Activities of Liesje SCHREINEMACHER
Plenary speeches (27)
US tariffs on European goods following WTO's decision on the Airbus dispute (debate)
Public discrimination and hate speech against LGBTI people, including LGBTI free zones (debate)
Crisis of the WTO Appellate Body (debate)
Common charger for mobile radio equipment (debate)
3D-printed illicit objects (debate)
3D-printed illicit objects (debate)
SMEs and better regulation (debate)
SMEs and better regulation (debate)
Proposed mandate for negotiations for a new partnership with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (debate)
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 (debate)
Conclusions of the European Council meeting of 15 and 16 October 2020, in particular the negotiations of the future relations with the UK (debate)
Representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers (debate)
The new LGBTIQ Equality Strategy (continuation of debate)
Elimination of customs duties on certain products (debate)
A new strategy for European SMEs (debate)
Future Relations between the EU and the UK (continuation of debate)
Inauguration of the new President of the United States and the current political situation (debate)
Declaration of the EU as an LGBTIQ Freedom Zone (debate)
Control of exports, brokering, technical assistance, transit and transfer of dual-use (debate)
The EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement - The outcome of EU-UK negotiations (debate)
Digital future of Europe: digital single market and use of AI for European consumers (debate)
State of the SMEs Union – Implementation of better regulation agenda / Reduction target for administrative burden (continuation of debate)
Breaches of EU law and of the rights of LGBTIQ citizens in Hungary as a result of the adopted legal changes in the Hungarian Parliament - The outcome of 22 June hearings under Article 7(1) of the TEU regarding Poland and Hungary (debate)
The future of EU-US relations (debate)
The outcome of the EU-US Trade and Technology Council (TTC) (debate)
Multilateral negotiations in view of the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference in Geneva, 30 November to 3 December 2021 (debate)
Digital Markets Act (debate)
Shadow reports (11)
RECOMMENDATION on the draft Council decision on the Conclusion of the Agreement between the United States of America and the European Union on the Allocation to the United States of a Share in the Tariff Rate Quota for High Quality Beef referred to in the Revised Memorandum of Understanding Regarding the Importation of Beef from Animals Not Treated with Certain Growth-Promoting Hormones and Increased Duties Applied by the United States to Certain Products of the European Union (2014)
REPORT containing a motion for a non-legislative resolution on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement between the United States of America and the European Union on the Allocation to the United States of a Share in the Tariff Rate Quota for High-Quality Beef referred to in the Revised Memorandum of Understanding Regarding the Importation of Beef from Animals Not Treated with Certain Growth-Promoting Hormones and Increased Duties Applied by the United States to Certain Products of the European Union (2014)
REPORT on the European Parliament recommendation on the negotiations for a new partnership with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
REPORT with recommendations to the Commission on a civil liability regime for artificial intelligence
REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the elimination of customs duties on certain products
REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the application of Union tariff rate quotas and other import quotas
RECOMMENDATION FOR SECOND READING on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters (taking of evidence) (recast)
RECOMMENDATION FOR SECOND READING on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers and repealing Directive 2009/22/EC
RECOMMENDATION FOR SECOND READING on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (service of documents) (recast)
REPORT on the implementation of Directive 2009/81/EC, concerning procurement in the fields of defence and security, and of Directive 2009/43/EC, concerning the transfer of defence-related products
SECOND REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the access of third-country goods and services to the Union’s internal market in public procurement and procedures supporting negotiations on access of Union goods and services to the public procurement markets of third countries
