-by-design and security-by-design rule as reasonable expectation of the consumers for their digital products;
Amendment 60 #
2020/2014(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the importance of ensuring a fair liability system in the chain of commercial transaction that makes it possible for consumers to prove that a defect in a product caused damage, even if third party software is involved or the cause of a defect is harddifficult to trace, for example when products are part of a complex interconnected Internet of Things environment;
Amendment 68 #
2020/2014(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to evaluate whether and to what extent the burden of proof should be reversedpropose a reversal of the burden of proof in specific cases and based on clear criteria, in order to empower harmed consumers while preventing abuse and providing legal clarity for businesses;
Amendment 70 #
2020/2014(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Highlights that the development- risk principle in line with point (e) of Article 7of Council Directive 85/374/EEC proved to be important and reasonable;
Amendment 71 #
2020/2014(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Underlines that explainability, interpretability and traceability of AI systems are key to ensure that liability mechanisms offer an adequate, efficient and fair allocation of responsibilities; therefore asks the Commission to issue binding rules for companies to publish transparency reports including the existence, functionality, process, main criteria, the logic behind, the data sets used and possible outcome of algorithmic systems and efforts to identify, prevent and mitigate damage caused by AI systems in a timely, accurate, easily- readable, and accessible manner;
Amendment 72 #
2020/2014(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Calls on the Commission to issue binding rules for companies and public bodies to document the development of AI systems; notes in this regard that it is essential for the risk assessment documentation, the software documentation, the algorithms and data sets used to be fully accessible to market surveillance authorities, while respecting Union law; additional prerogatives should be given to market surveillance authorities in this respect;
Amendment 75 #
2020/2014(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Highlights the need for a risk based approach to AI within the existing liability framework, which takes into account different levels of risk for consumers and society at large in specific sectors and uses of AI; algorithmic systems that may cause physical or material damage, breach fundamental rights and freedoms, impact an individual’s access to critical resources, or impact their participation in society shall not be deemed to be in the lowest risk category; underlines that such an approach, that might encompass two or moreseveral levels of risk, should be based on clear criteria and provide for legal clarityertainty and be subject to regular re-evaluation;
Amendment 82 #
2020/2014(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Asks the Commission to carefully assess the advantages and disadvantages of introducinge a strict liability model for products containing AI applications and consider it only in specific higher risk areas; underlines the need to strictly respect the proportionality principle if this approach is retainedand have a clear list of criteria agreed by the co-legislators.
Amendment 5 #
2020/2012(INL)
1. Recalls that the creationdevelopment and the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the areas of culture, education and information policy raises and will continue to raise a wide range of ethical issues;
Amendment 15 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the need to develop criteria for the use of AI in education, media and creative sectors, by developing benchmarks forfining principles of ethically responsible and acceptedtrustworthy uses of AI technologies in these areas; underlines that these criteria must be constantly adjustedadaptable to the progress in AI technologies;
Amendment 19 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notices that AI personalisedtechnology and AI- driven learning systems are increasingly being deployed in schools and universities, which is changing the role of teachers in the learning process to one more of facilitation; emphasises that education should empower citizens to develop new forms of thinking, including AI literacy and algorithm awareness and the ability to evaluate the impact of AI on information, knowledge, and decision-making; stresses that this shift should be reflected in educational curricula;
Amendment 40 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Acknowledges the great potential of AI in the areas of information and media; underlines that, if not regulated, it might have also ethically adverse effects by generating and spreading fake news, creating information bubbles and exploiting biases incorporated into AI algorithms;
Amendment 41 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Considers that the use of certain types of AI, such as facial recognition and behaviour detection systems, may have a damaging effect on the role of media and journalists as watchdogs of democracy; underlines, therefore, that the use of those systems in public spaces should be prohibited;
Amendment 42 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 56 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises the importance for transparency and accountability of algorithms used by media streaming companivideo-on-demand and television broadcasting services, in order to ensure access to culturally and linguistically diverse content; stresses that such algorithms should be designed in such a way that they do not privilege specific works by limiting their ‘personalised’ suggestions to the most popular works;
Amendment 60 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Emphasises that educational institutions should only use AI systems for education purposes that have been audited and certified as ethical, beneficial and acting consistently with human rights principles; reminds that open source software and open technologies are best suited for such purposes;
Amendment 67 #
2020/2012(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that the use of AI technologies is increasingly raising questions of fair competition in sport; stresses that this area needs a regulatory framework.
Amendment 59 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Articles 101 and 102 TFEU and the corresponding national competition rules concerning anticompetitive multilateral and unilateral conduct as well as merger control have as their objective the protection of undistorted competition on the market. This Regulation pursues an objective that is complementary to, but different from that of protecting undistorted competition on any given market, as defined in competition-law terms, which is to ensure that markets where gatekeepers are present are and remain contestable and fair, independently from the actual, likely or presumed effects of the conduct of a given gatekeeper covered by this Regulation on competition on a given market. This Regulation therefore aims at protecting a different legal interest from those rules and should be without prejudice tocomplements their application.
Amendment 61 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Weak contestability and unfair practices in the digital sector are more frequent and pronounced for certain digital services than for others. This is the case in particular for widespread and commonly used digital services that mostly directly intermediate between business users and end users and where features such as extreme scale economies, very strong network effects, an ability to connect many business users with many end users through the multi-sidedness of these services, lock-in effects, a lack of multi- homing or vertical integration are the most prevalent. Often, there is only one or very few large providers of those digital services. These providers of core platform services have emerged most frequently as gatekeepers for business users and end users with far-reaching impacts, gaining the ability to easily set commercial conditions and terms in a unilateral and detrimental manner for their business users and end users. Accordingly, it is necessary to focus on ally onf those digital services that are most broadly used by business users and end users and where, based on current market conditions, concerns about weak contestability and unfair practices by gatekeepers are more apparent and pressing from an internal market perspective.
Amendment 67 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) The conduct of combining end user data from different sources or signing in users to different services of gatekeepers gives them potential advantages in terms of accumulation of data, thereby raising barriers to entry. To ensure that gatekeepers do not unfairly undermine the contestability of core platform services, they should enable their end users to freely choose to opt-in to such business practices by offering a less personalised alternative. The possibility should cover all possible sources of personal data, including own services of the gatekeeper as well as third party websites, and should be proactively presented to the end user in an explicit, clear and straightforward manner.
Amendment 70 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36 a (new)
Recital 36 a (new)
(36 a) Article 5(a) of this Regulation should not be understood as suggesting that platforms that are not designated as gatekeepers may freely combine personal data across services without the individual’s consent.
Amendment 71 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) Because of their position, gatekeepers might in certain cases restrict the ability of business users of their online intermediation services to offer their goods or services to end users under more favourable conditions, including price, through other online intermediation services or through direct business channels. Such restrictions have a significant deterrent effect on the business users of gatekeepers in terms of their use of alternative online intermediation services or direct business channels, limiting inter- platform contestability, which in turn limits choice of alternative online intermediation channels for end users. To ensure that business users of online intermediation services of gatekeepers can freely choose alternative online intermediation services or other direct distribution channels and differentiate the conditions under which they offer their products or services to their end users, it should not be accepted that gatekeepers limit business users from choosing to differentiate commercial conditions, including price. Such a restriction should apply to any measure with equivalent effect, such as for example increased commission rates or de- listing or less favourable display of the offers of business users in the ranking.
Amendment 76 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) The conditions under which gatekeepers provide targeted online advertising based on contextual information services to business users including both advertisers and publishers are often non- transparent and opaque. This opacity is partly linked to the practices of a few platforms, but is also due to the sheer complexity of modern day programmatic advertising. The sector is considered to have become more non-transparent after the introduction of new privacy legislation, and is expected to become even more opaque with the announced removal of third-party cookies. This often leads to a lack of information and knowledge for advertisers and publishers about the conditions of the advertising services they purchased and undermines their atherefore their ability and possibility to switch to alternative providers of online advertising services increased. Furthermore, the costs of online advertising are likely to be higher than they would be in a fairer, more transparent and contestable platform environment. These higher costs are likely to be reflected in the prices that end users pay for many daily products and services relying on the use of online advertising. Transparency obligations should therefore require gatekeepers to provide advertisers and publishers to whom they supply targeted online advertising services based on contextual information, when requested and to the extent possible, with information that allows both sides to understand the price paid for each of the different advertising services provided as part of the relevant advertising value chain.
Amendment 94 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53
Recital 53
(53) The conditions under which gatekeepers provide targeted online advertising services based on contextual information to business users including both advertisers and publishers are often non- transparent and opaque. This often leads to a lack of information for advertisers and publishers about the effect of a given ad. To further enhance fairness, transparency and contestability of online advertising services designated under this Regulation as well as those that are fully integrated with other core platform services of the same provider, the designated gatekeepers should therefore provide advertisers and publishers, when requested, with free of charge access to the performance measuring tools of the gatekeeper for the purpose of targeted digital advertising based on contextual information and the information necessary for advertisers, advertising agencies acting on behalf of a company placing advertising, as well as for publishers to carry out their own independent verification of the provision of the relevant online advertising services.
Amendment 98 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55
Recital 55
(55) Business users that use large core platform services provided by gatekeepers and end users of such business users provide and generate a vast amount of data, including data inferred from such use. In order to ensure that business users have access to the relevant data thus generated, the gatekeeper should, upon their request, allow unhindered access, free of charge, to suchaggregated, non-personal data. Such access should also be given to third parties contracted by the business user, who are acting as processors of this data for the business user. Data provided or generated by the same business users and the same end users of these business users in the context of other services provided by the same gatekeeper may be concerned where this is inextricably linked to the relevant request. To this end, a gatekeeper should not use any contractual or other restrictions to prevent business users from accessing relevant data and should enable business users to obtain consent of their end users for such data access and retrieval, where such consent is required under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC. Gatekeepers should also facilitate access to these data in real time by means of appropriate technical measures, such as for example putting in place high quality application programming interfaces.
Amendment 100 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) In particular gatekeepers which provide access to software application stores online search engine and online social networking service serve as an important gateway for business users that seek to reach end users, which can result in an adverse effect on end users right to receive and impart information and ideas, and ultimately affect media pluralism, diversity of opinion as well as competition. In view of the imbalance in bargaining power between those gatekeepers on the one hand, and business users of their software application stores, especially those being in a minority position on a given sectorial market, such as small press publishers, particularly when accessing online search engine and online social networks, on the other hand, those gatekeepers should not be allowed to impose general conditions, including pricing conditions, that would be unfair or lead to unjustified differentiation. Pricing or other general access conditions should be considered unfair if they lead to an imbalance of rights and obligations imposed on business users or confer an advantage on the gatekeeper which is disproportionate to the service provided by the gatekeeper to business users or lead to a disadvantage for business users in providing the same or similar services as the gatekeeper. The following benchmarks can serve as a yardstick to determine the fairness of general access conditions: prices charged or conditions imposed for the same or similar services by other providers of software application stores; prices charged or conditions imposed by the provider of the software application store for different related or similar services or to different types of end users; prices charged or conditions imposed by the provider of the software application store for the same service in different geographic regions; prices charged or conditions imposed by the provider of the software application store for the same service the gatekeeper offers to itself. This obligation should not establish an access right and it should be without prejudice to the ability of providers of software application stores to take the required responsibility in the fight against illegal and unwanted content as set out in Regulation [Digital Services Act]. Determining the fairness of general access conditions should lead to the opportunity to make the revenue stream of digital content providers, such as press publishers being in a dominant position on their market, more transparent, notably in terms of revenues deriving from advertisement, and in terms of distribution of appropriate shares of revenues to the authors of works incorporated in press publications. This obligation should not establish an access right and it should be without prejudice to the ability of providers of software application stores to take the required responsibility in the fight against illegal and unwanted content as set out in Regulation [Digital Services Act]. It should also be without prejudice to the ability of business users being in a minority position on a given sectorial market, such as small press publishers, to offer royalty-free licenses in order to ensure access to their content, visibility on online search engines and online social networking services, and it should be without prejudice to the ability of end- users to perform acts of hyperlinking in according to article 15(1) of Directive(EU) 2019/790.
Amendment 108 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 79 – point 1
Recital 79 – point 1
Amendment 111 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. This Regulation shall apply to core platform services provided or offered by gatekeepers to business users established in the Union or end users established or located in the Union, irrespective of the place of establishment or residence of the gatekeepers and irrespective of the law otherwise applicable to the provision of service. This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular Articles 11, 13, 16, 47 and 50 thereof. Accordingly, this Regulation should be interpreted and applied with respect to those rights and principles.
Amendment 112 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5
Article 1 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall not impose on gatekeepers further obligations by way of laws, regulations or administrative action for the purpose of ensuring contestable and fair markets. This is without prejudice to rules pursuing other legitimate public interests, in compliance with Union law. In particular, nothing in this Regulation precludes Member States from imposing obligations, which are compatible with Union law, on undertakings, including providers of core platform services where these obligations are unrelated to the relevant undertakings having a status of gatekeeper within the meaning of this Regulation in order to protect consumers or, to fight against acts of unfair competition, to protect and to foster media freedom, pluralism of media or opinion as well as diversity in cultures and in languages or to pursue those other legitimate public interests.
Amendment 114 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 6
Article 1 – paragraph 6
6. This Regulation is without prejudice to the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU. It is also without prejudice to the application of: national rules prohibiting anticompetitive agreements, decisions by associations of undertakings, concerted practices and abuses of dominant positions; national competition rules prohibiting other forms of unilateral conduct insofar as they are applied to undertakings other than gatekeepers or amount to imposing additional obligations on gatekeepers; Council Regulation (EC) No 139/200438 and national rules concerning merger control; Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and Regulation (EU) …./.. of the European Parliament and of the Council39 . In particular, this Regulation does not preclude Member States from monitoring compliance with obligations laid down in the Regulation and to report regularly to the Commission on compliance with this Regulation in accordance with Article 24. _________________ 38Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) (OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1). 39Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council – proposal on a Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC.
Amendment 120 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h a (new)
(h a) voice assistants;
Amendment 121 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h a (new)
(h a) web browsers;
Amendment 122 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h b (new)
(h b) connected TVs;
Amendment 123 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h c (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h c (new)
(h c) Non-commercial, not-for profit, collaborative projects, organised on a voluntary basis should not be considered as core services.
Amendment 126 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)
(11 a) 'Web browser’ means a client software programme that enables a user to navigate in the World Wide Web to access and display data or to interact with content hosted on servers that are connected to this network, including standalone web browsers, as well as web browsers integrated or embedded in software;
Amendment 127 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11 b (new)
(11 b) `voice assistant` means a software application that provides capabilities for oral dialogue with a user in natural language and which intermediates between end users and business users offering voice-based apps;
Amendment 128 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11 c (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11 c (new)
(11 c) 'connected TV` means a television set connected to the Internet that allows user to perform online activities including music and video streaming, or viewing of pictures;
Amendment 129 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Digital services in general and online platforms in particular play an increasingly important role in the economy, in particular in the internal market, by providing new business opportunities in the Union and facilitating cross-border trading but also to the benefit of consumers with a greater choice in products and services provided.
Amendment 130 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Core platform services, at the same time, feature a number of characteristics that can be exploited by their providers. These characteristics of core platform services include among others extreme scale economies, which often result from nearly zero marginal costs to add business users or end users. Other characteristics of core platform services are very strong network effects, an ability to connect many business users with many end users through the multi-sidedness of these services, a significant degree of dependence of both business users and end users, lock-in effects, a lack of multi- homing for the same purpose by end users, vertical integration, and data driven- advantages. All these characteristics combined with unfair conduct by providers of these services can have the effect of substantially undermining the contestability of the core platform services, as well as impacting the fairness of the commercial relationship between providers of such services and their business users and end users, and lowering of consumer protection standards; leading to rapid and potentially far-reaching decreases in business users’ and end users’ choice in practice, and therefore can confer to the provider of those services the position of a so-called gatekeeper. End users are similarly affected by unfair practices by gatekeepers and their interests should be taken into account in the obligations to be imposed under this Regulation.
Amendment 130 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17 a (new)
(17 a) 'Business users of small press publications’ means any natural or legal person acting in a commercial or professional capacity using core platform services for the purpose of or in the course of providing press publications that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation2003/361/EC;
Amendment 136 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 23 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 23 a (new)
(23 a) ‘consent’ of the data subject means any freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous indication of the data subject's wishes as defined in point 11 of Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679;
Amendment 137 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 23 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 23 b (new)
(23 b) ‘profiling’ means any form of automated processing of personal data as defined in point 4 of Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679;
Amendment 138 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) it operates a core platform service which serves as an important gateway for business users or end users to reach other end users; and
Amendment 139 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – introductory part
(b) the requirement in paragraph 1 point (b) where it provides aone or more core platform service that combined has more than 45 million monthly active end users established or located in the Union andor more than 10 000 yearly active business users established in the Union in the last financial year;
Amendment 142 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Where a provider of core platform services meets all the thresholds in paragraph 2, it shall notify the Commission thereof within threout undue delay and no later than one months after those thresholds are satisfied and provide it with the relevant information identified in paragraph 2.. That notification shall include the relevant information identified in paragraph 2 for each of the core platform services of the provider that meets the thresholds in paragraph 2 point (b). The notification shall be updated whenever other core platform services individually meet the thresholds in paragraph 2 point (b).
Amendment 146 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 8
Article 3 – paragraph 8
8. The gatekeeper shall comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 within sixthree months after a core platform service has been included in the list pursuant to paragraph 7 of this Article.
Amendment 147 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall publish and update the list of gatekeepers and the list of the core platform services for which they need to comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 on an on-going basis. The Commission shall publish an annual report setting out the findings of its monitoring activities and present it to the European Parliament and the Council.
Amendment 151 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Articles 101 and 102 TFEU and the corresponding national competition rules concerning anticompetitive multilateral and unilateral conduct as well as merger control have as their objective the protection of undistorted competition on the market. This Regulation pursues an objective that is complementary to, but different from that of protecting undistorted competition on any given market, as defined in competition-law terms, which is to ensure that markets where gatekeepers are present are and remain contestable and fair, independently from the actual, likely or presumed effects of the conduct of a given gatekeeper covered by this Regulation on competition on a given market. This Regulation therefore aims at protecting a different legal interest from those rules and should be without prejudice tocomplement their application.
Amendment 151 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) refrain from combining personal data sourced from these core platform services with personal data from any other services offered by the gatekeeper or with personal data from third-party services, and from signing in end users to other services of the gatekeeper in order to combine personal data, unless the end user has been presented with the specific choice and provided consent in the sense of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. ;.
Amendment 152 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) This Regulation should also complement, without prejudice to their application, the rules resulting from other acts of Union law regulating certain aspects of the provision of services covered by this Regulation, in particular Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council26 , Regulation (EU) xx/xx/EU [DSA] of the European Parliament and of the Council27 , Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council28 , Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council29 and Directive 2002/58/EC29a, Directive (EU) 2015/2366 of the European Parliament and of the Council30 , Directive (EU) 2019/88230a, Directive(EU) 2018/180830b, and Directive (EU) 2010/13 of the European Parliament and of the Council31 , as well as national rules aimed at enforcing or, as the case may be, implementing that Union legislation. _________________ 26 Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 57). 27Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council – proposal on a Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC. 28Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 29 Directive (EU) 2019/790 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market and amending Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/ (OJ L 130, 17.5.2019, p. 92.). 29aDirective 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications) 30Directive (EU) 2015/2366 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 on payment services in the internal market, amending Directives 2002/65/EC, 2009/110/EC and 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, and repealing Directive 2007/64/EC ( OJ L 337, 23.12.2015, p. 35). 30aDirective (EU) 2019/882 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on the accessibility requirements for products and services (Text with EEA relevance) 30bDirective (EU) 2018/1808 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 November 2018 amending Directive 2010/13/EU on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) in view of changing market realities 31Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) (OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1).
Amendment 153 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) allow business users to offer the same products or services to end users through third party online intermediation services or through direct business channels at prices or conditions that are different from those offered through the online intermediation services of the gatekeeper;
Amendment 156 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Weak contestability and unfair practices in the digital sector are more frequent and pronounced for certain digital services than for others. This is the case in particular for widespread and commonly used digital services that mostly directly intermediate between business users and end users and where features such as extreme scale economies, very strong network effects, an ability to connect many business users with many end users through the multi-sidedness of these services, lock-in effects, a lack of multi- homing or vertical integration are the most prevalent. Often, there is only one or very few large providers of those digital services. These providers of core platform services have emerged most frequently as gatekeepers for business users and end users with far-reaching impacts, gaining the ability to easily set commercial conditions and terms in a unilateral and detrimental manner for their business users and end users. Accordingly, it is necessary to focus on ally onf those digital services that are most broadly used by business users and end users and where, based on current market conditions, concerns about weak contestability and unfair practices by gatekeepers are more apparent and pressing from an internal market perspective.
