15 Amendments of Sándor RÓNAI related to 2020/2014(INL)
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) plays an increasing role in our everyday lives and has the potential to contribute to the deployment and development of innovations in many sectors and offer benefits for consumers through innovative products and services and, for businesses, in particular micro, small and medium enterprises (SMEs) through optimised performance;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas for the framework to be appropriate, it must cover all AI-based products and their components, including algorithms, software, and data used or produced by them;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas a common framework for the development, deployment and use of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies within the Union should both protect consumers from their potential risks and promote the trustworthiness of such technologies;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the use, deployment and development of AI applications in products might also present challenges to the existing legal framework on products and reduce their effectivenes protection of consumers, thus potentially undermining consumer trust and welfare due to their specific characteristics;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas robust liability mechanisms remedying damage contribute to better protection of consumers, creation of trust in new technologies integrated in products and acceptance for innovation while ensuring legal certainty for business, in particular micro, small and medium enterprises;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas the Product Liability Directive is the existing regulatory framework on the responsibility for the final product;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission’s aim, which is to make the Union legal framework fit the new technological uses, deployments and developments, ensuring a high level of protection for consumers from harm caused by new technologies based on artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies while maintaining the balance with the needs of technological innovation;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Points out that the revision of the Product Liability Directive should be aligned with and built on the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR);
Amendment 39 #
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 Unioensure a level playing field and to avoid inequalities in consumer protection as each Member state has its own rleguislation remains limited toand it could clrearly identified problems for which feasible solutions exist and leaves room for further technological developmentste unnecessary fragmentation of the single market;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to assess whether definitions and concepts inupdate the product liability framework need to be updated due toin order to consider the specific characteristics of AI applications such as complexity, autonomy and opac, opacity and unpredictability;
Amendment 44 #
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 in line with the spirit of the current Consumer acquis, namely the definition of “good with digital elements’” under the Product LiabilityArticle 2(3) of Directive (EU) 2019/770 (the Digital Content Directive) and “goods” under Article 2(5)(b) of Directive (EU) 2019/771 (the Sale of goods Directive) and to update concepts such as ‘producer’, ‘damage’ and ‘defect’, and if so, to what extent; asks the Commission to also examine whetherurges the Commission to revise 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 particularly as the Product Liability Directive only covers personal injury, and damage to consumer property, while non-material damage, damage to data or other digital assets remain currently uncovered;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to clarify that the scope of the new legislation or the update of the Product Liability Directive should apply to all tangible and non- tangible goods, including digital services;
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls on the Commission to remove notion such “time at which a product is put on the market” which is no longer relevant given the dynamic features of digital goods; points out that currently the producer continues to have control over the product for a long time after having put it onto the market; urges to review the timelines for bringing a claim under the Product Liability Directive;
Amendment 84 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Notes that the new legislation about product liability should also address the challenges algorithms present in terms of ensuring non-discrimination, transparency and explainability, as well as liability; points out the need to monitor algorithms and to asses associated risks, to use high quality and unbiased datasets, as well as to help individuals acquire access to high quality products;
Amendment 88 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Calls on the Commission to propose concreate measures (such a registry of products liability cases) to enhance transparency and to monitor defective product circulating in the EU; it is essential to ensure high consumer protection and a high degree of information about the products that could be purchased.