Opinions (1)
OPINION on a new strategy for European SMEs
Shadow opinions (2)
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
OPINION on the future of EU-US relations
Institutional motions (9)
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on patentability of plants and essentially biological processes
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION On the situation of LGBTI people in Uganda
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the effects of the bankruptcy of the Thomas Cook Group
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the EU’s accession to the Istanbul Convention and other measures to combat gender-based violence
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on public discrimination and hate speech against LGBTI people, including LGBTI free zones
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on a common charger as provided for in Article 3(3)(a) of the Radio Equipment Directive
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on a common charger for mobile radio equipment
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on meeting the global COVID-19 challenge: effects of the waiver of the WTO TRIPS Agreement on COVID-19 vaccines, treatment, equipment and increasing production and manufacturing capacity in developing countries
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on breaches of EU law and of the rights of LGBTIQ citizens in Hungary as a result of the legal changes adopted by the Hungarian Parliament
Oral questions (2)
Implementation of the better regulation agenda/reduction target for administrative burdens
Breaches of EU law and of the rights of LGBTIQ citizens in Hungary as a result of the adopted legal changes in the Hungarian Parliament
Written explanations (37)
Draft general budget of the European Union for 2020 - all sections
De Europese begroting voor 2020 legt meer nadruk op prioriteiten die voor de VVD belangrijk zijn, zoals digitalisering, ondersteuning van het midden- en kleinbedrijf, investeringen in een betaalbaar en behapbaar klimaatbeleid en het migratie- en veiligheidsbeleid. De VVD betreurt het echter dat alle budgetten worden verhoogd zonder dat er wordt gekeken waar er kan worden bespaard. Daarnaast worden marges en flexibiliteit zodanig benut dat er beperkte ruimte overblijft voor onvoorziene omstandigheden. Hierbij kan gedacht worden aan budget dat beschikbaar moet zijn in geval van een natuurramp, veiligheidsdreiging, humanitaire crisis of migratiecrisis. Daarom heeft de VVD deze resolutie niet kunnen steunen.
2020 budgetary procedure: joint text (A9-0035/2019 - Monika Hohlmeier, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial)
De Europese begroting voor 2020 legt meer nadruk op prioriteiten die voor de VVD belangrijk zijn, zoals digitalisering, ondersteuning van het MKB, investeringen in een betaalbaar en behapbaar klimaatbeleid en het migratie- en veiligheidsbeleid. De VVD betreurt het echter dat alle budgetten worden opgehoogd zonder dat er wordt gekeken waar er kan worden bespaard. Daarnaast worden marges en flexibiliteit zodanig benut dat er beperkte ruimte overblijft voor onvoorziene omstandigheden. Hierbij kan gedacht worden aan budget dat beschikbaar moet zijn in geval van een natuurramp, veiligheidsdreiging, een humanitaire of migratiecrisis. Daarom heeft de VVD deze begroting niet kunnen steunen.
2019 UN Climate Change Conference (COP25) (B9-0174/2019)
De VVD heeft voor de resolutie over de COP25 gestemd. Bij de stemming over amendement 32 heeft de delegatie zich echter onthouden, en dit omdat zowel de originele tekst van paragraaf 64 als amendement 32 tegenstrijdigheden bevatten waar de VVD niet akkoord mee kan gaan.In amendement 32 werd de doelstelling van de maritieme sector om tegen 2023 maatregelen op korte en middellange termijn te nemen, geschrapt. Het is noodzakelijk dat de maritieme sector zelf met maatregelen komt, en dit ten laatste in het jaar 2023. Toch kan de VVD niet akkoord gaan met de visie in paragraaf 64 dat de maritieme sector sowieso wordt opgenomen in het emissiehandelssysteem.Wij geloven in een internationale aanpak die zou moeten vertrekken vanuit de Internationale Maritieme Organisatie. Mocht dit niet lukken tegen 2023, dan zien we wel een mogelijkheid om tot Europese maatregelen over te gaan. Een handelsemissiesysteem is een van de mogelijkheden die dan bekeken kunnen worden, mits er eerst een grondige effectbeoordeling wordt verricht.