Amendment 156 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) refrain from preventing or restricting business users or end user from raising issues with any relevant public authority or in front of national judicial authority relating to any practice of gatekeepers;
Amendment 158 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) refrain from requiring business users or end users to subscribe to or register with any other core platform services identified pursuant to Article 3 or which meets the thresholds in Article 3(2)(b)any ancillary service as a condition to access, sign up or register to any of their core platform services identified pursuant to that Article;
Amendment 159 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(f a) refrain from requiring to use only one specific payment method or payment processor as a condition in order to make use of or allow access to any of its core platform services for business users;
Amendment 160 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) In particular, online intermediation services, online search engines, operating systems, online social networking, video sharing platform services, number- independent interpersonal communication services, cloud computing services and online advertising services all have the capacity to affect a large number of end users and businesses alike, which entails a risk of unfair business practice, including business-to-business clouds, online advertising services, embedded digital services in vehicles, browsers, virtual assistant, connected tv and collaborative economy services all have the capacity to affect a large number of end users and businesses alike, which entails a risk of unfair business practices. Collaborative economy services, especially short term rental and online hotel reservation services are present in a market characterised by a high level of concentration. Due to their position on the market and their capacity to connect end users and business users they have substantial influence on the strategy and price setting of their business users. They therefore should be included in the definition of core platform services and fall into the scope of this Regulation. Online intermediation services may also be active in the field of financial services, and they may intermediate or be used to provide such services as listed non-exhaustively in Annex II to Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council32 . In certain circumstances, the notion of end users should encompass users that are traditionally considered business users, but in a given situation do not use the core platform services to provide goods or services to other end users, such as for example businesses relying on cloud computing services for their own purposes. _________________ 32Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 September 2015 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical regulations and of rules on Information Society services, OJ L 241, 17.9.2015, p. 1.
Amendment 160 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide advertisers and publishers to which it supplies targeted digital advertising services based on contextual information, upon their request, with information concerning the price paid by the advertiser and publisher, as well as the amount or remuneration paid to the publisher, for the publishing of a given ad and for each of the relevant advertising services provided by the gatekeeper.
Amendment 162 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(g a) allow end users to un-install any pre-installed software applications on its operating system;
Amendment 163 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g b (new)
(g b) allow end users, and business users of number independent interpersonal communication services and social network services to access to and interoperate with the gatekeepers services by providing open standards, open protocols including Application Programming Interface;
Amendment 164 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13 a) In certain circumstances, the notion of end users should encompass users that are traditionally considered business users, but in a given situation do not use the core platform services to sell goods or services to other end users, such as for example businesses relying on cloud computing services for their own purposes.
Amendment 167 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) allow end users to un-install any pre-installed software applications on its core platform service without prejudice to the possibility for a gatekeeper to restrict such un-installation in relation to software applications that are essential for the functioning of the operating system or of the device and which cannot technically be offered on a standalone basis by third-parties;
Amendment 168 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) The fact that a digital service qualifies as a core platform service in light of its widespread and common use and its importance for connecting business users and end users does not as such give rise to sufficiently serious concerns of contestability and unfair practices. It is only when a core platform service constitutes an important gateway and is operated by a provider with a significant impact in the internal market and an entrenched and durable position, or by a provider that will foreseeably have such a position in the near future, subject to a market investigation or to an assessment by the Commission based on a notification submitted in line with article 12, that such concerns arise. Accordingly, the targeted set of harmonised rules laid down in this Regulation should apply only to undertakings designated on the basis of these three objective criteria, and they should only apply to those of their core platform services that individually constitute an important gateway for business users to reach end users.
Amendment 176 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(d a) ensure that algorithms that determine the ranking of products and services are fair and transparent, and that the ranking of any content in online platforms incorporating voice assistant technologies must accurately and impartially reflect users’ voice requests;
Amendment 178 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) refrain from technically restricting the ability of end users to switch between and subscribe to different software applications and services to be accessed using the operating system of the gatekeeper, including as regards the choice of Internet access provider for end users;
Amendment 179 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) allow business users, end users and providers of ancillary services access to and interoperability with the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision by the gatekeeper of any ancillary services;
Amendment 181 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide advertisers and publishers, upon their request and free of charge, with access to the performance measuring tools of the gatekeeper for the purpose of targeted digital advertising based on contextual information and the information necessary for advertisers and publishers to carry out their own independent verification of the ad inventory;
Amendment 183 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Such thresholds can be impacted by market and technical developments. The Commission should therefore be empowered to adopt delegated acts to specify the methodology for determining whether the quantitative thresholds are met, and to regularly adjust ithis methodology to market and technological developments where necessary. This is particularly relevant in relation to the threshold referring to market capitalisation, which should be indexed in appropriate intervals.
Amendment 184 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) provide business users, or third parties authorised by a business user, free of charge, with effective, high-quality, continuous and real-time access and use of aggregated or non-aggregated non- personal data, that is provided for or generated in the context of the use of the relevant core platform services by those business users and the end users engaging with the products or services provided by those business users; for personal data, provide access and use only where directly connected with the use effectuated by the end user in respect of the products or services offered by the relevant business user through the relevant core platform service, and when the end user opts in to such sharing with a consent in the sense of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679; ;
Amendment 185 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Providers of core platform services which meet the quantitative thresholds but are able to present sufficiently substantiated arguments to demonstrate that, in the circumstances in which the relevant core platform service operates, they do not fulfil the objective requirements for a gatekeeper, should not be designated directly, but only subject to a further investigation. The burden of adducing evidence that the presumption deriving from the fulfilment of quantitative thresholds should not apply to a specific provider should be bbe subject to an assessment by the Commission whether they qualify or not as a gatekeeper in light of the argument presented. This assessment should be done within specific time-limits and not lead to undue delay in designating the provider of a corne by that providplatform service as a gatekeeper. In its assessment, the Commission should take into account only the elements which directly relate to the requirements for constituting a gatekeeper, namely whether it is an important gateway which is operated by a provider with a significant impact in the internal market with an entrenched and durable position, either actual or foreseeable. Any justification on economic grounds seeking to demonstrate efficiencies deriving from a specific type of behaviour by the provider of core platform services should be discarded, as it is not relevant to the designation as a gatekeeper. The Commission should be able to take a decision by relying on the quantitative thresholds where the provider significantly obstructs the investigation by failing to comply with the investigative measures taken by the Commission.
Amendment 188 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) apply transparent fair and non- discriminatory general conditions of access for business users to its software application store and for business users SMEs on a given sectorial market to its online search engine and online social networking service designated pursuant to Article 3 of this Regulation.
Amendment 190 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) A particular subset of rules should apply to those providers of core platform services that are foreseen to enjoy an entrenched and durable position in the near future, for instance because the Commission has been notified of an intended concentration in line with Article 12(1) and assessed its impact on the contestability of digital markets. The same specific features of core platform services make them prone to tipping: once a service provider has obtained a certain advantage over rivals or potential challengers in terms of scale or intermediation power, its position may become unassailable and the situation may evolve to the point that it is likely to become durable and entrenched in the near future. Undertakings can try to induce this tipping and emerge as gatekeeper by using some of the unfair conditions and practices regulated in this Regulation. In such a situation, it appears appropriate to intervene before the market tips irreversibly.
Amendment 190 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
(k a) ensure their services, including user interfaces, are accessible to persons with disabilities in accordance with Article 13 of Directive (EU)2019/882. They shall also ensure that business users which rely on their core platform service to reach consumers for offering services and products in the scope of Directive (EU) 2019/882, comply with the requirements of Directive (EU) 2019/882.
Amendment 191 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k b (new)
Amendment 194 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. For the purposes of specifying the obligations under Article 6(1) point (f),the Commission shall in cooperation with the Gatekeeper, business users and end user representatives define the open technologies, open standards and open protocols, including the technical interface (Application Programming Interface), that allows end users of competing software and services and business users to dock on to the gate keepers core service and to interoperate with it. Any processing of personal data by gatekeepers should comply with Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular Articles 6(1)(a) and 5(1)(c). Interoperability obligations shall not limit, hinder or delay the ability of intermediaries to address vulnerabilities in order to comply with an obligation under Article 18 of COM(2020) 823 final or Article 32(1)(c) of Regulation(EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 196 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) To ensure the effectiveness of the review of gatekeeper status as well as the possibility to adjust the list of core platform services provided by a gatekeeper, the gatekeepers should inform the Commission of all of their intended and concluded acquisitions of other providers of core platform services or any other services provided within the digital sector. Such information should not only serve the review process mentioned above, regarding the status of individual gatekeepers, but will also provide information that is crucial to monitoring broader contestability trends in the digital sector and can therefore be a useful factor, including for consideration in the context of the market investigations foreseen by this Regulation, as well as trigger behavioural or structural remedies on gatekeepers to restore contestability and fairness on digital markets.
Amendment 196 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. Where consent for collecting and processing of personal data is required to ensure compliance with this Regulation, a gatekeeper shall take the necessary steps to either enable business users to directly obtain the required consent to their processing, where required under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC, or to comply with Union data protection and privacy rules and principles in other ways including by providing business users with duly anonymised data where appropriate. The gatekeeper shall not make the obtaining of this consent by the business user more burdensome than for its own services, including product design, structure, function or manner of operation capable of influencing user choice and autonomy.
Amendment 199 #
2020/0374(COD)
1. The Commission may conduct a market investigation for the purpose of examining whether a provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper pursuant to Article 3(6), or in order to identify core platform services for a gatekeeper pursuant to Article 3(7). It shall endeavour to conclude its investigation by adopting a decision in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4) within twelvesix months from the opening of the market investigation.
Amendment 200 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) To safeguard the fairness and contestability of core platform services provided by gatekeepers, it is necessary to provide in a clear and unambiguous manner for a set of harmonised obligations with regard to those services. Such rules are needed to address the risk of harmful effects of unfair practices imposed by gatekeepers, to the benefit of the business environment in the services concerned, to the benefit of users and ultimately to the benefit of society as a whole. Given the fast-moving and dynamic nature of digital markets, and the substantial economic power of gatekeepers, it is important that these obligations are effectively applied without being circumvented. To that end, the obligations in question should apply to any practices by a gatekeeper, irrespective of its form and irrespective of whether it is of a contractual, commercial, technical or any other nature, including through product design, structure, function or manner of operation capable of influencing user’s choice or autonomy, or through agreements with third party business partners of the gatekeepers insofar as a practice corresponds to the type of practice that is the subject of one of the obligations of this Regulation.
Amendment 200 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. In the course of a market investigation pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission shall endeavour to communicate its preliminary findings to the provider of core platform services concerned within sixthree months from the opening of the investigation. In the preliminary findings, the Commission shall explain whether it considers, on a provisional basis, that the provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper pursuant to Article 3(6).
Amendment 202 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. If the Commission considers it necessary, it may also hear other natural or legal persons before taking the decisions as provided for in paragraph 1. Applications to be heard on the part of such persons shall, where they show a sufficient interest, be granted.
Amendment 203 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2
Article 30 – paragraph 2
2. Gatekeepers, undertakings and associations of undertakings concerned and interested third-parties may submit their observations to the Commission’s preliminary findings within a time limit which shall be fixed by the Commission in its preliminary findings and which may not be less than 14 days.
Amendment 204 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 3
Article 30 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall base its decisions only on objections on which gatekeepers, undertakings and associations of undertakings concerned and interested third-parties have been able to comment.
Amendment 205 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 a (new)
Article 32 a (new)
Amendment 206 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34 a (new)
Recital 34 a (new)
(34 a) The network effect is one of the factors that accelerated very large online platforms growth, increasing the value of their services to its users and the user base. When combined with the increased level of integration that technology has in most people's lives, this effect has a chilling effect on the choice that consumers have. Data portability requirements are a first step in re- establishing the freedom of choice but in some particular cases more measures are needed. Looking how communication markets evolved over time and the changes in communication habits, it can be concluded that some services offered by online platforms are replacing services like voice and SMS communications, services that come with interconnection and interoperability requirements. Due to its social importance, access to internet was recently included in the Universal Service obligations, and as a particular case of services, number independent interpersonal communication services are subject to potential remedies by National Regulatory Agencies according to Article 61 (2) c) of the Directive2018/1792, the European Electronic Communication Code (EECC). As this regulation applies in the particular case of gatekeepers meaning entities that have been already assessed as having a significant impact on the internal market and end-to-end connectivity is endangered, it should be compulsory to build up on the EECC provisions and introduce a interoperability requirement for gatekeepers services that are social media or number independent interpersonal communication services.
Amendment 206 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. When threone or more Member States request the Commission to open an investigation pursuant to Article 15 because they consider that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper, the Commission shall within four months examine whether there are reasonable grounds to open such an investigation and adopt a decision. In case the Commission decides there is no grounds for opening a market investigation, it shall publish a reasoned opinion.
Amendment 208 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 33 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Third parties with a legitimate interest in representing business users or end users may provide the Commission with evidence with respect to any of the investigations triggered by paragraphs 1 to 3 of this article. On that basis, the Commission shall within four months examine whether there are reasonable grounds to open such an investigation pursuant to Articles 15, 16 and 17.
Amendment 209 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) The conduct of combining end user data from different sources or signing in users to different services of gatekeepers gives them potential advantages in terms of accumulation of data, thereby raising barriers to entry. To ensure that gatekeepers do not unfairly undermine the contestability of core platform services, they should enable their end users to freely choose to opt-in to such business practices by offering a less personalised alternative. The possibility should cover all possible sources of personal data, including own services of the gatekeeper as well as third party websites, and should be proactively presented to the end user in an explicit, clear and straightforward manner.
Amendment 209 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 a (new)
Article 33 a (new)
Article 33 a Right to lodge complaints 1. Third parties representing business users or end users shall be entitled to lodge complaints with regard to the non- designation of gatekeepers, non- compliance and systematic non- compliance by gatekeepers with their obligations in accordance with Article 3, 5and 6 and request the opening of a market investigation. They shall submit evidence in support of their request. 2. The Commission shall examine whether there are reasonable grounds to open such an investigation and inform the interested third parties of its decision within three months.
Amendment 210 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 3
Article 38 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall provide any relevant information they have that the Commission may require for the purposes of drawing up the report referred to in paragraph 1. Among such information, data allowing to determine the fairness of general access conditions to platform services should be examined, including as regards revenue streams deriving from advertisement, and the distribution of appropriate shares of revenues to third party right holders.
Amendment 214 #
2020/0374(COD)
(36 a) Individual consent, expressed in accordance with Regulation (EU)2016/679 is always needed in order to combine personal data across services. Article 5(a) of this Regulation should not be understood as suggesting that platforms that are not designated as gatekeepers may act without the individual’s consent. It needs to be recalled that consent is not the only necessary requirement for data processing, and data limitation should guide the collection and use of data in all online activities.
Amendment 215 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) Because of their position, gatekeepers might in certain cases restrict the ability of business users of their online intermediation services to offer their goods or services to end users under more favourable conditions, including price, through other online intermediation services or through direct business channels. Such restrictions have a significant deterrent effect on the business users of gatekeepers in terms of their use of alternative online intermediation services or direct distribution channels , limiting inter-platform contestability, which in turn limits choice of alternative online intermediation channels for end users. To ensure that business users of online intermediation services of gatekeepers can freely choose alternative online intermediation services or other direct distribution channels and differentiate the conditions under which they offer their products or services to their end users, it should not be accepted that gatekeepers limit business users from choosing to differentiate commercial conditions, including price. Such a restriction should apply to any measure with equivalent effect, such as for example increased commission rates or, de-listing of the offers or less favourable display of business users in the ranking.
Amendment 231 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) To safeguard a fair commercial environment and protect the contestability of the digital sector it is important to safeguard the right of business users to raise concerns about unfair behaviour by gatekeepers with any relevant administrative or other public authorities. For example, business users may want to complain about different types of unfair practices, such as discriminatory access conditions, unjustified closing of business user accounts or unclear grounds for product de-listings. Any practice that would in any way inhibit such a possibility of raising concerns or seeking available redress, for instance by means of confidentiality clauses in agreements or other written terms, should therefore be prohibited. This should be without prejudice to the right of business users and gatekeepers to lay down in their agreements the terms of use including the use of lawful complaints-handling mechanisms, including any use of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms or of the jurisdiction of specific courts in compliance with respective Union and national law. This should therefore also be without prejudice to the role gatekeepers play in the fight against illegal content online.
Amendment 240 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) Gatekeepers should not restrict the free choice of end users by technically preventing switching between or subscription to different software applications and services. Gatekeepers should therefore ensure a free choice irrespective of whether they are the manufacturer of any hardware by means of which such software applications or services are accessed and should not raise artificial technical barriers so as to make switching impossible or ineffective. The mere offering of a given product or service to end users, including by means of pre-installation, as well the improvement of end user offering, such as better prices or increased quality, would not in itself constitute a barrier to switching.
Amendment 245 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) The conditions under which gatekeepers provide online advertising services based on contextual information to business users including both advertisers and publishers are often non- transparent and opaque. This opacity is partly linked to the practices of a few platforms, but is also due to the sheer complexity of modern day programmatic advertising. The sector is considered to have become more non-transparent after the introduction of new privacy legislation, and is expected to become even more opaque with the announced removal of third-party cookies. This often leads to a lack of information and knowledge for advertisers and publishers about the conditions of the advertising services they purchased and undermines their ability to switch to alternative providers of online advertising services. Furthermore, the costs of online advertising are likely to be higher than they would be in a fairer, more transparent and contestable platform environment. These higher costs are likely to be reflected in the prices that end users pay for many daily products and services relying on the use of online advertising. Transparency obligations should therefore require gatekeepers to provide advertisers and publishers to whom they supply online advertising services based on contextual information, when requested and to the extent possible, with information that allows both sides to understand the price paid for each of the different advertising services provided as part of the relevant advertising value chain.
Amendment 259 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) The rules that the gatekeepers set for the distribution of software applications may in certain circumstances restrict the ability of end users to install and effectively use third party software applications or, software application stores or repositories on operating systems or hardware of the relevant gatekeeper and restrict the ability of end users to access these software applications or, software application stores or repositories outside the core platform services of that gatekeeper. Such restrictions may limit the ability of developers of software applications to use alternative distribution channels and the ability of end users to choose between different software applications from different distribution channels and should be prohibited as unfair and liable to weaken the contestability of core platform services. In order to ensure that third party software applications or software application stores do not endanger the integrity of the hardware or operating system provided by the gatekeeper the gatekeeper concerned may implement proportionate technical or contractual measures to achieve that goal if the gatekeeper demonstrates that such measures are necessary and justified and that there are no less restrictive means to safeguard the integrity of the hardware or operating system.
Amendment 269 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) Gatekeepers are often vertically integrated and offer certain products or services to end users through their own core platform services, or through a business user over which they exercise control which frequently leads to conflicts of interest. This can include the situation whereby a gatekeeper offers its own online intermediation services through an online search engine. When offering those products or services on the core platform service, gatekeepers can reserve a better position to their own offering, in terms of ranking, as opposed to the products of third parties also operating on that core platform service. This can occur for instance with products or services, including other core platform services, which are ranked in the results communicated by online search engines, or which are partly or entirely embedded in online search engines results, groups of results specialised in a certain topic, displayed along with the results of an online search engine, which are considered or used by certain end users as a service distinct or additional to the online search engine. Other instances are those of software applications which are distributed through software application stores, or products or services that are given prominence and display in the newsfeed of a social network, or products or services ranked in search results or displayed on an online marketplace or in results provided to a search through virtual assistants. In those circumstances, the gatekeeper is in a dual- role position as intermediary for third party providers and as direct provider of products or services of the gatekeeper. Consequently, these gatekeepers have the ability to undermine directly the contestability for those products or services on these core platform services, to the detriment of business users which are not controlled by the gatekeeper.
Amendment 281 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
(50) Gatekeepers should not restrict or prevent the free choice of end users by technically preventing switching between or subscription to different software applications and services. This would allow more providers to offer their services, thereby ultimately providing greater choice to the end user. Gatekeepers should ensure a free choice irrespective of whether they are the manufacturer of any hardware by means of which such software applications or services are accessed and shall not raise artificial technical barriers so as to make switching impossible or ineffective. The mere offering of a given product or service to consumers, including by means of pre-installation, as well as the improvement of the offering to end users, such as price reductions or increased quality, should not be construed as constituting a prohibited barrier to switching.
