Activities of Karen MELCHIOR related to 2020/2216(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on shaping the digital future of Europe: removing barriers to the functioning of the digital single market and improving the use of AI for European consumers
Amendments (36)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that across all digital technology domains exists a gender gap putting women at a disadvantage, women account for 30 % of the technology workforce and, 17 % of ICT specialists in Europe and only 12 % in the domain of AI , and that the EU economy would be boosted by EUR 16 billion a year if women technology graduates were not hindered from followeding through to digital jobs at the same rate as men;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. RecogniStresses the importance of a fully functioning digital single market and the usebenefits of AI, robotics and related technologies for EU citizens, since they help to effectively tackle the challenges societies face, in particular during the COVID-19 pandemic;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Maintains that SMEs need to be supported in their digital transformation due to their limited resources; invites, therefore,calls on the Commission to pursue a fitness check for SMEs before publishintroducing legislation and to keep administrative burdens to a minimum by, inter alia, developing standards; asks the Commission to pay specific attention to the needs of start- and scale- ups, which play an important role in the uptake of new technologies in Europe;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Underlines that true access to justice for SMEs requires expertise in the area of law and technology, which is scarce and expensive; calls upon the Commission to integrate the promotion of legal technological expertise in Europe in its digital skills strategy;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that the digital single market and AI are diverse and subject to quick and dynamic developments; urges the Commission to base proposals and initiatives on the right balance avoiding on the one hand an one-size-fits-all approach and on the other hand aeveloping rapidly; highlights the importance therefore of a flexible, future-proof and proportionate European approach; underlines that a new framework should prevent fragmentation of the single market through different national approaches on the other, whilst avoiding becoming one-size-fits-all approach;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Calls on Commission and member states to apply multi-level approach to address the gender gap in all levels of digital education and employment, as well the access to the increasing online services and facilities; Stresses that closing the digital gender gap will increase gender equality not only for the labour market, but also through access to technologies and services;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights that a new regulatory framework for AI is needed in order to deal with the potential risks of autonomous behaviour and to maximise the trust of and the benefit for users; invites the Commission toto maximise the trust of users in the technology; invites the Commission to present a thorough impact assessment which identifies legal gaps in existing laws, followed by a proposeal for a risk- based and innovation- friendly legislative framework for AI that focuses on identifying and closing gaps within existing legislation and beingis coherent with the existing sector-specific legislation;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Recalls that the Covid pandemic has underlined the lack of access to internet, digital technologies and infrastructures in some rural areas making teleworking difficult if not impossible;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3 c. Recalls that teleworking can be an opportunity for women by allowing them to work from home and has the potential to lead to a better work-life balance;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3 d. Calls on the Commission to assist member states to take the necessary steps to ensure that women can benefit from the opportunities telework can provide for an effective balance between paid professional and caregiving responsibilities by ensuring efficient implementation of the work-life balance directive in order to ensure a more equal distribution of caregiving responsibilities in families, as well as ensuring that women have access to the necessary social protection system and childcare;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Is of the firm view that the definitions of ‘AI’ and ‘high-risk’ should be future- proof to ensurare crucial to provide legal clarity forto consumers and businesses and should consider human oversight for high-risk AI applications;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that AI can significantly contribute to promotingovercoming gender discrimination and address the challenges faced by women in order to promote gender equality, provided that an appropriate legal framework is developed, allowing for the elimination of conscious and unconscious biases are eliminated and the respect of the principles of gender equality are respected; stresses the lack of diversity in the AI sector within teams of developers and engineers, and the importance of using sex- disaggregated data when developing products, AI standards, algorithms and applications;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Is convinced that existing legislation needs to be adapted tomodernized to adjust to the introduction of new technologies; asks the Commission to adjust inter alia the Product Liability Directive1 , in particular by redefining the terms ‘product’ and ‘defect’ and considering adjustments to the concept of ‘burden of proof’, which should mirror the modifications to the General Product Safety Directive2 ; _________________ 1 OJ L 210, 7.8.1985, p.29. 2 OJ L 11, 15.1.2002, p. 4.
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Asks the Commission to follow-up on the recommendations of the European Parliament regarding the introduction of a new liability framework for AI- operators and following the results of the impact assessment, consider introducing a strict liability regime for high-risk AI- systems that would guarantee effective protection of consumers across the EU;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Recalls the importance of eliminating unintentional gender discriminatory bias from algorithms and AI applications that perpetuate harmful gender stereotypes, favours the development of ‘gender-biased algorithms’, and lead to the reduced participation of women in the digital, AI and ICT fields; Stresses the need to address the gender innovation bias within the digital sector, whereby the designers and developers of services, software and user applications are mostly men and the users for a large amount are women;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Calls on the Commission to put forward a regulatory framework to address bias, unjustified discrimination and inequalities inherent in high-risk AI systems, including biometric systems; calls for more diversity through an intersectional approach and gender- balance among AI designers, and to ensure sufficient and qualified training to AI designers on the transparency, discrimination, gender stereotypes, racial, and ethnic origin and culture bias;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Outlines that society, including consumers, should benefit from the responsible development and deployment of AI which serves the good of society; asks the Commission, therefore, to define ethical rulenorms for the development, deployment and use of AI, robotics and related technologies taking into account the principles of better regulation; believes that these norms should guarantee the effective protection of European citizen's fundamental and consumer rights;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Highlights that structural gender- bias present in academia, research and business in the digital sectors slows down the career progression for women and reduces their career opportunities, results in an underrepresentation of women in the digital economy; calls on the Commission to ensure that such bias to the largest extent possible are countered during the funding, application and decision-making processes through the design of these as well as calls on the Commission to allocate more funding supporting females academics, researchers and entrepreneurs;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls for special attention to be paid to women and girls as vulnerable consumers and to the rise in cyber violence against women in the digital world, and welcomes the Commission’s proposal on the digital services act (COM(2020)0825), which is addressing these issues.