Gender pay gap (B9-0069/2020, B9-0073/2020, B9-0083/2020, B9-0084/2020)
De VVD heeft zich vandaag onthouden van stemming bij de resolutie over de loonkloof tussen mannen en vrouwen. Hoewel de VVD volledig instemt met het principe “gelijk loon voor gelijk werk” en tegen elke vorm van discriminatie is, zijn bindende en wetgevende maatregelen volgens ons niet het geëigende middel om de loonkloof te dichten. Lidstaten moeten er allereerst zelf voor zorgen dat vrouwen niet worden achtergesteld op de arbeidsmarkt. Hiervoor hoeft niet direct naar de Europese Commissie te worden gekeken.Verder acht de VVD het niet de taak van de Europese Commissie om richtlijnen op te stellen voor een genderneutrale evaluatie van banen en voor het opzetten van een classificatiesysteem om de “waarde” van werk te bepalen.
Competition policy - annual report 2019 (A9-0022/2020 - Stéphanie Yon-Courtin)
Betreft amendement 27:Voor oneerlijke concurrentie en vijandige overnames in Europa, vanuit vooral China, zijn stevige maatregelen nodig. Een eenzijdig verbod op alle overnames door bedrijven uit alle niet-EU-landen die banden hebben met een staat, waar dit amendement toe oproept, is daarvoor niet de oplossing en is bovendien onrealistisch. We hebben een juridisch houdbaar instrumentarium nodig dat complementair is aan onze open economie én ons bedrijfsleven beschermt tegen oneerlijke praktijken. Daar moeten we de aandacht op richten. Daarom heeft de VVD-fractie tegen dit amendement van de tekst gestemd.
The reopening of the investigation against the Prime Minister of the Czech Republic on the misuse of EU funds and potential conflicts of interest (B9-0192/2020)
De VVD-fractie hecht zeer veel waarde aan het voorkomen en tegengaan van belangenverstrengeling en misbruik van EU-gelden, en steunt daarom ook de oproep in de resolutie om wanpraktijken aan te pakken. Wij hechten ook aan het principe dat iemand onschuldig is tot het tegendeel is bewezen. In deze resolutie worden al conclusies getrokken over een nog lopend onderzoek. Zolang het onafhankelijke onderzoek nog loopt, is het voorbarig om als Europees Parlement een oordeel te vellen. Daarom heeft de VVD-fractie zich op de eindstemming onthouden van stemming. Mochten er uit het onderzoek wanpraktijken naar voren komen, zal de VVD-fractie deze ten strengste veroordelen.
Conclusions of the extraordinary European Council meeting of 17-21 July 2020 (B9-0229/2020)
. – De VVD-delegatie in het Europees Parlement verwelkomt in deze resolutie, samen met een ruime meerderheid in het Europees Parlement, de uitkomst van de bijeenkomst van de Europese Raad (17-21 juli) en de overeenstemming die daar is bereikt over het Europees budget (2021-2027) en het herstelfonds. In het akkoord van de Raad is een juiste balans bereikt tussen solidair en verstandig beleid, waarbij landen die zwaar getroffen zijn door de uitbraak van COVID-19 de benodigde steun krijgen, op voorwaarde dat deze landen door middel van hervormingen toekomstige economische weerbaarheid bewerkstelligen.De VVD-delegatie heeft echter tegen tekstonderdelen van de resolutie gestemd die oproepen tot een verdere uitbreiding van het pakket aan eigen middelen ten opzichte van de conclusies van de Europese Raad en kan ook de oproep tot afschaffing van kortingen voor lidstaten die netto meer afdragen aan de EU niet ondersteunen. De VVD ondersteunt wel de oproep in deze resolutie om de Europese begroting te moderniseren en geld te herschikken naar nieuwe prioriteiten als migratie, veiligheid, innovatie klimaat en de digitale transitie. Het is van belang dat Europa nu snel aan de slag kan om sterker uit deze crisis te komen.
Draft Council decision on the system of own resources of the European Union (A9-0146/2020 - José Manuel Fernandes, Valerie Hayer)
De VVD-delegatie in het Europees Parlement heeft vandaag tegen het verslag over eigen middelen in de Europese Unie gestemd. De VVD kan de oproep van het Europees Parlement niet steunen als het gaat om de invoering van nieuwe Europese belastingen.De Europese Raad is tijdens de vergadering van 17-21 juli jl. tot een akkoord gekomen, onder andere over hoe de Europese begroting gefinancierd moet worden. De VVD-fractie steunt dit akkoord, maar acht de oproep tot een (juridisch bindende) invoering van bijvoorbeeld een Financiële Transactietaks (FTT) en een Europese vennootschapsbelasting niet opportuun.