Amendment 292 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) Gatekeepers may also have a dual role as developers of operating systems and device manufacturers, including any technical functionality that such a device may have. For example, a gatekeeper that is a manufacturer of a device may also restrict access to some of the functionalities in this device, such as near- field-communication technology and the software used to operate that technology, which may be required for the effective provision of an ancillary service by the gatekeeper as well as by any potential third party provider of such an ancillary service. Such access may equally be required by software applications related to the relevant ancillary services in order to effectively provide similar functionalities as those offered by gatekeepers. If such a dual role is used in a manner thatrestrictive measure is used to prevents alternative providers of ancillary services or of any software applications to have access under equal conditions to the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision by the gatekeeper of any ancillary services, this could significantly undermine innovation by providers of such ancillary services as well as choice for end users of such ancillary services. The gatekeepers should therefore be obliged to ensure access under equal conditions to, and interoperability with, the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision of any ancillaryof its services by the gatekeeper.
Amendment 295 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53
Recital 53
(53) The conditions under which gatekeepers provide online advertising services based on contextual information to business users including both advertisers and publishers are often non- transparent and opaque. This often leads to a lack of information for advertisers and publishers about the effect of a given ad. To further enhance fairness, transparency and contestability of online advertising services designated under this Regulation as well as those that are fully integrated with other core platform services of the same provider, the designated gatekeepers should therefore provide advertisers and publishers, when requested, with free of charge access to the performance measuring tools of the gatekeeper for the purpose of digital advertising based on contextual information and the information necessary for advertisers, advertising agencies acting on behalf of a company placing advertising, as well as for publishers to carry out their own independent verification of the provision of the relevant online advertising services.
Amendment 298 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55
Recital 55
(55) Business users that use large core platform services provided by gatekeepers and end users of such business users provide and generate a vast amount of data, including data inferred from such use. In order to ensure that business users have access to the relevant data thus generated, the gatekeeper should, upon their request, allow unhindered access, free of charge, to suchaggregated and non-aggregated non- personal data. Such access should also be given to third parties contracted by the business user, who are acting as processors of this data for the business user. Data provided or generated by the same business users and the same end users of these business users in the context of other services provided by the same gatekeeper may be concerned where this is inextricably linked to the relevant request. To this end, a gatekeeper should not use any contractual or other restrictions to prevent business users from accessing relevant data and should enable business users to obtain consent of their end users for such data access and retrieval, where such consent is required under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC. Gatekeepers should also facilitate access to these data in real time by means of appropriate technical measures, such as for example putting in place high quality application programming interfaces.
Amendment 301 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) The value of online search engines to their respective business users and end users increases as the total number of such users increases. Providers of online search engines collect and store aggregated datasets containing information about what users searched for, and how they interacted with, the results that they were served. Providers of online search engine services collect these data from searches undertaken on their own online search engine service and, where applicable, searches undertaken on the platforms of their downstream commercial partners. Access by gatekeepers to such ranking, query, click and view data constitutes an important barrier to entry and expansion, which undermines the contestability of online search engine services. Gatekeepers should therefore be obliged to provide access, on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms, to these ranking, query, click and view data in relation to free and paid search generated by consumers on online search engine services to other providers of such services, so that these third-party providers can optimise their services and contest the relevant core platform serviceprovided that the gatekeeper is able to demonstrate that anonymised query, click and view data have been adequately tested against possible re-identification risks. Such access should also be given to third parties contracted by a search engine provider, who are acting as processors of this data for that search engine. When providing access to its search data, a gatekeeper should ensure the protection of the personal data of end users by appropriate means, without substantially degrading the quality or usefulness of the data.
Amendment 303 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) In particular gatekeepers which provide access to software application stores, online search engine and online social networking service serve as an important gateway for business users that seek to reach end users. In view of the imbalance in bargaining power between those gatekeepers and business users of their software application stores which can result in an adverse effect on end users' right to receive and impart information and ideas, and ultimately affect media pluralism, diversity of opinion as well as competition. In view of the imbalance in bargaining power between those gatekeepers and business users of their software application stores, especially those that are SMEs on a given sectorial market, such as small press publishers, particularly when accessing online search engine and online social networks, on the other hand, those gatekeepers should not be allowed to impose general conditions, including pricing conditions, data usage conditions or conditions related to the licensing of rights held by the business user that would be unfair or lead to unjustified differentiation. Pricing or other general access conditions should be considered unfair if they lead to an imbalance of rights and obligations imposed on business users or confer an advantage on the gatekeeper which is disproportionate to the service provided by the gatekeeper to business users or lead to a disadvantage for business users in providing the same or similar services as the gatekeeper. The following benchmarks can serve as a yardstick to determine the fairness of general access conditions: prices charged or conditions imposed for the same or similar services by other providers of software application stores; prices charged or conditions imposed by the provider of the software application store for different related or similar services or to different types of end users; prices charged or conditions imposed by the provider of the software application store for the same service in different geographic regions; prices charged or conditions imposed by the provider of the software application store for the same service the gatekeeper offers to itself. Determining the fairness of general access conditions should lead to the opportunity to make the revenue stream of digital content providers, such as press publishers being in a dominant position on their market, more transparent, notably in terms of revenues deriving from advertisement, and in terms of distribution of appropriate shares of revenues to the authors of works incorporated in press publications. This obligation should not establish an access right and it should be without prejudice to the ability of providers of software application stores to take the required responsibility in the fight against illegal and unwanted content as set out in Regulation [Digital Services Act]. It should also be without prejudice to the ability of business that are SMEs on a given sectorial market, such as small press publishers, to offer royalty-free licenses in order to ensure access to their content, visibility on online search engines and online social networking services, and it should be without prejudice to the ability of end-users to perform acts of hyperlinking in according to Article15(1) of Directive (EU) 2019/790.
Amendment 319 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) To ensure the effectiveness of the obligations laid down by this Regulation, while also making certain that these obligations are limited to what is necessary to ensure contestability and tackling the harmful effects of the unfair behaviour by gatekeepers, it is important to clearly define and circumscribe them so as to allow the gatekeeper to immediately comply with them, in full respect of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC, consumer protection, cyber security and product safety. The gatekeepers should ensure the compliance with this Regulation by design. The necessary measures should therefore be as much as possible and where relevant integrated into the technological design used by the gatekeepers. However, it may in certain cases be appropriate for the Commission, following a dialogue conducted within legally binding deadlines with the gatekeeper concerned, to further specify some of the measures that the gatekeeper concerned should adopt in order to effectively comply with those obligations that are susceptible of being further specified. This possibility of a regulatory dialogue should facilitate compliance by gatekeepers and expedite the correct implementation of the Regulation.
Amendment 320 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58 a (new)
Recital 58 a (new)
(58 a) The Commission should also be able to swiftly adopt decisions in case of non-compliance of a gatekeeper with the obligations laid down in this Regulation. In taking such decisions, the Commission should be allowed to specify the measures that would be needed to ensure full compliance with this Regulation and restore the contestability of digital markets when it has been undermined.
Amendment 322 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 59
Recital 59
(59) As an additional element to ensure proportionality, gatekeepers should be given an opportunity to request the temporary suspension, to the extent necessary, of a specific obligation in exceptional circumstances that lie beyond the control of the gatekeeper, such as for example an unforeseen external shock that has temporarily eliminated a significant part of end user demand for the relevant core platform service, where compliance with a specific obligation is shown by the gatekeeper to endanger the economic viability of the Union operations of the gatekeeper concerned. The Commission should state in its decision the reasons for granting the suspension and review it on a regular basis to asses if the conditions for granting it are still viable or not.
Amendment 328 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 61
Recital 61
(61) The data protection and privacy interests of end users are relevant to any assessment of potential negative effects of the observed practice of gatekeepers to collect and accumulate large amounts of data from end users. Ensuring an adequate level of transparency of profiling practices employed by gatekeepers facilitates contestability of core platform services, by putting external pressure on gatekeepers to prevent making deep consumer profiling the industry standard, given that potential entrants or start-up providers cannot access data to the same extent and depth, and at a similar scale. Enhanced transparency should allow other providers of core platform services to differentiate themselves better through the use of superior privacy guaranteeing facilities. To ensure a minimum level of effectiveness of this transparency obligation, gatekeepers should at least provide a description of the basis upon which profiling is performed, including whether personal data and data derived from user activity is relied on, the processing applied, the purpose for which the profile is prepared and eventually used, the impact of such profiling on the gatekeeper’s services, and the steps taken to enable end users to be aware of the relevant use of such profiling, as well as to seek their consent. The Commission should develop, in consultation with the EU Data Protection Supervisor, the European Data Protection Board, civil society and experts, the standards and process of the audit. The audited description, as well as any relevant materials that is collected in the context of supervising the gatekeepers that relate to the processing of personal data, shall be shared by the Commission with any competent supervisory authority represented in the European Data Protection Board, upon its request.
Amendment 341 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 64
Recital 64
(64) The Commission should investigate and assess whether additional behavioural, or, where appropriate, structural remedies are justified, in order to ensure that the gatekeeper cannot frustrate the objectives of this Regulation by systematic non- compliance with one or several of the obligations laid down in this Regulation, which has further strengthened its gatekeeper position. This would be the caseIn imposing these remedies, the Commission should take into consideration if the gatekeeper’s size in the internal market has further increased, economic dependency of business users and end users on the gatekeeper’s core platform services has further strengthened as their number has further increased and the gatekeeper benefits from increased entrenchment of its position. The Commission should therefore in such cases have the power to impose any remedy, whether behavioural or structural, having due regard to the principle of proportionality. Structural remedies, such as legal, functional or structural separation, including the divestiture of a business, or parts of it, should only be imposed either where there is no equally effective behavioural remedy or where any equally effective behavioural remedy would be more burdensome for the undertaking concerned than the structural remedy. Changes to the structure of an undertaking as it existed before the systematic non- compliance was established would only be proportionate where there is a substantial risk that this systematic non-compliance results from the very structure of the undertaking concerned.
Amendment 352 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 68
Recital 68
(68) In order to ensure effective implementation and compliance with this Regulation, the Commission should have strong investigative and enforcement powers, to allow it to investigate, enforce and monitor the rules laid down in this Regulation, while at the same time ensuring the respect for the fundamental right to be heard and to have access to the file in the context of the enforcement proceedings. The Commission should dispose of these investigative powers also for the purpose of carrying out market investigations for the purpose of updating and reviewing this Regulation. National competent authorities should assist the Commission in monitoring and enforcing obligations laid down in this Regulation by providing support and expertise to the Commission or by requesting the Commission to open a market investigation based on evidence collected.
Amendment 355 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 68 a (new)
Recital 68 a (new)
(68 a) In order to ensure effective enforcement and compliance with this Regulation, it should be possible for interested third-parties to lodge a complaint when there is sufficient doubt on the non-compliance of a gatekeeper with the obligations laid down in this Regulation. The Commission should decide within an appropriate timeline on further action based on the evidence submitted.
Amendment 362 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 72 a (new)
Recital 72 a (new)
(72 a) The Commission should be adequately staffed to ensure the successful implementation and effective enforcement of this Regulation.
Amendment 367 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 75
Recital 75
(75) In the context of proceedings carried out under this Regulation, the undertakings concerned should be accorded the right to be heard by the Commission and the decisions taken should be widely publicised. Natural or legal persons demonstrating sufficient interest shall also have the right to be heard. Parties that are directly affected by the obligations under Articles 5 and 6shall be considered to have sufficient interest but also organisations representing consumers interests where the proceedings concern products or services provided to end-users. While ensuring the rights to good administration and the rights of defence of the undertakings concerned, in particular, the right of access to the file and the right to be heard, it is essential that confidential information be protected. Furthermore, while respecting the confidentiality of the information, the Commission should ensure that any information relied on for the purpose of the decision is disclosed to an extent that allows the addressee of the decision to understand the facts and considerations that led up to the decision. Finally, under certain conditions certain business records, such as communication between lawyers and their clients, may be considered confidential if the relevant conditions are met.
Amendment 371 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 77
Recital 77
(77) The advisory committee established in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182//2011 should also deliver opinions on certain individual decisions of the Commission issued under this Regulation. In order to ensure contestable and fair markets in the digital sector across the Union where gatekeepers are present, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty should be delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation. In particular, delegated acts should be adopted in respect of the methodology for determining the quantitative thresholds for designation of gatekeepers under this Regulation and in respect of the update of the obligations laid down in this Regulation where, based on a market investigation the Commission has identified the need for updating the obligations addressing practices that limit the contestability of core platform services or are unfair. It is of particular importance that the Commission carries out appropriate consultations, including with interested third parties demonstrating legitimate interest, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 201636 . In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. _________________ 36Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better Law-Making (OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p.1).
Amendment 384 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation lays down harmonised rules ensuring contestable and fair markets in the digital sector across the Union where gatekeepers are present so as to contribute to the protection of fundamental rights and the integrity of democratic processes, as well as to foster innovation, increase consumer choice and ensure higher consumer protection standards .
Amendment 388 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. This Regulation shall apply to core platform services provided or offered by gatekeepers to business users established in the Union or end users established or located in the Union, irrespective of the place of establishment or residence of the gatekeepers and irrespective of the law otherwise applicable to the provision of service. Services acting in a non- commercial purpose capacity such as collaborative projects should not be considered as core services. This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular Articles 11, 16, 47 and 50 thereof. Accordingly, this Regulation is interpreted and applied with respect to those rights and principles.
Amendment 402 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 6
Article 1 – paragraph 6
6. This Regulation is without prejudice to the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU. It is also without prejudice to the application of: national rules prohibiting anticompetitive agreements, decisions by associations of undertakings, concerted practices and abuses of dominant positions; national competition rules prohibiting other forms of unilateral conduct insofar as they are applied to undertakings other than gatekeepers or amount to imposing additional obligations on gatekeepers; Council Regulation (EC) No 139/200438 and national rules concerning merger control; Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and Regulation (EU) …./.. of the European Parliament and of the Council39 , Regulation 2016/679, Directive 2002/58/EC, Directive (EU) 2019/882, Directive(EU) 2018/1808, as well as without prejudice to Union law on consumer protection and product safety. _________________ 38Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) (OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1). 39Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council – proposal on a Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC.
Amendment 423 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point g
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point g
(g) cloud computing services, including business to business cloud;
Amendment 428 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h a (new)
(h a) embedded digital services in vehicles;
Amendment 436 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h b (new)
(h b) web browsers;
Amendment 438 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h c (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h c (new)
(h c) virtual assistants;
Amendment 440 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h d (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h d (new)
(h d) connected tv;
Amendment 441 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h e (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h e (new)
(h e) collaborative economy services;
Amendment 461 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 a (new)
(13 a) 'embedded digital services in vehicles' means software embedded in vehicles including for the purpose of gaining insights into vehicle performance and driver behaviour, or for the purpose of accessing audio-visual media content;
Amendment 462 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 b (new)
(13 b) 'Web browser’ means a client software programme that enables a user to navigate in the World Wide Web to access and display data or to interact with content hosted on servers that are connected to this network, including standalone web browsers, as well as web browsers integrated or embedded in software;
Amendment 463 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 c (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 c (new)
(13 c) 'virtual assistant’ means a software application that provides capabilities for oral dialogue with a user in natural language and which intermediates between end users and business users offering voice-based apps;
Amendment 464 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 d (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 d (new)
(13 d) 'connected tv` means a television set connected to the internet that allows user to perform online activities including music and video streaming, or viewing of pictures ;
Amendment 465 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 e (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 e (new)
(13 e) 'collaborative economy` refers to business models where activities are facilitated by collaborative platforms that create an open marketplace for the temporary usage of goods or services often provided by private individuals;
Amendment 472 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17 a (new)
(17 a) 'Business users of small press publications’ means any natural or legal person acting in a commercial or professional capacity using core platform services for the purpose of or in the course of providing press publications that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC;
Amendment 487 #
2020/0374(COD)
(23 a) ‘consent’ of the data subject means any freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous indication of the data subject's wishes as defined in point 11 of Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679;
Amendment 490 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 23 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 23 b (new)
(23 b) ‘profiling’ means any form of automated processing of personal data as defined in point 4 of Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 496 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) it operates a core platform service which serves as an important gateway for business users or end users to reach other end users; and
Amendment 506 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the requirement in paragraph 1 point (a) where the undertaking to which it belongs achieves an annual EEA turnover equal to or above EUR 6.5 billion in the last three financial years, or where the average market capitalisation or the equivalent fair market value of the undertaking to which it belongs amounted to at least EUR 65 billion in the last financial year, and it provides a core platform service in at least threewo Member States;
Amendment 509 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b – introductory part
(b) the requirement in paragraph 1 point (b) where it provides aone or more core platform service that hascombine more than 4530 million monthly active end users established or located in the Union andor more than 10 000 yearly active business users established in the Union in the last financial year;
Amendment 525 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Where a provider of core platform services meets all the thresholds in paragraph 2, it shall notify the Commission thereof within threundue delay and no later than one months after those thresholds are satisfied and provide it with the relevant information identified in paragraph 2.. That notification shall include the relevant information identified in paragraph 2 for each of the core platform services of the provider that meets the thresholds in paragraph 2 point (b). The notification shall be updated whenever other core platform services individually meet the thresholds in paragraph 2 point (b).
Amendment 537 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. The Commission shall, without undue delay and at the latest 60 days after receiving the complete information referred to in paragraph 3, designate the provider of core platform services that meets all the thresholds of paragraph 2 as a gatekeeper, unless that provider, with its notification, presents sufficiently substantiated arguments to demonstrate that, in the circumstances in which the relevant core platform service operates, and taking into account the elements listed in paragraph 6, the provider does not satisfy the requirements of paragraph 1.
Amendment 541 #
2020/0374(COD)
Where the gatekeeper presents such sufficiently substantiated arguments to demonstrate that it does not satisfy the requirements of paragraph 1, the Commission shall apply paragraph 6 to assess whetssess within the time- limits set in the first subparagraph the arguments provided by a gatekeeper to demonstrate that it does not satisfy the qualitative requirements of paragraph 1. Where the criteria in paragraph 1 are metprovider of a core platform service that satisfies the quantitative thresholds of paragraph 2 fails to comply with the investigative measures ordered by the Commission and the failure persists after the provider has been invited to comply within a reasonable time-limit and to submit observations, the Commission shall designate that provider as a gatekeeper.
Amendment 543 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5
Article 3 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 37 to specify the methodology for determining whether the quantitative thresholds laid down in paragraph 2 are met, and to regularly adjust ithe methodology to market and technological developments where necessary, in particular as regards the threshold in paragraph 2, point (a).
Amendment 546 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. The Commission may identify as a gatekeeper, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 15, any provider of core platform services that meets each of the requirements of paragraph 1, but does not satisfy each of the thresholds of paragraph 2, or has presented sufficiently substantiated arguments in accordance with paragraph 4.
Amendment 548 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) the size, including turnover and market capitalisation, operations and position of the provider of core platform services, taking into account any intended concentration notified in line with Article 12(1);
Amendment 564 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 567 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 4
Where the provider of a core platform service that does not satisfy the quantitative thresholds of paragraph 2 fails to comply with the investigative measures ordered by the Commission in a significant manner and the failure persists after the provider has been invited to comply within a reasonable time-limit and to submit observations, the Commission shall be entitled to designate that provider as a gatekeeper based on facts available.
Amendment 570 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 7
Article 3 – paragraph 7
7. For each gatekeeper identified pursuant to paragraph 4 or paragraph 6, the Commission shall identify within the deadline set under paragraph 4 the relevant undertaking to which it belongs and list the relevant core platform services that are provided within that same undertaking and which individually serve as an important gateway for business users and end users to reach end users as referred to in paragraph 1(b).
Amendment 580 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 8
Article 3 – paragraph 8
8. The gatekeeper shall comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 within sixthree months after a core platform service has been included in the list pursuant to paragraph 7 of this Article.
Amendment 603 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) refrain from combining personal data sourced from these core platform services with personal data from any other services offered by the gatekeeper or with personal data from third-party services, and from signing in end users to other services of the gatekeeper in order to combine personal data, unless the end user has been presented with the specific choice and provided consent in the sense of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. ;
Amendment 616 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) allow business users to offer the same products or services to end users through third party online intermediation services or through direct business channels at prices or conditions that are different from those offered through the online intermediation services of the gatekeeper;
Amendment 635 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) refrain from preventing or restricting business users or end user from raising issues with any relevant public authority or in front of national judiciary authority relating to any practice of gatekeepers;
Amendment 647 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) refrain from requiring business users or end users to use, offer or interoperate with an identification service of the gatekeeper in the context of services offered by the business users using the core platform services of that gatekeeper;
Amendment 663 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) refrain from requiring business users or end users to subscribe to or register with any other core platform services identified pursuant to Article 3 or which meets the thresholds in Article 3(2)(b)or any ancillary service as a condition to access, sign up or register to any of their core platform services identified pursuant to that Article;
Amendment 678 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide advertisers and publishers to which it supplies digital advertising services based on contextual information, upon their request, with information concerning the price paid by the advertiser and publisher, as well as the amount or remuneration paid to the publisher, for the publishing of a given ad and for each of the relevant advertising services provided by the gatekeeper.
