Activities of Javier ZARZALEJOS related to 2020/2022(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Digital Services Act: Improving the functioning of the Single Market - Digital Services Act: adapting commercial and civil law rules for commercial entities operating online - Digital Services Act and fundamental rights issues posed - Framework of ethical aspects of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies - Civil liability regime for artificial intelligence - Intellectual property rights for the development of artificial intelligence technologies (continuation of debate)
Amendments (10)
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
— having regard to the Commission recommendation of 1 March 2018 on measures to effectively tackle illegal content online (C(2018) 1177 final);
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 b (new)
Citation 7 b (new)
— having regard to the Europol Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) of 18 September 2018;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the political approach to tackle harmful and illegal content online in the EU has mainly focused on voluntary cooperation thus far, but a growing number of Member States are adopting national legislation to address illegal content and provisions to address certain types of content were included in recent sectoral legislation at EU level;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas the lack of robust public data on the prevalence and removal of illegal and harmful content online creates a deficit of accountability, both in the private and public sector; this includes the use and underlying source codes of algorithmic processes and how platforms address the erroneous removal of content;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that illegal content online should not only be removed by online platforms, but should be followed up by law enforcement and the judiciary; finds, in this regard, that a key issue in some Member States is not that they have unresolved cases but rather unopened ones; calls for barriers to filing complaints with competent authorities to be removed; is convinced that, given the borderless nature of the internet and the fast dissemination of illegal content online, cooperation between service providers and national competent authorities should be improved; calls, to this end, on Member States to equip their law enforcement and judicial authorities with the necessary expertise, resources and tools to allow them to effectively deal with the increasing number of cases involving illegal content online;
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Acknowledges the fact that, while the illegal nature of certain types of content can be easily established, the decision is more difficult for other types of content as it requires contextualisation; warns that some automated tools are not sophisticated enough to take contextualisation into account, which could lead to unnecessary restrictions being placed on thtakedowns and harm the freedom of expression; highlights that illegal content online can easily be multiplied which greatly amplifies the negative impact within a very short period of time; therefore believes that digital service providers should be allowed to have freedom of expresscourse to automated tools with human oversight to detect, remove or block access to content whose illegality has either been established by a court or can be easily determined without contextualisation;
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Highlights that this should include rules on the notice-and-action mechanisms and requirements for platforms to take proactive measures that are proportionate to their scale of reach and operational capacities in order to effectively address the appearance of illegal content on their services, while leaving the choice of the concrete measures to the platforms; supports a balanced duty-of-care approach and a clear chain of responsibility to avoid unnecessary regulatory burdens for the platforms and unnecessary and disproportionate restrictions on fundamental rights, including the freedom of expression;
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 15 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Maintains that these forms of harmful content include micro targeting based on characteristics exposing physical or psychological vulnerabilities, health related content such as disinformation on COVID-19 causes or remedies and emerging issues such as the organised abuse of multiple platforms, artificial intelligence applications creating fake profiles or manipulating online content; points out that special attention should be paid to harmful content in the context of minors using the internet, especially in regard to their exposure to cyberbullying, sexual harassment, pornography, violence or self-harm;
Amendment 215 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls, in this regard, for a regular public reporting obligation for platforms, proportionate to their scale of reach and operational capacities, more specifically on their content moderation procedures, including standardised data about the amount of content removed and the underlying reasons, the type and justification of removal requests received, the number of requests whose execution was refused and the reasons therefore;
Amendment 221 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls, moreover, for a regular public reporting obligation for national authorities, including standardised data on the number of removal requests and their legal bases, on the number of removal requests which were subject to administrative or judicial remedies, on the outcome of these proceedings, and on the total number of decisions imposing penalties, including a description of the type of penalty imposed;