Implementation of the common commercial policy – annual report 2018 (A9-0160/2020 - Jörgen Warborn)
De VVD-delegatie steunt een groot deel van het jaarverslag 2018 over de tenuitvoerlegging van het gemeenschappelijk handelsbeleid. Het verslag kijkt onder andere naar de impact van COVID-19 op handel, roept op om de Wereldhandelsorganisatie te hervormen en verwelkomt de nieuwe handelsverdragen met landen zoals Japan en Singapore. Het verslag erkent het belang van handel op basis van regels en een multilateraal handelssysteem. Die ambitie steunt de VVD ten zeerste.Een aantal onderdelen van dit verslag kan de VVD echter niet steunen, zoals een oproep in het kader van eigen middelen voor onder andere een “Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base”. Verder roept dit verslag op om de ratificatie van het EU-Mercosur-akkoord voortijdig uit te sluiten. Deze oproep kan de VVD niet steunen. Handelsakkoorden zorgen voor welvaart en hogere standaarden, bijvoorbeeld op het gebied van milieu en arbeidsnormen. Dit was voor de VVD-delegatie reden om zich te onthouden op de eindstemming. Europa en Nederland hebben baat bij een ambitieus Europees handelsbeleid, juist in tijden van deze coronacrisis en de economische gevolgen hiervan.
Further development of the Capital Markets Union (CMU): improving access to capital market finance, in particular by SMEs, and further enabling retail investor participation (A9-0155/2020 - Isabel Benjumea Benjumea)
Vandaag heeft in het Europees Parlement een stemming plaatsgevonden over de ontwikkeling van de Europese kapitaalmarktenunie. De VVD is groot voorstander van dit dossier, daar het als doelstelling heeft om de Europese economie minder afhankelijk te maken van enkel bancaire financiering. In algemene zin steunt de VVD de voorstellen in dit verslag die gericht zijn op een versterking en verdieping van de kapitaalmarkten in de EU, aangezien deze bijdragen aan economische groei en financiële stabiliteit.Met enkele onderdelen van het verslag, zoals bijvoorbeeld de invoering van een Europese vennootschapsbelasting en het creëren van een veilig Europees vermogensbestanddeel, kan de VVD echter niet instemmen. De VVD-delegatie heeft zich vandaag daarom onthouden van stemming.
Reinforcing the Youth Guarantee (B9-0310/2020)
Vandaag is er in het Europees Parlement gestemd over de toekomst van de Europese jongerengarantie, een initiatief om werkloze jongeren zo snel mogelijk aan een baan of opleiding te helpen. In deze tijden is dit zeker ook een belangrijk onderwerp. De VVD ondersteunt een voortvarende aanpak van jeugdwerkloosheid van harte.Uiteindelijk heeft de VVD-delegatie zich toch onthouden bij de eindstemming. De resolutie vraagt om van de jongerengarantie een bindend instrument voor alle lidstaten te maken, opgelegd en gecontroleerd door de EU. Dit gaat de VVD-delegatie te ver. Daarnaast vraagt de resolutie om nog eens extra middelen voor het ESF+, en zouden alle lidstaten nog eens 3 % vanuit het ESF+ moeten besteden aan de aanpak van jeugdwerkloosheid. Dit zou ook gelden voor lidstaten waar de jeugdwerkloosheid relatief laag is.
Deforestation (A9-0179/2020 - Delara Burkhardt)
Bossen en regenwouden spelen een belangrijke rol in het tegengaan van klimaatverandering. De VVD onderschrijft dan ook de doelstelling van het verslag om Europese bossen beter te beschermen door ontbossing te reguleren en heeft daarom voor het verslag gestemd. De hoofdstukken over due diligence heeft de VVD echter niet gesteund, omdat deze een voorschot nemen op het duediligencevoorstel van de Commissie dat volgend jaar wordt verwacht en een horizontale duediligenceverplichting zal introduceren. De VVD geeft de voorkeur aan een consequente duediligenceaanpak om fragmentatie in de EU-wetgeving te voorkomen.