Amendment 696 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(g a) allow end users to un-install any pre-installed software applications on its operating system;
Amendment 701 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g b (new)
(g b) allow end users, business users of number independent interpersonal communication services and social network services to access to and interoperate with the gatekeepers services by providing open standards, open protocols including Application Programming Interface.
Amendment 721 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) allow end users to un-install any pre-installed software applications on its core platform service without prejudice to the possibility for a gatekeeper to restrict such un-installation in relation to software applications that are essential for the functioning of the operating system or of the device and which cannot technically be offered on a standalone basis by third-parties;
Amendment 731 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) allow the installation and effective use of third party software applications or software application stores or repositories using, or interoperating with, operating systems of that gatekeeper and allow these software applications or software application stores or repositories to be accessed by means other than the core platform services of that gatekeeper. The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking proportionate measures to ensure that third party software applications or software application stores do not endanger the integrity of the hardware or operating system provided by the gatekeeper;
Amendment 763 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) refrain from technically restricting the ability of end users to switch between and subscribe to different software applications and services to be accessed using the operating system of the gatekeeper, including as regards the choice of Internet access provider for end users;
Amendment 778 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) allow business users, end users and providers of ancillary servicesservices free of charge access to and interoperability with the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision by the gatekeeper of any ancillary services;
Amendment 788 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide advertisers and publishers, upon their request and free of charge, with access to the performance measuring tools of the gatekeeper for the purpose of digital advertising based on contextual information and the information necessary for advertisers and publishers to carry out their own independent verification of the ad inventory;
Amendment 793 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) provide effective portability of data generated through the activity of a business user or end user and shall, in particular, provide tools for end users to facilitate the exercise ofeffective portability of the personal data relating to her or him, including personal data generated through her or his activity as end-user of the platform service data portability, in line with Regulation EU 2016/679, including by the provision of continuous and real-time access ;
Amendment 799 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) provide business users, or third parties authorised by a business user, free of charge, with effective, high-quality, continuous and real-time access and use of aggregated or non-aggregated non- personal data, that is provided for or generated in the context of the use of the relevant core platform services by those business users and the end users engaging with the products or services provided by those business users; for personal data, provide access and use only where directly connected with the use effectuated by the end user in respect of the products or services offered by the relevant business user through the relevant core platform service, and when the end user opts in to such sharing with a consent in the sense of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679; ;
Amendment 807 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) provide to any third party providers of online search engines, upon their request, with access on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms to ranking, query, click and view data in relation to free and paid search generated by end users on online search engines of the gatekeeper, subject to anonymisation for the query, click and view data that constitutes personal data provided that the gatekeepers able to demonstrate that anonymised query, click and view data have been adequately tested against possible re-identification risks;
Amendment 813 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) apply transparent, fair and non- discriminatory general conditions of access for business users to its software application store designated pursuant to Article 3 of this Regulation. , and for business users SMEs on a given sectorial market to its online search engine and online social networking service designated pursuant to Article 3 of this Regulation;
Amendment 823 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
(k a) ensure that their services, including user interfaces, are accessible to persons with disabilities in accordance with Article 13 of Directive (EU) 2019/882. They shall also ensure that business users which rely on their core platform service to reach consumers for offering services and products in the scope of Directive (EU) 2019/882, comply with the requirements of Directive (EU) 2019/882;
Amendment 828 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k b (new)
(k b) refrain from deploying subliminal techniques beyond a person`s consciousness in order to materially distort a person`s behaviour in a manner that can lead that person towards making certain choices by appealing to psychological biases driven by intermediation bias;
Amendment 832 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k c (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k c (new)
(k c) refrain from limiting end users’ ability to directly access business users or other end-users services or websites outside of the gatekeepers’ ecosystem from the gatekeeper platform service.
Amendment 856 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Where the Commission finds that the measures that the gatekeeper intends to implement pursuant to paragraph 1, or has implemented, do not ensure effective compliance with the relevant obligations laid down in Article 6, it mayshall by decision specify the measures that the gatekeeper concerned shall implement. The Commission shall adopt such a decision within six months from the opening of proceedings pursuant to Article 18. The decision shall be public.
Amendment 865 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Paragraph 2 of this Article is without prejudice to the powers of the Commission under Articles 25, 26 and 27. In case of a non-compliance decision under Article 25 resulting in fines and penalties under Article 26, the period for non-compliance shall be presumed to start from the deadline set under Article 3(8).
Amendment 868 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. In view of adopting the decision under paragraph 2, the Commission shall communicate to gatekeepers its preliminary findings within three months from the opening of the proceedings. In the preliminary findings, the Commission shall explain the measures it considers to take or it considers that the provider of core platform services concerned should take in order to effectively address the preliminary findings. The Commission may consult interested third parties demonstrating sufficient interest when drafting the preliminary findings. The preliminary findings shall be public.
Amendment 878 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. For the purposes of specifying the obligations under Article 6(1) point (f),interoperability shall be defined by reference to the open technologies, open standards and open protocols, including the technical interface (Application Programming Interface), that allows end users of competing software and services and business users to dock on to the gatekeepers core service and to interoperate with it. Any processing of personal data by gatekeepers should comply with Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular articles 6(1)(a) and5(1)(c). Interoperability obligations shall not limit, hinder or delay the ability of intermediaries to address vulnerabilities in order to comply with an obligation under article 18 of COM(2020) 823 final or article 32(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 880 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 6 b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. The Commission shall adopt implementing act establishing the technical specifications referred to in article 7(6a new). Those technical specifications shall meet the interoperability requirements set out in article 6(1)(f) and article 7(6a new).
Amendment 886 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 7
Article 7 – paragraph 7
7. A gatekeeper may request within the time-limits set under Article 3(8) the opening of proceedings pursuant to Article 18 for the Commission to determine whether the measures that the gatekeeper intends to implement or has implemented under Article 6 are effective in achieving the objective of the relevant obligation in the specific circumstances. A gatekeeper may, with its request, provide a reasoned submission to explain in particular why the measures that it intends to implement or has implemented are effective in achieving the objective of the relevant obligation in the specific circumstances.
Amendment 887 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. The powers granted to the Commission under this Article are without prejudice to the jurisdiction of national courts to ensure compliance with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 in legal proceedings between gatekeepers, business and end users, including in collective redress procedures pursuant to Directive (EU) 2020/18281a. _________________ 1aDirective (EU) 2020/1828 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2020 on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers and repealing Directive 2009/22/EC.
Amendment 916 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 34 to update the existing obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6, and add obligations where, based on a market investigation pursuant to Article 17, it has identified the need for new obligations addressing practices that limit the contestability of core platform services or are unfair in the same way as the practices addressed by the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6.
Amendment 926 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) there is an imbalance of rights and obligations on business users and end users, and the gatekeeper is obtaining an advantage from business users that is disproportionate to the service provided by the gatekeeper toeither on business or end users; or
Amendment 933 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. A gatekeeper shall ensure that the obligations of Articles 5 and 6 are fully and effectively complied with. While the obligations of Articles 5 and 6 apply in respect of core platform services designated pursuant to Article 3, their implementation shall not be undermined by any behaviour of the undertaking to which the gatekeeper belongs, regardless of whether this behaviour is of a contractual, commercial, technical or any other nature, including product design, structure, function or manner of operation capable of influencing user choice and autonomy or through agreements with third party business partners of the gatekeepers.
Amendment 939 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. Where consent for collecting and processing of personal data is required to ensure compliance with this Regulation, a gatekeeper shall take the necessary steps to either enable business users to directly obtain the required consent to their processing, where required under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC, or to comply with Union data protection and privacy rules and principles in other ways including by providing business users with duly anonymised data where appropriate. The gatekeeper shall not make the obtaining of this consent by the business user more burdensome than for its own services including product design, structure, function or manner of operation capable of influencing user choice and autonomy or through agreements with third party business partners of the gatekeepers.
Amendment 951 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – title
Article 12 – title
12 Obligation to inform aboutPrior notification of concentrations
Amendment 956 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. A gatekeeper shall informnotify to the Commission of any intended concentration within the meaning of Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 involving another provider of core platform services or of any other services provided in the digital sector irrespective of whether it is notifiable to a Union competition authority under Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 or to a competent national competition authority under national merger rules.
Amendment 961 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
A gatekeeper shall informnotify the Commission of such a concentration prior to its implementation and following the conclusion of the agreement, the announcement of the public bid, or the acquisition of a controlling interest.
Amendment 964 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. The notification pursuant to paragraph 1 shall at least describe for the acquisition targets their EEA and worldwide annual turnover, for any relevant core platform services their respective EEA annual turnover, their number of yearly active business users and the number of monthly active end users, the categories of personal data they process, as well as the rationale of the intended concentration.
Amendment 966 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Commission should assess the impact on any intended concentration on the contestability of markets by taking into account, inter alia, the elements laid down in Article 3(6). If, following this assessment, it is demonstrated that a concentration would weaken the contestability of markets, the Commission shall impose proportionate behavioural or structural remedies to ensure compliance with this Regulation.
Amendment 967 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3
Article 12 – paragraph 3
3. If, following any concentration as provided in paragraph 1, it is demonstrated that additional core platform services individually satisfy the thresholds in point (b) of Article 3(2), the gatekeeper concerned shall inform the Commission thereof within three months from the implementation of the concentration and provide the Commission with the information referred to in Article 3(2).
Amendment 971 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Within six months after its designation pursuant to Article 3, a gatekeeper shall submit to the Commission an independently audited description of any techniques for profiling of consumers that the gatekeeper applies to or across its core platform services identified pursuant to Article 3. This description shall be updated at least annually. The Commission shall develop, in consultation with the EU Data Protection Supervisor, the European Data Protection Board, civil society and experts, the standards and process of the audit. The audited description, as well as any relevant materials that is collected in the context of supervising the gatekeepers that relate to the processing of personal data, shall be shared by the Commission with any competent supervisory authority represented in the European Data Protection Board, upon its request.
Amendment 984 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission may conduct a market investigation for the purpose of examining whether a provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper pursuant to Article 3(6), or in order to identify core platform services for a gatekeeper pursuant to Article 3(7). It shall endeavour to conclude its investigation by adopting a decision in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4) within twelvesix months from the opening of the market investigation.
Amendment 989 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. In the course of a market investigation pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission shall endeavour to communicate its preliminary findings to the provider of core platform services concerned within sixthree months from the opening of the investigation. In the preliminary findings, the Commission shall explain whether it considers, on a provisional basis, that the provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper pursuant to Article 3(6).
Amendment 992 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Amendment 998 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. When the Commission pursuant to Article 3(6) designates as a gatekeeper a provider of core platform services that does not yet enjoy an entrenched and durable position in its operations, but it is foreseeable that it will enjoy such a position in the near future based on a notification in line with Article 12(1), it shall declare applicable to that gatekeeper only obligations laid down in Article 5(b) and Article 6(1) points (e), (f), (h) and (i) as specified in the designation decision. The Commission shall only declare applicable those obligations that are appropriate and necessary to prevent that the gatekeeper concerned achieves by unfair means an entrenched and durable position in its operations. The Commission shall review such a designation in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 4.
Amendment 1003 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – title
Article 16 – title
16 Market investigation into systematic non-compliance or concentration that weakens the contestability of markets
Amendment 1011 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. Where the market investigation shows that a gatekeeper has systematically infringed the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 and has further strengthened or extended its gatekeeper position in relatior where the Commission assesses under Article 12 that any intended concentration has an adverse impact on to the characteristics under Article 3(1)ontestability of markets, the Commission mayshall by decision adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4) impose on such gatekeeper any behavioural or structural remedies which are proportionate to the infringement committed and necessary to ensure compliance with this Regulation. The Commission shall conclude its investigation by adopting a decision within twelvesix months from the opening of the market investigation.
Amendment 1016 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission may onlyalso impose structural remedies pursuant to paragraph 1 either where thwhere it consideres is no equallyt more effective than behavioural remedy or where any equally effective behavioural remedy would be more burdensome for the gatekeeper concerned than the structural remedy.ies in ensuring compliance with the obligations laid down in articles 5 and 6. Such structural remedies may include: - separation of business units; - unbundling and horizontal division of services; - changes to the gatekeeper’s financing model; - disgorging financial benefits to end- users;
Amendment 1021 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3
Article 16 – paragraph 3
3. A gatekeeper shall be deemed to have engaged in a systematic non- compliance with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6, whereas soon as the Commission has issued at least threewo non- compliance or fining decisions pursuant to Articles 25 and 26 respectively against a gatekeeper in relation to any of its core platform services within a period of five years prior to the adoption of the decision opening a market investigation in view of the possible adoption of a decision pursuant to this Articleten years.
Amendment 1026 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 4
Article 16 – paragraph 4
Amendment 1031 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 5
Article 16 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall communicate its objections to the gatekeeper concerned within sixthree months from the opening of the investigation. In its objections, the Commission shall explain whether it preliminarily considers that the conditions of paragraph 1 are met and which remedy or remedies it preliminarily considers necessary and proportionate.
Amendment 1065 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 1
1. In case of urgency due to the risk of serious and irreparable damage for business users or end users of gatekeepers, imminent threats to the fairness and contestability of markets or the general considerations laid out in Article 1(1), the Commission may, by decision adopt in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4), order interim measures against a gatekeeper on the basis of a prima facie finding of an infringement of Articles 5 or 6.
Amendment 1068 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 2
2. A decision pursuant to paragraph 1 may only be adopted in the context of proceedings opened in view of the possible adoption of a decision of non-compliance pursuant to Article 25(1). This decision shall apply for a specified period of time and may be renewed in so far this is necessary and appropriate.
Amendment 1075 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) the measures proposed by the gatekeeper have proven ineffective to ensure compliance with the obligations of Article 5 and 6;
Amendment 1078 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission mayshall take the necessary actions to monitor the effective implementation and compliance with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 and the decisions taken pursuant to Articles 7, 16, 22 and 23.
Amendment 1086 #
2020/0374(COD)
The Commission shall adopt its decision within six months from the opening of a proceeding.
Amendment 1088 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3
Article 25 – paragraph 3
3. In the non-compliance decision adopted pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission shall order the gatekeeper to cease and desist with the non-compliance within an appropriate deadline and to provide eximpose any appropriate remedies to ensure effective complianations on how it plans to comply with the decisce with the obligations laid down under Articles 5 and 6 and restore contestability and fairness on the markets in line with this Regulation.
Amendment 1094 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 4
Article 25 – paragraph 4
4. The gatekeeper shall provide the Commission with the description of the measures it took to ensure compliance with the decision adopted pursuant to paragraph 1. In case the non compliance persists following a review of the measures taken by the gatekeeper, the Commission shall propose amendments to these measures to ensure full compliance with obligations laid down under Articles 5 and 6.
Amendment 1117 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1
Article 28 – paragraph 1
1. The powers conferred on the Commission by Articles 26 and 27 shall be subject to a threfive year limitation period.
Amendment 1125 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 1127 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2
Article 30 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1129 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 3
Article 30 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall base its decisions only on objections on which gatekeepers, undertakings and, associations of undertakings concerned and interested third-parties have been able to comment.
Amendment 1132 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 a (new)
Article 30 a (new)
Article 30 a Accountability 1. The Commission shall adopt an annual report on the state of the digital economy. This report shall provide an analysis of the market position, influence and business models of the gatekeepers in the common market. The report shall include a summary of its activities, in particular supervisory measures adopted under Chapter II and IV of this Regulation as well as an assessment on whether competition rules, the provisions of this Regulation (and Regulation XX/2021 Digital Services Act) and current enforcement levels are adequate to address anticompetitive conduct and ensure the contestability and fairness of digital markets. This annual report shall also include a social impact assessment, which assesses new digital products and services and their potential impact on mental health, user behaviour, disinformation, polarisation and democracy. In the fulfilment of this mandate, the Commission should coordinate its supervisory and monitoring efforts with those foreseen under the Digital Services Act, so as to achieve the best possible synergies. 2. The European Parliament through its competent committees may provide an opinion on an annual basis on the report by the Commission. 3. The Commission shall reply in writing to the opinion adopted by the European Parliament and to any question addressed to it by the European Parliament or by the Council within five weeks of its receipt. 4. At the request of the European Parliament, the Commission shall participate in a hearing before the European Parliament. A hearing shall take place at least bi-annually. The respective Commissioner shall make a statement before the European Parliament and answer any questions from its members, whenever so requested. In addition, a continuous, high-level dialogue between the European Parliament and the Commission shall be ensured through exchanges which take place no less than four times a year.
Amendment 1133 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1
1. The information collected pursuant to Articles 3, 12, 13, 19, 20 and 21 shall be used only for the purposes of this Regulation.
Amendment 1138 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to the exchange and to the use of information provided for the purpose of use pursuant to Articles 12, 13, 32 and 33, the Commission, the authorities of the Member States, their officials, servants and other persons working under the supervision of these authorities and any natural or legal person, including auditors and experts appointed pursuant to Article 24(2), shall not disclose information acquired or exchanged by them pursuant to this Regulation and of the kind covered by the obligation of professional secrecy. This obligation shall also apply to all representatives and experts of Member States participating in any of the activities of the Digital Markets Advisory Committee pursuant to Article 32.
Amendment 1151 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 a (new)
Article 32 a (new)
Article 32 a Role of national competent authorities and coordination by the Commission 1. Member State shall designate a competent authority to monitor compliance with obligations laid down in this Regulation and report regularly to the Commission on compliance with this Regulation. 2. National competent authorities may provide, under the coordination of the Commission, support to a market investigation or proceeding pursuant to Article 7(2), 15, 16, 17, 19, 20 by collecting information and providing expertise or by collecting complaints to be transferred to the Commission. 3. When collecting sufficient evidence for designation of a gatekeeper, non- compliance with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 or need to add new obligations, national competent authorities shall request the opening of a market investigation in accordance with Article 33.
Amendment 1156 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. When threone or more Member States request the Commission to open an investigation pursuant to Article 15 because they consider that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper, the Commission shall within four months examine whether there are reasonable grounds to open such an investigation and adopt a decision. In case the Commission decides that there is no grounds for opening a market investigation, it shall publish a reasoned opinion.
Amendment 1162 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 33 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. When one or more Member States request the Commission to open an investigation pursuant to Article 16 because they consider that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a provider of core platform services fails to comply with its obligations under Article 5 and 6, the Commission shall within four months examine whether there are reasonable grounds to open such an investigation and adopt a decision. In case the Commission decides that there is no grounds for opening a market investigation, it shall publish a reasoned opinion
Amendment 1164 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 33 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. When one or more Member States request the Commission to open an investigation pursuant to Article 17 because they consider that there are reasonable grounds to request new services or practices to fall under the scope of this Regulation, the Commission shall within four months examine whether there are reasonable grounds to open such an investigation and adopt a decision. In case the Commission decides there is no grounds for opening a market investigation, it shall publish a reasoned opinion.
Amendment 1170 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2
Article 33 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall submit evidence in support of their request. Such evidence provided by competent national authorities shall notably include information allowing to determine the fairness of general access conditions to core platform services, including as regards revenue streams deriving from advertisement, and the distribution of appropriate shares of revenues to third party right holders.
Amendment 1175 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 a (new)
Article 33 a (new)
Article 33 a Right to lodge complaints 1. Third parties representing business users or end users shall be entitled to lodge complaints with regard to the non- designation of gatekeepers and non- compliance by gatekeepers with their obligations in accordance with Article 3, 5 and 6 and request the opening of a market investigation pursuant to Article 15, 16, 17. They shall submit evidence in support of their request. 2. The Commission shall examine whether there are reasonable grounds to open such an investigation and inform the interested third parties of its decision within three months.
Amendment 1179 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 b (new)
Article 33 b (new)
Article 33 b Amendment to Directive (EU) 2020/1828 The following point is added to the Annex I of Directive (EU) 2020/1828: '(67)Regulation (EU) 20XX/XXXX of the European Parliament and of the Council on contestable and fair markets in the digital sectors'
Amendment 1181 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall publish the decisions which it takes pursuant to Articles 3, 7, 8, 9, 15, 16, 17, 18, 22, 23(1), 25, 26 and 27, 27, 33, and 33(a). Such publication shall state the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed, and a report stating the grounds for such a decision.
Amendment 1198 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 3
Article 38 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall provide any relevant information they have that the Commission may require for the purposes of drawing up the report referred to in paragraph 1. Among such information, data allowing to determine the fairness of general access conditions to platform services should be examined, including as regards revenue streams deriving from advertisement, and the distribution of appropriate share of revenues to third party right holders.