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Underlines that, for the traifunctioning of the digital single market and the development of AI, the free flow of data within the digital single market is essential and this should be underpinned by the appropriate contractual rule, as well as with third countries, is essential; welcomes Commission’s commitment to build a genuine European single market for data, allowing businesses to start up and scale up, to innovate and compete or cooperate on fair terms;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to increase support for key enablers of the digital economyaim at an innovation-friendly regulatory environment for enablers of the digital economy and to strengthen the financial and institutional support for the European digital economy in close coordination with Member States and stakeholders;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Calls on the Commission to introduce and ensure the implementation of gender mainstreaming in the Digital Single Market Strategy with a view to effectively addressing the under- representation of women ingrowing sectors for the future EU economy.
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission to supportFirmly believes that the European Union should be a frontrunner globally when it comes to the development of AI, and at the same time, should work closely with like-minded countries to coordinate efforts internationally; Welcomes in this respect the ambition to introduce A Global Digital Cooperation Strategy and a Transatlantic AI Agreement; Calls on the Commission to promote the development of international standardization processes to govern the use of AI;
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Highlights that consumers are already benefiting from strong data protection rules such as the GDPR3 and ePrivacy Directive4 ; appreciates that the Commission foresees measures to empower individuals to exercise their rights, which must at least partly be based on civil law; _________________ 3 OJ L 119 4.5.2016, p. 1. 4 OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p.37.
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission to ensure wider coordination of investment in the NextGenerationEU recovery plan; calls on the Commission to propose concrete actions within this plan to support key digital enablers and high impact technologies in the EU;
Amendment 63 #
11. Asks the Commission to ensure that users are properly informed and that their rights arwhen they interact with AI, about the data that it collects and for which use; underlines that their rights offline should also be effectively guaranteed online when they interact with automated decision-making systems and; stresses that automatic decision- making systems shouldo not generate unfairly biased outputs leading to discriminatory decisions for consumers in the single market;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to work to position the EU as leader in the adoption and standardisation process for new technologies; highlights the need to work with industry and also with international partners on setting global standards; in this regard, welcomes the Commission’s proposal from December 2020 for a new transatlantic agenda, which highlights the importance of cooperating with the US on technology and standards;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Urges the Commission to ensure a strong protection for users’ civil law rightof the rights of users in the forth-coming proposal for a Digital Services Act (DSA), particularly in order to protect, inter alia, the freedom of expression and the freedom to provide services, and to protect users fromagainst harmful micro-targeting;
Amendment 75 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. OutlinStresses that it is unacceptable that consumers are exposed to unsafe products and therefore increased responsibilities for online marketplaces are needed; askscalls upon the Commission to set up clear rules forify the responsibility of content hosting platforms for goods sold or advertised on them in the DSA proposal in order to inter alia close the legal gap in which the buyers failed to obtain the satisfaction to which he or she is entitled according to the law or the contract for the supply of goods for example because of the inability to identify the primary sellerto ensure that consumers can effectively exercise their right to redress; Proposes that this should include an obligation for digital services from third countries that are active in the European single market to establish a legal representative within the European Union;
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes that large platforms with significant network effects resulting from for example the data that they possess could act as de facto ‘online gatekeepers’ of the digital economy and urges the Commission to analyse the impact that the power of these large platforms have on the rights of consumers and SMEs., which creates unfair competition disproportionately impacting SMEs; urges the Commission to introduce measures to protect the rights of consumers and SMEs by restoring the level playing field in the internal market;
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Considers that AI is a fast moving technology that requires effective legislation; believes that to 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, a concrete definition of AI is not necessary so that any regulatory measures can remain flexible and adaptable in order to take into account future developments; reminds that there is no common definition on cybersecurity or even the internet;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Believes the regulatory framework needs to build public trust in AI while allowing companies to develop automated systems without losing the confidence of their customersupport the development of trustworthy AI systems and should ensure high consumer protection standards in order to strengthen consumer’s confidence in AI enabled products; believes also that the regulatory framework should ensure transparency, and provide for clear communication of the relevant requirements to both consumers and regulatory authorities;
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Believes that the use of AI in a high-risk AIcontext should be limited to specific and clearly warranted purposes, in full respect of the applicable law and subject to transparency obligations; underlines that thisonly a clear and legally certain legislative framework 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 certain 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 and re-evaluated, given the fast pace of technological development;
Amendment 181 #
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 Commission and the Member States to ensure close cooperation and mutual recognition of decisions when enforcing the Member States to assess the potential benefits and potential harm stemming from high-risk, impactful AI-based projectsregulatory framework in order to prevent a fragmented Single Market;
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Highlights the importance of education and research for AI; calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish an EU centre of excellence for AI; considers that this should be done with the involvement of universities, companies and research institusupports the establishment of the European Network of Artificial Intelligence Excellence Centres; believes that this network should help to strengthen the exchange of knowledge on AI, support AI related talent within the EU and attract new talent, foster the cooperations; believes that such a centre can help totween science and AI developers as well as provide specialised training and development for regulatory authorities;
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Calls on the Commission to update the existing liabiliproduct liability and product safety framework in order to address new challenges posed by emerging digital technologies such as artificial intelligence;