Amendment 127 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) This Regulation should complement, yet not affect the application of rules resulting from other acts of Union law regulating certain aspects of the provision of intermediary services, in particular Directive 2000/31/EC, with the exception of those changes introduced by this Regulation, Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as amended,28 and Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council29 – proposed Terrorist Content Online Regulation. Therefore, this Regulation leaves those other acts, which are to be considered lex specialis in relation to the generally applicable framework set out in this Regulation, unaffected. However, the rules of this Regulation apply in respect of issues that are not or not fully addressed by those other acts as well as issues on which those other acts leave Member States the possibility of adopting certain measures at national level. At the same time, it respects Member States' competence to adopt and further develop laws in order to protect and promote the freedom of expression in line with the Charter of fundamental Rights of the European Union. _________________ 28 Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) (Text with EEA relevance), OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1 . 29Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council – proposed Terrorist Content Online Regulation
Amendment 135 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) It should be clarified that this Regulation is without prejudice to the rules of national laws implemented in line with Union law on copyright and related rights, which establish specific rules and procedures that should remain unaffected.
Amendment 141 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In order to achieve the objective of ensuring a safe, predictable and trusted online environment, for the purpose of this Regulation the concept of “illegal content” should be defined broadly and also covers information relating to illegal content, products, services and activities. In particular, that concept should be understood to refer to information, irrespective of its form, that under the applicable law is either itself illegal, such as illegal hate speech or terrorist content and unlawful discriminatory content, or that relates to activities that are illegal, such as the sharing of images depicting child sexual abuse, unlawful non- consensual sharing of private images, online stalking, the sale of non-compliant or counterfeit products, the non-authorised use of copyright protected material or activities involving infringements of consumer protection law. In this regard, it is immaterial whether the illegality of the information or activity results from Union law or from national law that is consistent with Union law and what the precise nature or subject matter is of the law in question. For the purpose of this Regulation, the concept of “manifestly illegal content” should be defined as any information which has been subject of a specific ruling by a court or administrative authority of a Member State or where it is evident to a layperson, without any substantive analysis, that the content is in not in compliance with Union law or the law of a Member State.
Amendment 149 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15 a) Ensuring that providers of intermediary services can offer effective end-to-end encryption to data is essential for trust in and security of digital services in the Digital Single Market, and effectively prevents unauthorised third- party access.
Amendment 160 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
Amendment 165 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Providers of intermediary services should not be subject to a monitoring obligation with respect to obligations of a general nature. This does not concern monitoring obligations in a specific case and, in particular, does not affect orders by national judicial authorities in accordance with national legislation, in accordance with the conditions established in this Regulation. Nothing in this Regulation should be construed as an imposition of a general monitoring obligation or active fact-finding obligation, or as a general obligation for providers to take proactive measures to relation to illegal content. Providers of intermediary services should not be obliged to use automated tools for content moderation. Nothing in this regulation should be construed as preventing providers of intermediary services from offering end-to-end encrypted services, or make the provision of such services a cause for liability or loss of immunity.
Amendment 169 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) Depending on the legal system of each Member State and the field of law at issue, national judicial or administrative authorities may order providers of intermediary services to act against certain specific items of illegal content or to provide certain specific items of information. The national laws on the basis of which such orders are issued differ considerably and the orders are increasingly addressed in cross-border situations. In order to ensure that those orders can be complied with in an effective and efficient manner, so that the public authorities concerned can carry out their tasks and the providers are not subject to any disproportionate burdens, without unduly affecting the rights and legitimate interests of any third parties, it is necessary to set certain conditions that those orders should meet and certain complementary requirements relating to the processing of those orders.
Amendment 171 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) The orders to provide informationby judicial authorities to provide information about one or more specific suspects or serious threat to public security or orders by national authorities about a specific item of information about service providers licence numbers, address or rental, or number of nights let, regulated by this Regulation concern the production of specific information about individual recipients of the intermediary service concerned who are suspect or suspects of a serious threat to public security, identified in those orders for the purposes of determining compliance by the recipients of the services with applicable Union or national rules. Therefore, orders about information on a group of recipients of the service who are not specifically identified, including orders to provide aggregate information required for statistical purposes or evidence-based policy-making, should remain unaffected by the rules of this Regulation on the provision of information.
Amendment 172 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) Orders to act against illegal content and to provide information are subject to the rules safeguarding the competence of the Member State where the service provider addressed is established and laying down possible derogations from that competence in certain cases, set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, only if the conditions of that Article are met. Given that the orders in questo provide information relate to specific items of illegal content and information, respectively,nformation where they are addressed to providers of intermediary services established in another Member State, they do not in principle restrict those providers’ freedom to provide their services across borders. Therefore, the rules set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, including those regarding the need to justify measures derogating from the competence of the Member State where the service provider is established on certain specified grounds and regarding the notification of such measures, do not apply in respect of those orders.
Amendment 173 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33 a (new)
Recital 33 a (new)
(33 a) With the exception of Article 7, rules in Chapter II should not apply to online platforms that qualify as micro enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC or as a not-for-profit service, including free and open source software projects, online encyclopaedia and educational or scientific repositories. Content managed by educational and scientific repositories are subject to various national laws and are made available in order to safeguard public interest and are meant to be re- used by students, researchers and the general public.
Amendment 178 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) Whilst the freedom of contract of providers of intermediary services should in principle be respected, it is appropriate to set certain rules on the content, application and enforcement of the terms and conditions of those providers in the interests of transparency, the protection of the fundamental rights of recipients of the service and the avoidance of discriminatory, unfair or arbitrary outcomes. Terms and conditions of providers of intermediary services should respect the essential principles of human rights as enshrined in the Charter and international law, including the right to freedom of expression. The freedom and pluralism of media should be respected, to this end, Member States should ensure that editorial content providers` and media service providers` possibilities to contest decisions of online platforms or to seek judicial redress in accordance with the laws of the Member State concerned is unaffected.
Amendment 184 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) To ensure an adequate level of transparency and accountability, providers of intermediary services should annually report in a standardised and machine- readable format, in accordance with the harmonised requirements contained in this Regulation, on the content moderation they engage in, including the measures taken as a result of the application and enforcement of their terms and conditions. However, so as to avoid disproportionate burdens, those transparency reporting obligations should not apply to providers that are micro- or small enterprises as defined in Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC.40 _________________ 40 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium- sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36), or as a not-for-profit service with fewer than 100.000 monthly active users.
Amendment 186 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39 a (new)
Recital 39 a (new)
(39 a) Recipients of the service should be empowered to make autonomous decisions inter alia regarding the acceptance of and changes to terms and conditions, advertising practices, privacy and other settings, recommender systems when interacting with intermediary services. Dark patterns however typically exploit cognitive biases and prompt online consumers to purchase goods and services that they do not want or to reveal personal information they would prefer not to disclose. Therefore, providers of intermediary services should be prohibited from deceiving or nudging recipients of the service and from subverting or impairing the autonomy, decision- making, or choice of the recipients of the service via the structure, design or functionalities of an online interface or a part thereof (‘dark pattern’). This includes, but is not limited to, exploitative design choices to direct the user to actions that benefit the provider of intermediary services, but which may not be in the recipients’ interests, presenting choices in a non-neutral manner, repetitively requesting or pressuring the recipient to make a decision or hiding or obscuring certain options.
Amendment 188 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Providers of hosting services play a particularly important role in tackling illegal content online, as they store information provided by and at the request of the recipients of the service and typically give other recipients access thereto, sometimes on a large scale. It is important that all providers of hosting services, regardless of their size, put in place user-friendly notice and action mechanisms that facilitate the notification of specific items of information that the notifying party considers to be illegal content to the provider of hosting services concerned ('notice'), pursuant to which that provider can decide whether or not it agrees with that assessment and wishes to remove or disable access to that content ('action'). Content that has been notified and that is not manifestly illegal should remain accessible while the assessment of its legality by the judicial authority is still pending. Provided the requirements on notices are met, it should be possible for individuals or entities to notify multiple specific items of allegedly illegal content through a single notice. Recipients of the service who provided the information to which the notice relates should be given them the opportunity to reply before taking a decision. The obligation to put in place notice and action mechanisms should apply, for instance, to file storage and sharing services, web hosting services, advertising servers and paste bins, in as far as they qualify as providers of hosting services covered by this Regulation.
Amendment 189 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) The rules on such notice and action mechanisms should be harmonised at Union level, so as to provide for the timely, diligent and objective processing of notices on the basis of rules that are uniform, transparent and clear and that provide for robust safeguards to protect the right and legitimate interests of all affected parties, in particular their fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter, irrespective of the Member State in which those parties are established or reside and of the field of law at issue. The fundamental rights include, as the case may be, the right to freedom of expression and information, the right to respect for private and family life, the right to protection of personal data, the right to non-discrimination and the right to an effective remedy of the recipients of the service; the freedom to conduct a business, including the freedom of contract, of service providers; as well as the right to human dignity, the rights of the child, the right to protection of property, including intellectual property,perty and the right to non- discrimination of parties affected by illegal content.
Amendment 192 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) Online advertisement plays an important role in the online environment, including in relation to the provision of the information society services. However, certain forms of online advertisement can contribute to significant risks, ranging from advertisement that is itself illegal content, to contributing to creating financial incentives for the publication or amplification of illegal or otherwise harmful content and activities online, to misleading or exploitative marketing or the discriminatory display of advertising with an impact on the equal treatment and the rights of consumers. Consumers are largely unaware of the volume and granularity of the data that is being collected and used to deliver personalised and micro-targeted advertisements, and have little agency and limited ways to stop or control data exploitation. The significant reach of a few online platforms, their access to extensive datasets and participation at multiple levels of the advertising value chain has created challenges for businesses, traditional media services and other market participants seeking to advertise or develop competing advertising services. In addition to the information requirements resulting from Article 6 of Directive 2000/31/EC, stricter rules on targeted advertising and micro-targeting are needed, in favour of less intrusive forms of advertising that do not require extensive tracking of the interaction and behaviour of recipients of the service. Therefore, providers of information society services may only deliver and display online advertising to a recipient or a group of recipients of the service when this is done based on contextual information, such as keywords or metadata. Providers should not deliver and display online advertising to a recipient or a clearly identifiable group of recipients of the service that is based on personal or inferred data relating to the recipients or groups of recipients. Where providers deliver and display advertisement, they should be required to ensure that the recipients of the service have certain individualised information necessary for them to understand why and on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed, including sponsored content and paid promotion.
Amendment 193 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Where a hosting service provider decides to remove or disable information provided by a recipient of the service, for instance following receipt of a notice or acting on its own initiative, including through the use of automated means, that provider should inform the recipient of its decision, the reasons for its decision and the available redress possibilities to contest the decision, in view of the negative consequences that such decisions may have for the recipient, including as regards the exercise of its fundamental right to freedom of expression. That obligation should apply irrespective of the reasons for the decision, in particular whether the action has been taken because the information notified is considered to be illegal content or incompatible with the applicable terms and conditions. Available recourses to challenge the decision of the hosting service provider should always include judicial redress.
Amendment 194 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42 a (new)
Recital 42 a (new)
(42 a) When moderating content, mechanisms voluntarily employed by platforms should not lead to ex-ante control measures based on automated tools or upload-filtering of content. Automated tools are currently unable to differentiate illegal content from content that is legal in a given context and therefore routinely result in overblocking legal content. Human review of automated reports by service providers or their contractors does not fully solve this problem, especially if it is outsourced to private staff that lack sufficient independence, qualification and accountability. Ex-ante control should be understood as making publishing subject to an automated decision. Filtering automated content submissions such as spam should be permitted. Where automated tools are otherwise used for content moderation the provider should ensure human review and the protection of legal content.
Amendment 197 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) Recipients of the service, including persons with disabilities, should be able to easily and effectively contest certain decisions of online platforms that negatively affect them. Therefore, online platforms should be required to provide for internal complaint-handling systems, which meet certain conditions aimed at ensuring that the systems are easily accessible and lead to swift and fair outcomes. In addition, provision should be made for the possibility of out-of-court dispute settlement of disputes, including those that could not be resolved in satisfactory manner through the internal complaint-handling systems, by certified bodies that have the requisite independence, means and expertise to carry out their activities in a fair, swift and cost- effective manner. The possibilities to contest decisions of online platforms thus created should complement, yet leave unaffected in all respects, the possibility to seek judicial redress in accordance with the laws of the Member State concerned.
Amendment 202 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) Action against illegal content can be taken more quickly and reliably where online platforms take the necessary measures to ensure that notices submitted by trusted flaggers through the notice and action mechanisms required by this Regulation are treated with priority, without prejudice to the requirement to process and decide upon all notices submitted under those mechanisms in a timely, diligent and objective manner. Such trusted flagger status should only be awarded to entities, and not individuals, that have demonstrated, among other things, that they have particular expertise and competence in tackling illegal content, that they represent collective interests and that they work in a diligent and objective manner. Such entities can be public in nature, such as, for terrorist content, internet referral units of national law enforcement authorities or of the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (‘Europol’) or they can be non-governmental organisations and semi-public bodies, such as the organisations part of the INHOPE network of hotlines for reporting child sexual abuse material and organisations committed to notifying illegal racist and xenophobic expressions online. For intellectual property rights, organisations of industry and of right-holders could be awarded trusted flagger status, where they have demonstrated that they meet the applicable conditions. The rules of this Regulation on trusted flaggers should not be understood to prevent online platforms from giving similar treatment to notices submitted by entities or individuals that have not been awarded trusted flagger status under this Regulation, from otherwise cooperating with other entities, in accordance with the applicable law, including this Regulation and Regulation (EU) 2016/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council.43 _________________ 43Regulation (EU) 2016/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) and replacing and repealing Council Decisions 2009/371/JHA, 2009/934/JHA, 2009/935/JHA, 2009/936/JHA and 2009/968/JHA, OJ L 135, 24.5.2016, p. 53
Amendment 206 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) The misuse of services of online platforms by frequently providing manifestly illegal content or by frequentpeatedly submitting manifestly unfounded notices or complaints under the mechanisms and systems, respectively, established under this Regulation undermines trust and harms the rights and legitimate interests of the parties concerned. Therefore, there is a need to put in place appropriate and proportionate safeguards against such misuse. Information should be considered to be manifestly illegal content and nNotices or complaints should be considered manifestly unfounded where it is evident to a layperson, without any substantive analysis, that the content is illegal respectively that the notices or complaints are unfounded. Under certain conditions, online platforms should temporarily suspend their relevant activities in respect of the person engaged in abusive behaviour. This is without prejudice to the freedom by online platforms to determine their terms and conditions and establish stricter measures in the case of manifestly illegal content related to serious crimes. For reasons of transparency, this possibility should be set out, clearly and in sufficiently detail, in the terms and conditions of the online platforms. Redress should always be open to the decisions taken in this regard by online platforms and they should be subject to oversight by the competent Digital Services Coordinator. The rules of this Regulation on misuse should not prevent online platforms from taking other measures to address the provision of illegal content by recipients of their service or other misuse of their services, in accordance with the applicable Union and national law. Those rules are without prejudice to any possibility to hold the persons engaged in misuse liable, including for damages, provided for in Union or national law.
Amendment 211 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) An online platform may in some instances become aware, such as through a notice by a notifying party or through its own voluntary measures, of information relating to certain activity of a recipient of the service, such as the provision of certain types of illegal content, that reasonably justify, having regard to all relevant circumstances of which the online platform is aware, the suspicion that the recipient may have committed, may be committing or is likely to commit a serious criminal offence involving a threat to the life or safety of person, such as offences specified in Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council44 . In such instances, the online platform should inform without delay the competent law enforcement authorities of such suspicion, providing all relevant information available to it, including where relevant the content in question and an explanation of its suspicion. This Regulation does not provide the legal basis for profiling of recipients of the services with a view to the possible identification of criminal offences by online platforms. Online platforms should also respect other applicable rules of Union or national law for the protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals when informing law enforcement authorities. _________________ 44Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (OJ L 335, 17.12.2011, p. 1).
Amendment 218 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) Very large online platforms are used in a way that strongly influences safety online, the shaping of public opinion and discourse, as well as on online trade. The way they design their services is generally optimised to benefit their often advertising-driven business models and can cause societal concerns. In the absence of effective regulation and enforcement, they can set the rules of the game, without effectively identifying and mitigating the risks and the societal and economic harm they can cause. Under this Regulation, very large online platforms should therefore assess the systemic risks stemming from theimpact of functioning and use of their service, as well as by potential misuses by the recipients of the service on fundamental rights, and take appropriate mitigating measures.
Amendment 219 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) Three categories of systemic risksadverse impact should be assessed in-depth. A first category concerns the risks associated with the misuse of their service through the dissemination of manifestly illegal content, such as the dissemination of child sexual abuse material or illegal hate speech, and the conduct of illegal activities, such as the sale of products or services prohibited by Union or national law, including counterfeit products. For example, and without prejudice to the personal responsibility of the recipient of the service of very large online platforms for possible illegality of his or her activity under the applicable law, such dissemination or activities may constitute a significant systematic risk where access to such content may be amplified through accounts with a particularly wide reach. A second category concerns the impact of the service on the exercise of fundamental rights, as protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights, including the freedom of expression and information, including freedom and pluralism of media, the right to private life, the right to non-discrimination and the rights of the child. Such risks may arise, for example, in relation to the design of the algorithmic systems used by the very large online platform or the misuse of their service through the submission of abusive notices or other methods for silencing speech or hampering competition. A third category of risks concerns the malfunctioning or intentional and, oftentimes, coordinated manipulation of the platform’s service, with a foreseeable impact on health, civic discourse, electoral processes, public security and protection of minors, having regard to the need to safeguard public order, protect privacy and fight fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices. Such risks may arise, for example, through the creation of fake accounts, the use of bots, and other automated or partially automated behaviours, which may lead to the rapid and widespread dissemination of information that is illegal content or incompatible with an online platform’s terms and conditionsfundamental rights. Such risks may arise, for example, through the creation of fake accounts, the use of bots, and other automated or partially automated exploitation of the service.
Amendment 226 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) Very large online platforms should deploy the necessary means to diligently mitigate the systemic riskadverse impacts identified in the riskfundamental rights impact assessment. Very large online platforms should under such mitigating measures consider, for example, enhancing or otherwise adapting the design and functioning of their content moderation, algorithmic recommender systems and online interfaces, so that they discourage and limit the dissemination of illegal content, adapting their decision- making processes, or adapting their terms and conditions. They may also include corrective measures, such as discontinuing advertising revenue for specific content, or other actions, such as improving the visibility of authoritative information sources. Very large online platforms may reinforce their internal processes or supervision of any of their activities, in particular as regards the detection of systemic riskadverse impacts. They may also initiate or increase cooperation with trusted flaggers, organise training sessions and exchanges with trusted flagger organisations, and cooperate with other service providers, including by initiating or joining existing codes of conduct or other self-regulatory measures. Any measures adopted should respect the due diligence requirements of this Regulation and be effective and appropriate for mitigating the specific risks identified, in the interest of safeguarding public order, protecting privacy and fighting fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices, and should be proportionate in light of the very large online platform’s economic capacity and the need to avoid unnecessary restrictions on the use of their service, taking due account of potential negative effectsadverse impact identified on the fundamental rights of the recipients of the service.
Amendment 231 #
2020/0361(COD)
(59) Very large online platforms should, where appropriate, conduct their riskimpact assessments and design their risk mitigation measures with the involvement of representatives of the recipients of the service, representatives of groups potentially impacted by their services, independent experts and civil society organisations.
Amendment 232 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 60
Recital 60
(60) Given the need to ensure verification by independent experts, very large online platforms should be accountable, through independent auditing, for their compliance with the obligations laid down by this Regulation and, where relevant, any complementary commitments undertaking pursuant to codes of conduct and crises protocols. They should give the audit. They should give the Fundamental Rights Agency and the audit or access to all relevant data necessary to perform the audit properly. AThe Fundamental Rights Agency and the auditors should also be able to make use of other sources of objective information, including studies by vetted researchers. AThe Fundamental Rights Agency and the auditors should guarantee the confidentiality, security and integrity of the information, such as trade secrets in line with Directive(EU) 2016/943, that they obtain when performing their tasks and have the necessary expertise in the area of risk management and technical competence to audit algorithms. Auditors should be independent, so as to be able to perform their tasks in an adequate and trustworthy manner. If their independence is not beyond doubt, they should resign or abstain from the audit engagement.
Amendment 234 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 62
Recital 62
(62) A core part of a very large online platform’s business is the manner in which information is prioritised and presented on its online interface to facilitate and optimise access to information for the recipients of the service. This is done, for example, by algorithmically suggesting, ranking and prioritising information, distinguishing through text or other visual representations, or otherwise curating information provided by recipients. Such recommender systems can have a significant impact on the ability of recipients to retrieve and interact with information online. They also play an important role in the amplification of certain messages, the viral dissemination of information and the stimulation of online behaviour. Consequently, very large online platforms should ensure that recipients are appropriately informed, and can influence the information presented to them. They should clearly present the main parameters for such recommender systems in an easily comprehensible manner to ensure that the recipients understand how information is prioritised for them. They should also ensure that the recipients enjoy alternative options for the main parameters, including options that are not based on profiling of the recipient. In addition, very large online platforms should offer the recipients of the service the choice of using recommender systems from third party providers, where available. Such third parties should be offered access to the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision by the platform of its own recommender systems.
Amendment 239 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 64
Recital 64
(64) In order to appropriately supervise the compliance of very large online platforms with the obligations laid down by this Regulation, the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission may require access to or reporting of specific data. Such a requirement may include, for example, the data necessary to assess the risks and possible harms brought about by the platform’s systems, data on the accuracy, functioning and testing of algorithmic systems by providing relevant source code and associated data that allow the detection of possible biases or threats to fundamental rights for content moderation, recommender systems or advertising systems, or data on processes and outputs of content moderation or of internal complaint-handling systems within the meaning of this Regulation. Investigations by researcherof possible biases onr the evolution and severity of online systemic riskreats to fundamental rights are particularly important for bridging information asymmetries and establishing a resilient system of risk mitigation, informing online platforms, Digital Services Coordinators, other competent authorities, the Commission and the public. This Regulation therefore provides a framework for compelling access to data from very large online platforms to vetted researchers. All requirements for access to data under that framework should be proportionate and appropriately protect the rights and legitimate interests, including trade secrets and other confidential information, of the platform andin line with Directive (EU) 2016/943 and the privacy of any other parties concerned, including the recipients of the service.
Amendment 240 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65 a (new)
Recital 65 a (new)
(65 a) Given the cross-border nature of the services at stake, EU action to harmonise accessibility requirements for very large online platforms across the internal market is necessary to avoid market fragmentation and to ensure that equal right to access and choice of those services for persons with disabilities is guaranteed. Lack of harmonised accessibility requirements for digital services can create barriers for the implementation of existing Union legislation on accessibility, as many of the services falling under those laws will rely on intermediary services to reach end- users. Therefore, accessibility requirements for very large online platforms, including their user interfaces, must be consistent with existing Union accessibility legislation, including Directive(EU) 2019/882 and Directive (EU) 2016/2102.
Amendment 242 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 67
Recital 67
(67) The Commission and the Board should encouragmay facilitate the drawing-up of codes of conduct to contribute to the application of this Regulation. While the implementation of codes of conduct should be measurable and subject to public oversight, this should not impair the voluntary nature of such codes and the freedom of interested parties to decide whether to participate. In certain circumstances, it is important that very large online platforms cooperate in the drawing-up and adhere to specific codes of conduct. Nothing in this Regulation prevents other service providers from adhering to the same standards of due diligence, adopting best practices and benefitting from the guidance provided by the Commission and the Board, by participating in the same codes of conduct.
Amendment 243 #
2020/0361(COD)
Amendment 245 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 70
Recital 70
(70) The provision of online advertising generally involves several actors, including intermediary services that connect publishers of advertising with advertisers. Codes of conducts shouldmay support and complement the transparency obligations relating to advertisement for online platforms and very large online platforms set out in this Regulation in order to provide for flexible and effective mechanisms to facilitate and enhance the compliance with those obligations, notably as concerns the modalities of the transmission of the relevant information. The involvement of a wide range of stakeholders should ensure that those codes of conduct are widely supported, technically sound, effective and offer the highest levels of user-friendliness to ensure that the transparency obligations achieve their objectives.
Amendment 246 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 71
Recital 71
(71) In case of extraordinary circumstances affecting public security or public health, the Commission may initiate the drawing up of voluntary crisis protocols to coordinate a rapid, collective and cross- border response in the online environment. Extraordinary circumstances may entail any unforeseeable event, such as earthquakes, hurricanes, pandemics and other serious cross-border threats to public health, war and acts of terrorism, where, for example, online platforms may be misused for the rapid spread of illegal content or disinformation or where the need arises for rapid dissemination of reliable information. In light of the important role of very large online platforms in disseminating information in our societies and across borders, such platforms shouldmay be encouraged in drawing up and applying specific crisis protocols. Such crisis protocols should be activated only for a limited period of time and the measures adopted should also be limited to what is strictly necessary to address the extraordinary circumstance. Those measures should be consistent with this Regulation, and should not amount to a general obligation for the participating very large online platforms to monitor the information which they transmit or store, nor actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal content. The Commission should also ensure that measures are in place to ensure accessibility for persons with disabilities during the implementation of crisis protocols.
Amendment 247 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 71 a (new)
Recital 71 a (new)
(71 a) Before initiating or facilitating the negotiation or the revision of codes of conduct, the Commission should consider the appropriateness of proposing legislation and invite the European Parliament, the Council, the Fundamental Rights Agency, the public and, where relevant, the European Data Protection Supervisor to express their opinion and publish their opinions. It should also conduct a Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment and publish the findings.
Amendment 261 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. This Regulation is without prejudice to national law regulating the protection and or promotion of cultural diversity and plurality of the media in conformity with Union law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Amendment 265 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(g a) ‘manifestly illegal content’ means any information which has been subject of a specific ruling by a court or administrative authority of a Member State or where it is evident to a layperson, without any substantive analysis, that the content is in not in compliance with Union law or the law of a Member State;
Amendment 272 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new)
(q a) ‘persons with disabilities’ means persons within the meaning of Article 3 (1) of Directive (EU) 2019/882;
Amendment 274 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6
Article 6
Amendment 277 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Providers of intermediary services shall not be obliged to use automated tools for content moderation.
Amendment 278 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 b (new)
No provision of this Regulation shall prevent providers of intermediary services from offering end-to-end encrypted services, or make the provision of such services a cause for liability or loss of immunity.
Amendment 282 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of intermediary services shall, upon the receipt of an order to act against a specific item of illegal content, issued by the relevant national judicial or administrative authorities, on the basis of the applicable Union or national law, in conformity with Union law, inform the authority issuing the order of the effect given to the orders, without undue delay, specifying the action taken and the moment when the action was taken.
Amendment 284 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(b a) the territorial scope of an order addressed to a provider that has its main establishment or, if the provider is not established in the Union, its legal representation in another Member State is limited to the territory of the Member State issuing the order;
Amendment 285 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)
(b b) if addressed to a provider that has its main establishment outside the Union, the territorial scope of the order, where Union law is infringed, is limited to the territory of the Union or, where national law is infringed, to the territory of the Member State issuing the order;
Amendment 287 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of intermediary services shall, upon receipt via a secure communication channel of an order to provide a specific item of information about one or more specific individual recipients of the servicesuspect or suspects of a serious threat to public security, issued by the relevant national judicial or administrative authoritiesy on the basis of the applicable Union or national law, in conformity with Union law, inform without undue delay the authority of issuing the order of its receipt and the effect given to the order.
Amendment 289 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Providers of intermediary services shall, upon receipt via a secure communication channel of an order to provide national authorities , where proportionate and strictly necessary for the enforcement of existing national, regional or local regulation, a specific item of information about service providers’ licence numbers, the address of a rental, number of nights let on the platform or number of services provided, in compliance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 290 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Member States shall ensure that orders referred to in paragraph 1 seek information about suspect or suspects of serious crime and meet the following conditions:
Amendment 292 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1
— a detailed statement of reasons explaining the legal basis and the objective for which the information is required and why the requirement to provide the information is necessary and proportionate to determine compliance by the recipients of the intermediary services with applicable Union or national rules, unless such a statement cannot be provided for reasons related to the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offencetaking due account of the impact of the measures on fundamental rights;
Amendment 293 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 a (new)
- a clear indication of the electronic location of that information, in particular the exact URL or URLs, and, where necessary, additional information enabling the identification of the illegal content;
Amendment 295 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a With the exception of Article 7, this Chapter shall not apply to online platforms that qualify as micro enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC or as a not-for-profit service with fewer than 100.000 monthly active users.
Amendment 298 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of intermediary services shall include information on any restrictions or modification that they impose in relation to the use of their service in respect of information provided by the recipients of the service, in their terms and conditions. That information shall include information on any policies, procedures, measures and tools used for the purpose of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making and human review. It shall be set out in clear user- friendly and unambiguous language and shall be publicly available in an easily accessible formatand machine-readable format in the language in which the service is offered.
Amendment 300 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Providers of intermediary services shall publish summary versions of their terms and conditions in a clear, user- friendly and unambiguous language, and in an easily accessible and machine- readable format. Such a summary shall include information on remedies and redress mechanisms pursuant to Articles 17 and 18, where available.
Amendment 301 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. Providers of intermediary services shall act in a diligent, objectivecoherent, predictable, non- discriminatory, transparent, diligent, non- arbitrary and proportionate manner in applying and enforcing the restrictions referred to in paragraph 1, in compliance with procedural safeguards and with due regard to the rights and legitimate interests of all parties involved, including the applicable fundamental rights of the recipients of the service as enshrined in the Charter and relevant national law.
Amendment 306 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Any restriction referred to in paragraph 1 must respect fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter and relevant national law.
Amendment 308 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Individuals who are enforcing restrictions on the basis of terms and conditions of providers of intermediary services should be given adequate initial and ongoing training on the applicable laws and international human rights standards, as well as on the action to be taken in case of conflict with the terms and conditions. Such individuals shall be provided with appropriate working conditions, including professional support, qualified psychological assistance and qualified legal advice, where relevant.
Amendment 309 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. Terms and conditions of providers of intermediary services shall respect the essential principles of human rights as enshrined in the Charter and international law.
Amendment 310 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 d (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 d (new)
2 d. Member States shall ensure that editorial content providers` and media service providers` possibilities to contest decisions of online platforms or to seek judicial redress in accordance with the laws of the Member State concerned is unaffected.
Amendment 311 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 e (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 e (new)
2 e. Terms that do not comply with this Article shall not be binding on recipients.
Amendment 320 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a Targeting of digital advertising 1. Providers of intermediary services shall not collect or process personal data as defined by Regulation(EU) 2016/679 for the purpose of showing digital advertising. 2. This provision shall not prevent intermediary services from displaying targeted digital advertising based on contextual information such as keywords, the language setting communicated by the device of the recipient or the digital location where the advertisement is displayed. 3. The use of the contextual information referred to in paragraph 2 shall only be permissible if it does not allow for the direct or, by means of combining it with other information, indirect identification of a natural person or a clearly identifiable group of recipients/persons, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that natural person.
Amendment 328 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(a a) evidence that substantiates the claim, where possible;
Amendment 329 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) a clear indication of the exact electronic location of that information, in particularsuch as the exact URL or URLs or other identifiers where appropriate, and, where necessary, additional information enabling the identification of the alleged illegal content;
Amendment 333 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 334 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) where the information concerns an alleged infringement of an intellectual property right, evidence that the entity submitting the notice is the rightholder or authorised to act on behalf of the rightholder;
Amendment 335 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Amendment 337 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4
Article 14 – paragraph 4
4. WThere the notice contains the name and an electronic mail address of the individual or entity that submitted it individual or entity that submitted the notice shall be given the option to provide an electronic mail address to enable, the provider of hosting services shallto promptly send a confirmation of receipt of the notice to that individual or entity. Where individuals decide to include their contact details in a notice, their anonymity towards the recipient of the service who provided the content shall be ensured, except in cases of alleged violations of personality rights or of intellectual property rights.
Amendment 339 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5
Article 14 – paragraph 5
5. The provider shall also, without undue delay, notify that individual or entity of its decisaction in respect of the information to which the notice relates, providing information on the redress possibilities in respect of that decision.
Amendment 340 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. The provider of intermediary services shall also notify the recipient of the service who provided the information, where contact details are available, giving them the opportunity to reply before taking a decision, unless this would obstruct the prevention and prosecution of serious criminal offences.
Amendment 344 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Upon receipt of a valid notice, providers of hosting services shall act expeditiously to disable access to content which is manifestly illegal.
Amendment 345 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6 b (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Information that has been the subject of a notice and that is not manifestly illegal shall remain accessible while the assessment of its legality by the competent authority is still pending. Member States shall ensure that providers of intermediary services are not held liable for failure to remove notified information, while the assessment of legality is still pending.
Amendment 346 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6 c (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 6 c (new)
6 c. A decision taken pursuant to a notice submitted in accordance with Article 14(1) shall protect the rights and legitimate interests of all affected parties, in particular their fundamental rights as enshrined in the Charter, irrespective of the Member State in which those parties are established or reside and of the field of law at issue.
Amendment 347 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6 d (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 6 d (new)
6 d. The provider of hosting services shall ensure that processing of notices is undertaken by qualified individuals to whom adequate initial and ongoing training on the applicable legislation and international human rights standards as well as appropriate working conditions are to be provided, including, where relevant professional support, qualified psychological assistance and legal advice.
Amendment 351 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15 a Content moderation 1. Providers of hosting services shall not use ex-ante control measures based on automated tools or upload-filtering of content for content moderation. Where providers of hosting services otherwise use automated tools for content moderation, they shall ensure that qualified staff decide on any action to be taken and that legal content which does not infringe the terms and conditions set out by the providers is not affected. The provider shall ensure that adequate initial and ongoing training on the applicable legislation and international human rights standards as well as appropriate working conditions are provided to staff, and that, where necessary, they are given the opportunity to seek professional support, qualified psychological assistance and qualified legal advice. This paragraph shall not apply to moderating information which has most likely been provided by automated tools. 2. Providers of hosting services shall act in a fair, transparent, coherent, predictable, non-discriminatory ,diligent, non-arbitrary and proportionate manner when moderating content, with due regard to the rights and legitimate interests of all parties involved, including the fundamental rights of the recipients of the service as enshrined in the Charter.
Amendment 353 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) decisions to remove demote, or disable access to or impose other sanctions against the information;
Amendment 357 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Online platforms shall ensure that their internal complaint-handling systems are easy to access, user-friendlincluding for persons with disabilities, user-friendly non- discriminatory and enable and facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated complaints. Online platforms shall set out the rules of procedure of their internal complaint handling system in their terms and conditions in a clear, user-friendly and easily accessible manner, including for persons with disabilities.
Amendment 358 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. Online platforms shall handle complaints submitted through their internal complaint-handling system in a timely, diligent and objective mannernon-discriminatory and non- arbitrary manner and within seven days starting on the date on which the online platform received the complaint. Where a complaint contains sufficient grounds for the online platform to consider that the information to which the complaint relates is not illegal and is not incompatible with its terms and conditions, or contains information indicating that the complainant’s conduct does not warrant the suspension or termination of the service or the account, it shall reverse its decision referred to in paragraph 1 without undue delay.
Amendment 359 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5
Article 17 – paragraph 5
5. Online platforms shall ensure that the decisions, referred to in paragraph 4, are not solely taken on the basis of automated means. and are reviewed by qualified staff to whom adequate initial and ongoing training on the applicable legislation and international human rights standards as well as appropriate working conditions are to be provided, including, where relevant, professional support, qualified psychological assistance and legal advice.
Amendment 362 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the independent out-of-court dispute settlement body is established shall, at the request of that body, certify the body for a maximum of three years, which can be renewed, where the body has demonstrated that it meets all of the following conditions:
Amendment 363 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) it is impartial and independent of online platforms and recipients of the service provided by the online platformsor any third party involved in dispute, provided by the online platforms and its members are remunerated in a way that is not linked to the outcome of the procedure;
Amendment 364 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(a a) it is composed of legal experts;
Amendment 365 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) iIt has the necessary expertise in relation to the issues arising in one or more particular areas of illegal content, or in relation to the application and enforcement of terms and conditions of one or more types of online platforms, allowing the body to contribute effectively to the settlement of a dispute as well as a general understanding of law;
Amendment 366 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(b a) the natural persons with responsibility for dispute settlement are granted a period of office of a minimum of three years to ensure the independence of their actions;
Amendment 367 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)
(b b) the natural persons with responsibility for dispute settlement commit not to work for the online platform or a professional organisation or business association of which the online platform is a member for a period of three years after their position in the body has ended;
Amendment 368 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point b c (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point b c (new)
(b c) natural persons with responsibility for dispute resolution may not have worked for an online platform or a professional organisation or business association of which the online platform is a member for a period of two years before taking up their position in the body;
Amendment 369 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the dispute settlement is easily accessible, including for persons with disabilities through electronic communication technology;
Amendment 371 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) the anonymity of the individuals involved in the settlement procedure can be guaranteed;
Amendment 372 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) it is capable ofensures the settling of a dispute in a swift, efficient and cost-effective manner and in at least one official language of the Union or at the request of the recipient at least in English;
Amendment 373 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) the dispute settlement takes place in accordance with clear and fair rules of procedure. which are easily and publicly accessible;
Amendment 374 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
(e a) it ensures that a preliminary decision is taken within a period of seven days following the reception of the complaint and that the outcome of the dispute settlement is made available within a period of 90 calendar days from the date on which the body has received the complete complaint file.
Amendment 383 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 5
Article 19 – paragraph 5
5. Where an online platform has information indicating that a trusted flagger submitted a significant number of insufficiently precise or inadequately substantiated notices or notices regarding legal content through the mechanisms referred to in Article 14, including information gathered in connection to the processing of complaints through the internal complaint-handling systems referred to in Article 17(3), it shall communicate that information to the Digital Services Coordinator that awarded the status of trusted flagger to the entity concerned, providing the necessary explanations and supporting documents.
Amendment 385 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Amendment 388 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
2. Online platforms shall suspend, for a reasonable period of time and after having issued a prior warning, the processing of notices and complaints submitted through the notice and action mechanisms and, internal complaints- handling systems and out-of-court dispute settlement bodies referred to in Articles 14, 17 and 178, respectively, by individuals or entities or by complainants that frequentpeatedly submit notices or complaints or initiate dispute settlements that that are manifestly unfounded.
Amendment 391 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Online platforms shall assess, on a case-by-case basis and in a timely, diligent and objective manner, whether a recipient, individual, entity or complainant engages in the misuse referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, taking into account all relevant facts and circumstances apparent from the information available to the online platform. Those circumstances shall include at least the following:
Amendment 393 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) the gravity of the misuses and its consequences in particular on the exercise of fundamental rights, regardless of the absolute numbers or relative proportion;
Amendment 394 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
(d a) the fact that notices and complaints were submitted following the use of an automated content recognition system;
Amendment 395 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d b (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d b (new)
(d b) any justification provided by the recipient of the service to provide sufficient grounds to consider that the information is not manifestly illegal.
Amendment 396 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
4. Online platforms shall set out, in a clear and detailed manner, with due regard to their obligations under Article 12(2) in particular as regards the applicable fundamental rights of the recipients of the service as enshrined in the Charter, their policy in respect of the misuse referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 in their terms and conditions, including as regards the facts and circumstances that they take into account when assessing whether certain behaviour constitutes misuse and the duration of the suspension.
Amendment 397 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42 a (new)
Recital 42 a (new)
(42a) When moderating content, mechanisms voluntarily employed by platforms should not lead to ex-ante control measures based on automated tools or upload-filtering of content. Automated tools are currently unable to differentiate illegal content from content that is legal in a given context and therefore routinely result in over-blocking legal content. Human review of automated reports by service providers or their contractors does not fully solve this problem, especially if it is outsourced to private staff that lack sufficient independence, qualification and accountability. Ex-ante control should be understood as making publishing subject to an automated decision. Filtering automated content submissions such as spam should be permitted. Where automated tools are otherwise used for content moderation the provider should ensure human review and the protection of legal content.
Amendment 399 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the name, address provided that the trader is not self-employed or independent professional, and whose address is his or her private address, telephone number and electronic mail address of the trader;
Amendment 410 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter III – Section 4 – title
Chapter III – Section 4 – title
4 Additional obligations for very large online platforms to manage systemic risks
Amendment 411 #
Amendment 412 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 b (new)
Article 2 b (new)
Amendment 413 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Very large online platforms shall identify, analyse and assess, from the date of application referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 25(4), at least once a year thereafter, any significant systemic risks stemming fromthe impact of the functioning and use made of their services in the Union on fundamental rights. This riskimpact assessment shall be specific to their services and shall include the following systemic riskadverse impacts:
Amendment 414 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the dissemination of manifestly illegal content through their services;
Amendment 417 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) any negative effects for the exercise of the fundamental rights, in particular the rights to respect for private and family life, freedom of expression and information including freedom and pluralism of media, the prohibition of discrimination and the rights of the child, as enshrined in Articles 7, 11, 21 and 24 of the Charter respectivelythe Charter;
Amendment 418 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) malfunctioning or intentional manipulation of their service, including by means of inauthentic use or automated exploitation of the service, with an actual or foreseeable negative effect on the protection of public health, minors, civic discourse, or actual or foreseeable effects related to electoral processes and public securityfundamental rights.
Amendment 419 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2
Article 26 – paragraph 2
2. When conducting riskimpact assessments, very large online platforms shall take into account, in particular, howthe effects of their content moderation systems, recommender systems and systems for selecting and displaying advertisement influence any of the systemic risks referred to in paragraph 1, including the potentially rapid and wide dissemination of manifestly illegal content and of information that is incompatible with their terms and conditions.
Amendment 420 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 26 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. The outcome of the impact assessment and supporting documents shall be communicated to the Board of Digital Service Coordinators and the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment. A summary version of the impact assessment shall be made publicly available in an easily accessible format.
Amendment 421 #
Amendment 422 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Very large online platforms shall put in place reasonable, proportionate and effective mitigation measures, tailored to the specific systemic riskadverse impacts identified pursuant to Article 26, where mitigation is possible without adversely impacting other fundamental rights. Such measures may include, where applicable:
Amendment 425 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point e
Amendment 426 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. The decision as to the choice of measures shall remain with the platform.
Amendment 427 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) identification and assessment of the most prominent and recurrent systemic riskadverse impacts reported by very large online platforms or identified through other information sources, in particular those provided in compliance with Article 31 and 33;
Amendment 428 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) best practices for very large online platforms to mitigate the systemic riskadverse impacts identified.
Amendment 429 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 3
Article 27 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission, in cooperation with the Digital Services Coordinators, may issue general guidelinerecommendations on the application of paragraph 1 in relation to specific riskadverse impacts, in particular to present best practices and recommend possible measures, having due regard to the possible consequences of the measures on fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter of all parties involved. When preparing those guidelinerecommendations the Commission shall organise public consultations.
Amendment 430 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Amendment 431 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Very large online platforms shall be subject, at their own expense and at least once a year, to audits to assess compliance with the following:
Amendment 432 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 433 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Audits performed pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be performed the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. The Agency may decide to perform the audit in collaboration with by organisations which:
Amendment 434 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 4
Article 28 – paragraph 4
4. Very large online platforms receiving an audit report that is not positive shall take due account of any operational recommendations addressed to them with a view to take the necessary measures to implement them. They shall, within one month from receiving those recommendations, adopt an audit implementation report setting out those measures. Where they do not implement the operational recommendations, they shall justify in the audit implementation report the reasons for not doing so and set out any alternative measures they may have taken to address any instances of non- compliance identified.
Amendment 440 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. In addition to the obligations applicable to all online platforms, very large online platforms shall offer to the recipients of the service the choice of using recommender systems from third party providers, where available. Such third parties shall be offered access to the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision by the platform of its own recommender systems.
Amendment 442 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Very large online platforms may only limit access to third-party recommender systems temporarily and in exceptional circumstances, when justified by an obligation under Article 18 of Directive (EU) 2020/0359 and Article 32(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Such limitations shall be notified within 24 hours to affected third parties and to the Agency. The Agency may require such limitations to be removed or modified where it decides by majority vote they are unnecessary or disproportionate.
Amendment 443 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. Very large online platforms shall not make commercial use of any of the data that is generated or received from third parties as a result of interoperability activities for purposes other than enabling those activities. Any processing of personal data related to those activities shall comply with Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular Articles 6(1)(a) and 5(1)(c).
Amendment 450 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2
2. UpWith regards to moderation and reasoned request fromcommendation systems, very large online platforms shall make publicly available and communicate to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment and/or the Commission, very large online platforms shall, within a reasonable period, as specified in the request, provide access to data to vetted researchers who meet the requirements in paragraphs 4 of this Article, for the sole purpose of conducting research that contributes to the identification and understanding of systemic risks as set out in upon request access to algorithms by providing the relevant source code and associated data that allow the detection of possible biases or threats to fundamental rights including freedom of expression. When disclosing these data, very large online platforms shall have a duty of explainability and ensure close cooperation with the Digital Services Coordinator or the Commission to make moderation and recommender systems fully understandable. When a bias is detected, very large online platforms should correct it expeditiously following requirements from the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment or the Commission. Very large online platforms shall be able to demonstrate their compliance at every step of the process pursuant to this Article 26(1).
Amendment 451 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 4
Article 31 – paragraph 4
Amendment 453 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 5
Article 31 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall, after consulting the Board, adopt delegated acts laying down the technical conditions under which very large online platforms are to share data pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 and the purposes for which the data may be used. Those delegated acts shall lay down the specific conditions under which such sharing of data with vetted researchers can take place in compliance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679, taking into account the rights and interests of the very large online platforms and the recipients of the service concerned, including the protection of confidential information, in particular trade secrets, in line with Directive (EU) 2016/943 and maintaining the security of their service.
Amendment 454 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 6
Article 31 – paragraph 6
Amendment 455 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 6 – point a
Article 31 – paragraph 6 – point a
Amendment 456 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 6 – point b
Article 31 – paragraph 6 – point b
Amendment 457 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 7
Article 31 – paragraph 7
Amendment 458 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 461 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 a (new)
Article 33 a (new)
Amendment 462 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1
Article 35 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission and the Board shall encourage andmay facilitate the drawing up of voluntary codes of conduct at Union level to contribute to the proper application of this Regulation, taking into account in particular the specific challenges of tackling different types of illegal content and systemic riskadverse impacts, in accordance with Union law, in particular on competition and the protection of personal data.
Amendment 464 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. Where significant systemic riskadverse impacts within the meaning of Article 26(1) emerge and concern several very large online platforms, the Commission may invite the very large online platforms concerned, other very large online platforms, other online platforms and other providers of intermediary services, as appropriate, as well as civil society organisations and other interested parties, to participate in the drawing up of codes of conduct, including by setting out commitments to take specific risk mitigation measures, as well as a regular reporting framework on any measures taken and their outcomes.
Amendment 465 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 3
Article 35 – paragraph 3
Amendment 466 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 4
Article 35 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission and the Board shallmay assess whether the codes of conduct meet the aims specified in paragraphs 1 and 3, and shallmay regularly monitor and evaluate the achievement of their objectives. They shall publish their conclusions.
Amendment 467 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 5
Article 35 – paragraph 5
5. The Board shallmay regularly monitor and evaluate the achievement of the objectives of the codes of conduct, having regard to the key performance indicators that they may contain.
Amendment 468 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1
Article 36 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall encourage andmay facilitate the drawing up of voluntary codes of conduct at Union level between, online platforms and other relevant service providers, such as providers of online advertising intermediary services or organisations representing recipients of the service and civil society organisations or relevant authorities to contribute to further transparency in online advertising beyond the requirements of Articles 24 and 30.
Amendment 469 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 3
Article 36 – paragraph 3
Amendment 470 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1
Article 37 – paragraph 1
1. The Board may recommend the Commission to initiate the drawing up, in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3 and 4, of voluntary crisis protocols for addressing crisis situations strictly limited to extraordinary circumstances affecting public security or public health.
Amendment 471 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 37 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Commission shallmay encourage and facilitate very large online platforms and, where appropriate, other online platforms, with the involvement of the Commission, to participate in the drawing up, testing and application of those crisis protocols, which include one or more of the following measures:
Amendment 472 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 37 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) displaying prominent information on the crisis situation provided by Member States’ authorities or at Union level which are also accessible for persons with disabilities;
Amendment 473 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 3
Article 37 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission may involve, as appropriate, Member States’ authorities and Union bodies, offices and agencies in drawing up, testing and supervising the application of the crisis protocols. The Commission may, where necessary and appropriate, also involve civil society organisations or other relevant organisations in drawing up the crisis protocols.
Amendment 474 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 4 – point f a (new)
Article 37 – paragraph 4 – point f a (new)
(f a) measures to ensure accessibility for persons with disabilities during the implementation of crisis protocols, including by providing accessible description about these protocols;
Amendment 475 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 a (new)
Article 37 a (new)
Article 37 a Accountability and transparency 1. Before initiating or facilitating the negotiation or the revision of codes of conduct, the Commission shall (a) consider the appropriateness of proposing legislation; (b) publish the elements of the code which it could propose or advocate; (c) invite the European Parliament, the Council, the Fundamental Rights Agency, the public and, where relevant, the European Data Protection Supervisor to express their opinion and publish their opinions; (d) conduct a Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment and publish the findings. 2. The Commission shall subsequently publish the elements of the envisaged code, which it intends to propose or advocate in the negotiations. It shall not propose or advocate elements, which the European Parliament or the Council object to or which have not been subject to the process set out in paragraph 1. 3. The Commission shall allow representatives of non-governmental organisations, which advocate the interests of the recipients of relevant services, the European Parliament, the Council and the Fundamental Rights Agency to observe the negotiations and to have access to all documents pertaining to them. The Commission shall offer compensation to non-profit participants. 4. The Commission shall publish codes of conduct and their parties and keep the information updated. 5. This Article shall apply, mutatis mutandis, to crisis protocols.
Amendment 498 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 62 a (new)
Recital 62 a (new)
(62a) Recommender systems used by very large online platforms pose a particular risk in terms of consumer choice and lock-in effects. Consequently, in addition to the obligations applicable to all online platforms, very large online platforms should offer to the recipients of the service the choice of using recommender systems from third party providers, where available. Such third parties must be offered access to the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision by the platform of its own recommender systems, including through application programming interfaces.
Amendment 581 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Amendment 783 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Amendment 797 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
No provision of this Regulation shall prevent providers of intermediary services from offering end-to-end encrypted services, or make the provision of such services a cause for liability or loss of immunity.
Amendment 895 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9a Exclusion for micro enterprises and not- for-profit services This Chapter shall not apply to online platforms that qualify as micro enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC or as a not-for-profit service with fewer than 100,000 monthly active users.
Amendment 936 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Providers of intermediary services shall publish summary versions of their terms and conditions in clear, user- friendly and unambiguous language, and in an easily accessible and machine- readable format. Such a summary shall include information on remedies and redress mechanisms pursuant to Articles 17 and 18, where available.
Amendment 955 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Any restriction referred to in paragraph 1 must respect the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter and relevant national law.
Amendment 957 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Individuals who are enforcing restrictions on the basis of terms and conditions of providers of intermediary services shall be given adequate initial and ongoing training on the applicable laws and international human rights standards, as well as on the action to be taken in case of conflict with the terms and conditions. Such individuals shall be provided with appropriate working conditions, including professional support, qualified psychological assistance and qualified legal advice, where relevant.
Amendment 960 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Providers of intermediary services shall notify the recipients of the service of any change to the contract terms and conditions that can affect their rights and provide a user-friendly explanation thereof. The changes shall not be implemented before the expiry of a notice period which is reasonable and proportionate to the nature and extent of the envisaged changes and to their consequences for the recipients of the service. That notice period shall be at least 15 days from the date on which the provider of intermediary services notifies the recipients about the changes. Failure to consent to such changes should not lead to basic services becoming unavailable.
Amendment 1034 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1 shall be such as to facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated notices, on the basis of which a diligent economic operator canmay, in some cases, identify the illegality of the content in question. To that end, the providers shall take the necessary measures to enable and facilitate the submission of valid notices containing all of the following elements:
Amendment 1041 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) evidence that substantiates the claim, where possible;
Amendment 1045 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) a clear indication of the exact electronic location of that information, in particular the exact URL or URLssuch as the URL or URLs or other identifiers where appropriate, and, where necessary, additional information enabling the identification of the alleged illegal content;
Amendment 1051 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 1054 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1065 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4
Article 14 – paragraph 4
4. WThere the notice contains the name and an electronic mail address of the individual or entity that submitted it, individual or entity that submitted the notice shall be given the option to provide an electronic mail address to enable the provider of hosting services shallto promptly send a confirmation of receipt of the notice to that individual or entity.
Amendment 1085 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Upon receipt of a valid notice, providers of hosting services shall act expeditiously to disable access to content which is manifestly illegal.
Amendment 1086 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6 b (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Information that has been the subject of a notice and that is not manifestly illegal shall remain accessible while the assessment of its legality is still pending. Member States shall ensure that providers of intermediary services are not held liable for failure to remove notified information, while the assessment of legality is still pending.
Amendment 1090 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6 c (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. A decision taken pursuant to a notice submitted in accordance with Article 14(1) shall protect the rights and legitimate interests of all affected parties, in particular their fundamental rights as enshrined in the Charter, irrespective of the Member State in which those parties are established or reside and of the field of law at issue.
Amendment 1091 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6 d (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 6 d (new)
6d. The provider of hosting services shall ensure that processing of notices is undertaken by qualified individuals to whom adequate initial and ongoing training on the applicable legislation and international human rights standards as well as appropriate working conditions are to be provided, including, where relevant professional support, qualified psychological assistance and legal advice.
Amendment 1128 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15 a (new)
Amendment 1153 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) decisions to remove or, demote, disable access to or impose other sanctions against the information;
Amendment 1175 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Online platforms shall ensure that their internal complaint-handling systems are easy to access, user-friendlincluding for persons with disabilities, user-friendly, non- discriminatory and enable and facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated complaints. Online platforms shall set out the rules of procedure of their internal complaint handling system in their terms and conditions in a clear, user-friendly and easily accessible manner, including for persons with disabilities.
Amendment 1180 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. Online platforms shall handle complaints submitted through their internal complaint-handling system in a timely, diligent and objective manner, non-discriminatory and non- arbitrary manner and within seven days starting on the date on which the online platform received the complaint. Where a complaint contains sufficient grounds for the online platform to consider that the information to which the complaint relates is not illegal and is not incompatible with its terms and conditions, or contains information indicating that the complainant’s conduct does not warrant the suspension or termination of the service or the account, it shall reverse its decision referred to in paragraph 1, without undue delay.
Amendment 1190 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5
Article 17 – paragraph 5
5. Online platforms shall ensure that the decisions, referred to in paragraph 4, are not solely taken on the basis of automated means and are reviewed by qualified staff to whom adequate initial and ongoing training on the applicable legislation and international human rights standards as well as appropriate working conditions are to be provided, including, where relevant, professional support, qualified psychological assistance and legal advice..
Amendment 1215 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) it is impartial and independent of online platforms, any third party involved in the dispute and recipients of the service provided by the online platforms;
Amendment 1328 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
2. Online platforms shall suspend, for a reasonable period of time and after having issued a prior warning, the processing of notices and complaints submitted through the notice and action mechanisms and, internal complaints- handling systems and out-of-court dispute settlement bodies referred to in Articles 14, 17 and 178, respectively, by individuals or entities or by complainants that frequentpeatedly submit notices or complaints or initiate dispute settlements that are manifestly unfounded.
Amendment 1337 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) the gravity of the misuses and its consequences, in particular on the exercise of fundamental rights, regardless of the absolute numbers or relative proportion;
Amendment 1342 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
(da) the fact that notices and complaints were submitted following the use of an automated content recognition system;
Amendment 1343 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d b (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d b (new)
(db) any justification provided by the recipient of the service to provide sufficient grounds to consider that the information is not manifestly illegal.
Amendment 1347 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
4. Online platforms shall set out, in a clear and detailed manner with due regard to their obligations under Article 12(2) in particular as regards the applicable fundamental rights of the recipients of the service as enshrined in the Charter, their policy in respect of the misuse referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 in their terms and conditions, including as regards the facts and circumstances that they take into account when assessing whether certain behaviour constitutes misuse and the duration of the suspension.
Amendment 1518 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 a (new)
Article 24 a (new)
Amendment 1544 #
Amendment 1553 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Very large online platforms shall identify, analyse and assess, from the date of application referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 25(4), at least once a year thereafter, any significant systemic risks stemming fromthe impact of the functioning and use made of their services in the Union. This risk on fundamental rights, including article 38 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and on ensuring a high level of consumer protection. This impact assessment shall be specific to their services and shall include the following systemic riskadverse impacts:
Amendment 1558 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the dissemination of manifestly illegal content through their services;
Amendment 1571 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) any negative effects for the exercise of the fundamental rights, including article 38 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of The European Union and in particular the rights to respect for private and family life, freedom of expression and information, freedom of the press the prohibition of discrimination and the rights of the child, as enshrined in Articles 7, 11, 21 and 24 of the Charter respectivelythe Charter;
Amendment 1575 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) malfunctioning or intentional manipulation of their service, including by means of inauthentic use or automated exploitation of the service, with an actual or foreseeable negative effect on the protection of public health, minors, civic discourse, or actual or foreseeable effects related to electoral processes and public securityfundamental rights as foreseen by the Charter of Fundamental rights of the European Union, including Article 38 on ensuring a high level of consumer protection.
Amendment 1591 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2
Article 26 – paragraph 2
2. When conducting riskimpact assessments, very large online platforms shall take into account, in particular, howthe effects of their content moderation systems, recommender systems and systems for selecting and displaying advertisement influence any of the systemic risks referred to in paragraph 1, including the potentially rapid and wide dissemination of manifestly illegal content and of information that is incompatible with their terms and conditions.
Amendment 1594 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 26 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The outcome of the impact assessment and supporting documents shall be communicated to the Board of Digital Service Coordinators and the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment. A summary version of the impact assessment shall be made publicly available in an easily accessible format.
Amendment 1598 #
Amendment 1600 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Very large online platforms shall put in place reasonable, proportionate and effective mitigation measures, tailored to the specific systemic riskadverse impacts identified pursuant to Article 26, where mitigation is possible without adversely impacting other fundamental rights. Such measures may include, where applicable:
Amendment 1621 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point e
Amendment 1629 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The decision as to the choice of measures shall remain with the platform.
Amendment 1635 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) identification and assessment of the most prominent and recurrent systemic riskadverse impacts reported by very large online platforms or identified through other information sources, in particular those provided in compliance with Article 31 and 33;
Amendment 1640 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) best practices for very large online platforms to mitigate the systemic riskadverse impacts identified.
Amendment 1645 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 3
Article 27 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission, in cooperation with the Digital Services Coordinators, may issue general guidelinerecommendations on the application of paragraph 1 in relation to specific riskimpacts, in particular to present best practices and recommend possible measures, having due regard to the possible consequences of the measures on fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter of all parties involved. When preparing those guidelinerecommendations the Commission shall organise public consultations.
Amendment 1652 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Very large online platforms shall be subject, at their own expense and at least once a year, to audits to assess compliance with the following:obligations set out in Chapter III.
Amendment 1655 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 1660 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 1663 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Audits performed pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be performed by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. The Agency may decide to perform the audit in collaboration with organisations which:
Amendment 1681 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 4
Article 28 – paragraph 4
4. Very large online platforms receiving an audit report that is not positive shall take due account of any operational recommendations addressed to them with a view to take the necessary measures to implement them. They shall, within one month from receiving those recommendations, adopt an audit implementation report setting out those measures. Where they do not implement the operational recommendations, they shall justify in the audit implementation report the reasons for not doing so and set out any alternative measures they may have taken to address any instances of non- compliance identified.
Amendment 1703 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In addition to the obligations applicable to all online platforms, very large online platforms shall offer to the recipients of the service the choice of using recommender systems from third party providers, where available. Such third parties must be offered access to the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision by the platform of its own recommender systems.
Amendment 1705 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Very large online platforms may only limit access to third-party recommender systems temporarily and in exceptional circumstances, when justified by an obligation under Article 18 of Directive (EU) 2020/0359 and Article 32(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Such limitations shall be notified within 24 hours to affected third parties and to the Agency. The Agency may require such limitations to be removed or modified where it decides by majority vote they are unnecessary or disproportionate.
Amendment 1706 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Very large online platforms shall not make commercial use of any of the data that is generated or received from third parties as a result of interoperability activities for purposes other than enabling those activities. Any processing of personal data related to those activities shall comply with Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular Articles 6(1)(a) and 5(1)(c).
Amendment 1806 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 a (new)
Article 33 a (new)
Amendment 1850 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1
Article 35 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission and the Board shall encourage andmay facilitate the drawing up of voluntary codes of conduct at Union level to contribute to the proper application of this Regulation, taking into account in particular the specific challenges of tackling different types of illegal content and systemic riskadverse impacts, in accordance with Union law, in particular on competition and the protection of personal data.
Amendment 1857 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. Where significant systemic riskadverse impacts within the meaning of Article 26(1) emerge and concern several very large online platforms, the Commission may invite the very large online platforms concerned, other very large online platforms, other online platforms and other providers of intermediary services, as appropriate, as well as civil society organisations and other interested parties, to participate in the drawing up of codes of conduct, including by setting out commitments to take specific risk mitigation measures, as well as a regular reporting framework on any measures taken and their outcomes.
Amendment 1861 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 3
Article 35 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1871 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 4
Article 35 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission and the Board shallmay assess whether the codes of conduct meet the aims specified in paragraphs 1 and 3, and shallmay regularly monitor and evaluate the achievement of their objectives. They shall publish their conclusions.
Amendment 1876 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 5
Article 35 – paragraph 5
5. The Board shallmay regularly monitor and evaluate the achievement of the objectives of the codes of conduct, having regard to the key performance indicators that they may contain.
Amendment 1884 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1
Article 36 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shallmay encourage and facilitate the drawing up of voluntary codes of conduct at Union level between, online platforms and other relevant service providers, such as providers of online advertising intermediary services or organisations representing recipients of the service and civil society organisations or relevant authorities to contribute to further transparency in online advertising beyond the requirements of Articles 24 and 30.
Amendment 1898 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1
Article 37 – paragraph 1
1. The Board may recommend the Commission to initiate the drawing up, in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3 and 4, of voluntary crisis protocols for addressing crisis situations strictly limited to extraordinary circumstances affecting public security or public health.
Amendment 1899 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 37 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Commission shallmay encourage and facilitate very large online platforms and, where appropriate, other online platforms, with the involvement of the Commission, to participate in the drawing up, testing and application of those crisis protocols, which include one or more of the following measures:
Amendment 1901 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 3
Article 37 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission may involve, as appropriate, Member States’ authorities and Union bodies, offices and agencies in drawing up, testing and supervising the application of the crisis protocols. The Commission may, where necessary and appropriate, also involve civil society organisations or other relevant organisations in drawing up the crisis protocols.
Amendment 1905 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 a (new)
Article 37 a (new)
Article 37a Accountability and transparency 1. Before initiating or facilitating the negotiation or the revision of codes of conduct, the Commission shall (a) consider the appropriateness of proposing legislation; (b) publish the elements of the code which it could propose or advocate; (c) invite the European Parliament, the Council, the Fundamental Rights Agency, the public and, where relevant, the European Data Protection Supervisor to express their opinion and publish their opinions; (d) conduct a Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment and publish the findings. 2. The Commission shall subsequently publish the elements of the envisaged code which it intends to propose or advocate in the negotiations. It shall not propose or advocate elements which the European Parliament or the Council object to or which have not been subject to the process set out in paragraph 1. 3. The Commission shall allow representatives of non-governmental organisations which advocate the interests of the recipients of relevant services, the European Parliament, the Council and the Fundamental Rights Agency to observe the negotiations and to have access to all documents pertaining to them. The Commission shall offer compensation to non-profit participants. 4. The Commission shall publish codes of conduct and their parties and keep the information updated. 5. This Article shall apply, mutatis mutandis, to crisis protocols.
Amendment 74 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
Amendment 76 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) However, small or micro entities, unless fulfilling certain criteria that indicate a key role for the economies or societies of Member States or for particular sectors or types of services, should alsonot be covered by this Directive. Member States should be responsible for establishing a list of such entities, and submit it to the Commission. In order not to jeopardise collaborative innovation, non- commercial, free and open source projects should not be covered by this Directive.
Amendment 86 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20 a (new)
Recital 20 a (new)
(20a) When adopting national cybersecurity strategies, Member States should ensure that policy frameworks are available in order to address cybersecurity and the lawful access to information. In particular they should make sure that lawful access to information does not directly or indirectly lead to encryption being undermined and includes oversight, independent from the government.
Amendment 87 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20 b (new)
Recital 20 b (new)
(20b) A policy addressing cybersecurity in the supply chain should favour open source cybersecurity products, in line with Opinion 5/2021 of the European Data Protection Supervisor1a __________________ 1aOpinion 5/2021 of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the Cybersecurity Strategy and the NIS 2.0 Directive, 11 March 2021
Amendment 89 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) As regards personal data, CSIRTs should be able to provide, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council19 as regards personal data, on behalf of and upon specific request by an entity under this Directive, a proactive scanning of the network and information systems used for the provision of their services in order to identify, mitigate or prevent specific network and information security threats. Member States should aim at ensuring an equal level of technical capabilities for all sectorial CSIRTs. Member States may request the assistance of the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA) in developing national CSIRTs. __________________ 19Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 96 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Access to correct and timely information on vulnerabilities affecting ICT products and services contributes to an enhanced cybersecurity risk management. In that regard, sources of publicly available information on vulnerabilities are an important tool for entities and their users, but also national competent authorities and CSIRTs. For this reason, ENISA should establish a vulnerability registry where,nsure that essential and important entities and their suppliers, as well as entities which do not fall in the scope of application of this Directive may, on a voluntary basis, disclose vulnerabilities and provide the vulnerability information that allows users to take appropriate mitigating measures.
Amendment 97 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Although similar vVulnerability registries or databases do exist, these are hosted and maintained by entities which are not established in the Union. A European vulnerability registry maintained byTo avoid duplication of efforts and seek complementarity to the extent possible, ENISA wshould provide improved transparency regarding the publication process before enter into structured cooperation agreements withe vulnerability is officially disclosed, and resilience in cases of disruptions or interruptions on the provision of similar services. To avoid duplication of efforts and seek complementarity to the extent possible, ENISA should explore the possibility of entering into structured cooperation agreements with similar registrregistries in third country jurisdictions and it should ensure that reports are transmitted to appropriate registries internationally. ENISA should support European companies in theird country jurisdiction use of such registries.
Amendment 98 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32 a (new)
Recital 32 a (new)
(32a) The Cooperation Group should be composed of representatives of Member States, the Commission and ENISA.
Amendment 102 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) Among service providers, managed security services providers (MSSPs) in areas such as incident response, penetration testing, security audits and consultancy play a particularly important role in assisting entities in their efforts to detect and respond to incidents. Those MSSPs have however also been the targets of cyberattacks themselves and through their close integration in the operations of operators pose a particular cybersecurity risk. Entities should therefore exercise increased diligence in selecting an MSSP and should favour open source cybersecurity products for both software and hardware, as well as open source implementation of open and state-of-the- art, strong cryptography standards.
Amendment 107 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 51 a (new)
Recital 51 a (new)
(51a) In order to offer the necessary transparency to mitigate supply chain risks, open source cybersecurity products (software and hardware), including open source encryption, should be favoured, in line with Opinion 5/2021 of the European Data Protection Supervisor1a. __________________ 1aOpinion 5/2021 of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the Cybersecurity Strategy and the NIS 2.0 Directive, 11 March 2021.
Amendment 109 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 53
Recital 53
(53) In particular,Strong and state of the art encryption is critical and irreplaceable for effective consistent protection of consumer and business security in the Single Market. Strong and state of the art encryption must be available to be used for mitigation of risks to network and information security. To protect their consumers providers of public electronic communications networks or publicly available electronic communications services, should implement security by design and by default, and inform the service recipients of particular and significant cyber threats and of additional measures they can take to protect the security of their devices and communications, for instance by using specific types of software or encryption technologies.
Amendment 111 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) In order to safeguard the security of electronic communications networks and services, the use of encryption, and in particular end-to-end encryption, should be promoted and, where necessary, should be mandatory for providers of such services and networks, in accordance with the principles of security and privacy by default and by design, for the purposes of Article 18. The usecurity of end-to-end encryption should be reconciled with thenot be weakened by Member State’ powers to ensure the protection of their essential security interests and public security, and to permit the investigation, detection and, policies or procedures for ensuring the prostecution of criminal offences in compliance with Union law. Solutions for lawful access to information in end-to-end encrypted communications should maintain the effectiveness of encryption in protecting privacy and security of communications, while providing an effective response to crimetheir essential security interests and public security.
Amendment 117 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 59
Recital 59
(59) Maintaining accurate and complete databases of domain names and registration data (so called ‘WHOIS data’) and providing lawful access to such data is essential to ensure the security, stability and resilience of the DNS, which in turncompetent authorities for network and information security to such data may contributes to a high common level of cybersecurity within the Unionincreased cybersecurity. Where processing includes personal data such processing shall comply with Union data protection law.
Amendment 119 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 60
Recital 60
(60) The availability and timely accessibility of these data to public authorities, including competent authorities under Union or national law for the prevention, investigation or prosecution of criminal offences, CERTs, (CSIRTs, and as regards the data of their clients to providers of electronic communications networks and services and providers of cybersecurity technologies and services acting on behalf of those clients, is essentiaCERTs and CSIRTs can sometimes be useful to prevent and combat Domain Name System abuse, in particular to prevent, detect and respond to cybersecurity incidents. Such access should comply with Union data protection law insofar as it is related to personal data.
Amendment 120 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 61
Recital 61
(61) In order to ensure the availability of accurate and complete domain name registration data, TLD registries and the entities providing domain name registration services for the TLD (so-called registrars) should collect and guarantee the integrity and availability ofshould collect the domain names registration data. In particular, TLD registries and the entities providing domain name registration services for the TLD should establish policies and procedures to collect and maintain accurate and complete registration data, as well a necessary for the provision of their services. They should also take steps to prevent and correct inaccurate registration data in accordance with Union data protection rules.
Amendment 122 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 62
Recital 62
(62) TLD registries and the entities providing domain name registration services for them should make publically available domain name registration data that fall outside the scope of Union data protection rules, such as data that concern legal persons25 . TLD registries and the entities providing domain name registration services for the TLD should also enable lawful access to specific domain name registration data concerning natural persons to legitimate access seekers, in accordance with Union data protection law. Member States should ensure that TLD registries and the entities providing domain name registration services for them should respond without undue delay to requests from legitimate access seekers for the disclosure of domain name registration data. TLD registries and the entities providing domain name registration services for them should establish policies and procedures for the publication and disclosure of registration data, including service level agreements to deal with requests for access from legitimate access seekers. The access procedure may also include the use of an interface, portal or other technical tool to provide an efficient system for requesting and accessing registration data. With a view to promoting harmonised practices across the internal market, the Commission may adopt guidelines on such procedures without prejudice to the competences of the European Data Protection Board. __________________ 25REGULATION (EU) 2016/679 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL recital (14) whereby “this Regulation does not cover the processing of personal data which concerns legal persons and in particular undertakings established as legal persons, including the name and the form of the legal person and the contact details of the legal person”should also enable lawful access, without undue delay, to competent national authorities, as designated by Member States under their national cybersecurity strategies, to specific domain name registration data concerning natural persons, in accordance with Union data protection law.
Amendment 125 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 69
Recital 69
(69) The processing of personal data, to the extentwhich should be limited to what is strictly necessary and proportionate, for the purposes of ensuring network and information security by entities, public authorities, CERTs, CSIRTs, and providers of security technologies and services should constitute a legitimate interest of the data controller concerned, as referred to in Regulation (EU) 2016/679. That should include measures related to the prevention, detection, analysis and response to incidents, measures to raise awareness in relation to specific cyber threats, exchange of information in the context of vulnerability remediation and coordinated disclosure, as well as the voluntary exchange of information on those incidents, as well as cyber threats and vulnerabilities, indicators of compromise, tactics, techniques and procedures, cybersecurity alerts and configuration tools. Such measures may require the processing of the following types of personal data: IP addresses, uniform resources locators (URLs), domain names, and email addresses.
Amendment 129 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 79
Recital 79
(79) A peer-review mechanism should be introduced, allowing the assessment by independent experts designated by the Member States, of the implementation of cybersecurity policies, including the level of Member States’ capabilities and available resources. When deciding on the methodology, the Commission, supported by ENISA, should establish an objective, non-discriminatory, technology neutral, fair and transparent system for the selection of such experts.
Amendment 134 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive applies to public and private entities of a type referred to as essential entities in Annex I and as important entities in Annex II. This Directive does not apply to entities that qualify as micro and small enterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC.28 nor to non-commercial free and open source projects. __________________ 28Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium- sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
Amendment 137 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) a potential disruption of the service provided by the entity could have an impact on public safety, public security or public health;
Amendment 138 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) a potential disruption of the service provided by the entity could induce systemic risks, in particular for the sectors where such disruption could have a cross- border impact;
Amendment 152 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(fa) a policy framework for enhanced coordination between the competent authorities under this Directive and the independent body responsible for oversight of data collection, in line with Union law.
Amendment 153 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) a policy addressing cybersecurity in the supply chain for ICT products and services used by essential and important entities for the provision of their services, which should favour open source cybersecurity products for both software and hardware, as well as open source implementation of open and state-of-the- art, strong cryptography standards;
Amendment 154 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) a policy framework addressing cybersecurity and the lawful access to information, which does not undermine the effectiveness of encryption in protecting privacy and security of communications and which includes independent oversight;
Amendment 156 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) guidelines regarding the inclusion and specification of cybersecurity-related requirements for ICT products and service in public procurement, including the promotion of the use of open source cybersecurity products;
Amendment 159 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) a policy on promoting and developing technology neutral cybersecurity skills, awareness raising and research and development initiatives;
Amendment 170 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – title
Article 6 – title
Coordinated vulnerability disclosure and a European vulnerability registry
Amendment 173 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. ENISA shall develop and maintain a European vulnerability registry. To that end, ENISA shall establish and maintain the appropriate information systems, policies and procedures with a view in particular to enabling important and essential entities and their suppliers of network and information systems to disclose and register vulnerabilities present in ICT products or ICT services, as well as to provide access to the information on vulnerabilities contained in the registry to all interested parties. The registry shall, in particular, include information describing the vulnerability, the affected ICT product or ICT services and the severity of the vulnerability in terms of the circumstances under which it may be exploited, the availability of related patches and, in the absence of available patches, guidance addressed to users of vulnerable products and services as to how the risks resulting from disclosed vulnerabilities may be mitigated in relevant international registries.
Amendment 184 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) providing, upon a specific request of an entity, a proactive scanning of the network and information systems used for the provision of their services in order to identify, mitigate or prevent specific and exceptional network and information security threats, in compliance with Union law;
Amendment 203 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The methodology shall include objective, non-discriminatory, technology- neutral, fair and transparent criteria on the basis of which the Member States shall designate experts eligible to carry out the peer reviews. ENISA and the Commission shall designate experts to participate as observers in the peer-reviews. The Commission, supported by ENISA, shall establish within the methodology as referred to in paragraph 1 an objective, non-discriminatory, fair and transparent system for the selection and the random allocation of experts for each peer review.
Amendment 212 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point g
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point g
(g) the use of cryptography and strong encryption.
Amendment 214 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
(ga) policies that ensure reproducible- builds and code auditability.
Amendment 218 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 3
Article 18 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that, where considering appropriate measures referred to in point (d) of paragraph 2, entities shall take into account the vulnerabilities specific to each supplier and service provider and the overall quality of products and cybersecurity practices of their suppliers and service providers, including their secure development procedures. For this purpose they should also favour open source cybersecurity products for both software and hardware, as well as open source implementation of open and state-of-the-art, strong cryptography standards.
Amendment 230 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that essential and important entities notify, without undue delay, the competent authorities or the CSIRT of any significant cyber threat that those entities identify that could have potentially, if steps to mitigate the risk had not been taken or are not taken in the future, would have resulted or are likely in the future to resulted, in a significant incident.
Amendment 246 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 7
Article 20 – paragraph 7
7. Where public awareness is necessary to prevent an incident or to deal with an ongoing incident, or where disclosure of the incident is otherwise in the public interest, the competent authority or the CSIRT, and where appropriate the authorities or the CSIRTs of other Member States concerned mayshall, after consulting the entity concerned, inform the public about the incident or require the entity to do so.
Amendment 257 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. For the purpose of contributing to the security, stability and resilience of the DNS, Member States shall ensure that TLD registries and the entities providing domain name registration services for the TLD shall collect and maintain the accurate and complete domain name registration data in a dedicated database facility with due diligence subject to Union data protection law as regards data which are personal datanecessary for the provision of their services, in compliance with Union data protection law.
Amendment 259 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Amendment 263 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Amendment 267 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 4
Article 23 – paragraph 4
Amendment 270 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 5
Article 23 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall ensure that the TLD registries and the entities providing domain name registration services for the TLD provide access to specific domain name registration data upon lawful and duly justified requests of legitimate access seekercompetent national authorities, in compliance with Union data protection law. Member States shall ensure that the TLD registries and the entities providing domain name registration services for the TLD reply without undue delay to all requests for access. Member States shall ensure that policies and procedures to disclose such data are made publicly availableply without undue delay to lawful and duly justified requests for access from competent national authorities.
Amendment 284 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 28 – paragraph 2
Article 28 – paragraph 2
2. Competent authorities shall work in close cooperation with data protection authorities when addressing incidents resulting in personal data breaches without prejudice to the competences, tasks, and powers of data protection authorities pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 286 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) targeted security audits based on risk assessments or risk-related available information; , carried out by a qualified independent body or a competent authority or independent experts and make the results thereof available to the competent authority; the cost of the audit shall be paid by the provider;
Amendment 290 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) targeted security audits based on risk assessments or risk-related available information carried out by a qualified independent body or a competent authority and make the results thereof available to the competent authority; the cost of the audit shall be paid by the provider;
Amendment 295 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. Where the competent authorities have indications that the infringement by an essential or important entity of the obligations laid down in Articles 18 and 20 entails a personal data breach, as defined by Article 4(12) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 which shall be notified pursuant to Article 33 of that Regulation, they shall inform the supervisory authorities competent pursuant to Articles 55 and 56 of that Regulation within a reasonable period of time72 hours.
Amendment 297 #
2020/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 32 – paragraph 3
Article 32 – paragraph 3
3. Where the supervisory authority competent pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 is established in another Member State than the competent authority, the competent authority mayshall inform the supervisory authority established in the same Member State.
Amendment 27 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) The Commission should, before 21 July 2022, present a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Regulation, accompanied where appropriate by a legislative proposal. This review should incorporate in its assessment whether the disclosure regime for EU Recovery prospectuses is appropriate to meet the objectives pursued by this Regulation. This assessment should cover the issue whether the EU Recovery prospectus stroke a proper balance between reduction of administrative burden for the issuer and investor protection.
Amendment 30 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
(2a) in the first subparagraph of Article 6(1), the following point is added: "(ca) climate-related and environmental, social and governance risks, to the extent they are material."
Amendment 31 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 7 – paragraph 12 a – point b a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 12 a – point b a (new)
(ba) available in the official language or at least one of the official languages of the host Member State, or in another language accepted by the competent authority of the host Member State;
Amendment 35 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 14 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 14 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) the essential information on the shares, the rights attached to the securities, including any limitations and procedure for the exercise of those rights, the reasons for the issuance and its impact on the overall capital structure of the issuer, the disclosure of capitalisation and indebtedness, a working capital statement and the use of proceeds.
Amendment 41 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 20 – paragraph 6 a
Article 20 – paragraph 6 a
6a. By way of derogation from paragraphs 2 and 4, the time limits set out in the first subparagraph of paragraph 2 and in paragraph 4 shall be reduced to fiseven working days for an EU Recovery prospectus drawn up in accordance with Article 14a. The issuer shall inform the competent authority at least five working days before the date envisaged for the submission of an application for approval.
Amendment 54 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 48 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 48 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) an analysis of whetherthe impact of the EU Recovery prospectuses strikes a proper balance between investor protection and the reduction of administrative burden for the persons entitled to use it.on investor protection and accessibility of the information;
Amendment 55 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Article 48 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
Article 48 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
(ea) an analysis of the impact of the EU Recovery prospectuses on investor protection and accessibility of the information;
Amendment 69 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I
Annex I
The purpose is to describe the most material risks that are specific to the issuer and the shares, including climate-related and environmental, social and governance risks.
Amendment 70 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I
Annex I
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Annex Va – section V – point b a (new)
Annex Va – section V – point b a (new)
(ba) financial and non-financial objectives and strategy of the issuer in the context of the Covid-19-crisis and ecological transition;
Amendment 71 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I
Annex I
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Annex Va – section VIII a (new)
Annex Va – section VIII a (new)
Amendment 72 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I
Annex I
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Annex Va – section IX – title
Annex Va – section IX – title
IX. Working capital statement and statement on capitalisation and indebtedness
Amendment 73 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I
Annex I
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Annex Va – section IX
Annex Va – section IX
The purpose is to provide information on the issuer’s capitalisation and indebtedness and information as to whether or not the working capital is sufficient for the issuer’s present requirements or, if not,. If there is insufficient capital, a clear description of how the issuer proposes to provide the additional working capital needed is required.
Amendment 74 #
2020/0155(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I a (new)
Annex I a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2017/1129
Annex Va – section IXa (new)
Annex Va – section IXa (new)
IXa. Dividend policy and remuneration A description of the issuer’s policy on dividend distributions, including any restrictions thereon, and a description of the issuer’s remuneration policy, including all benefits awarded to individual directors, fixed and variable remuneration components, the number of shares and share options granted or offered, as well as an explanation on how the remuneration contributes to the business strategy, long-term performance and sustainability of the company.