Gender Equality in EU’s foreign and security policy (A9-0145/2020 - Ernest Urtasun)
Vandaag heeft het Europees Parlement gestemd over gendergelijkheid in het buitenlands en veiligheidsbeleid van de EU. De VVD-delegatie onderschrijft het belang van gelijke rechten en gelijke kansen voor mannen en vrouwen en staat positief tegenover verhoging van de participatie van vrouwen in het buitenlands en veiligheidsbeleid van de EU. Een aantal onderdelen van dit verslag kan de VVD echter niet steunen, zoals quota voor de deelname van vrouwen aan controle-, evaluatie- en toezichtmechanismen, de eis dat 85 % van de officiële ontwikkelingshulp (ODA) moet worden besteed aan programma’s waarin gendergelijkheid de hoofddoelstelling is en het streefdoel van 50 % vrouwen in leidinggevende functies. Ook acht de VVD het niet werkbaar en/of veilig dat op alle EU-ambassades een gendermedewerker ongelimiteerde toegang dient te krijgen tot informatiestromen inclusief geclassificeerde informatie. De VVD-delegatie heeft daarom vandaag tegen dit verslag gestemd.
Common agricultural policy – amendment of the CMO and other Regulations (A8-0198/2019 - Eric Andrieu)
Vandaag heeft het Europees Parlement gestemd over de regels voor producten en samenwerking in de landbouwsector. Het is goed dat er meer mogelijkheden komen om duurzaamheidsinitiatieven in de keten te realiseren. De VVD heeft zich echter onthouden van stemming over dit verslag omdat een aantal voorstellen verregaand ingrijpt in de vrijemarktwerking.
The impact of Covid-19 measures on democracy, fundamental rights and rule of law (B9-0343/2020)
. ‒ De leden van de VVD-delegatie steunen de geest van de resolutie, namelijk: de pandemie waarin we ons momenteel bevinden mag nooit of te nimmer een excuus zijn om verworven democratische rechten en vrijheden op disproportionele wijze in te perken. De delegatie heeft zich tijdens de eindstemming niettemin van stemming onthouden omdat zij aangenomen amendement 19, waarin wordt opgeroepen tot onmiddellijke evacuatie en herverdeling van asielzoekers op de Griekse eilanden, niet kan steunen.De VVD zet zich in voor een duurzame oplossing voor de erbarmelijke omstandigheden op de Griekse eilanden, onder andere door middel van financiële en operationele ondersteuning. Volledige evacuatie en herverdeling als ad-hocmaatregel draagt wat de VVD-delegatie betreft niet bij aan het op de lange termijn verbeteren van de situatie.
Towards a more sustainable single market for business and consumers (A9-0209/2020 - David Cormand)
Vandaag heeft het Europees Parlement gestemd over het verslag “Naar een duurzamer eengemaakte markt voor het bedrijfsleven en consumenten”. De VVD vindt het belangrijk dat we werk maken van een duurzamere interne markt en een circulaire economie. Het verslag geeft goede aanbevelingen op het gebied van duurzame criteria bij openbare aanbestedingen, het versterken van de rol van het EU-milieukeurmerk en het beter afstemmen van de duur van wettelijke garanties op de levensduur van productcategorieën. De VVD-delegatie kan een aantal voorstellen, zoals de verplichte etikettering en voortijdige afschrijving van producten, echter niet steunen. Daarom heeft de delegatie zich onthouden van stemming bij de eindstemming.
A New Industrial Strategy for Europe (A9-0197/2020 - Carlo Calenda)
Nederland is een klein en open handelsland. De open economie van Europa brengt ons grote welvaart en is daarom van groot belang. Hoewel het belangrijk is om niet naïef te zijn over de agressieve economische politiek van landen zoals China, moet Europa fundamenteel een open en vrije markt blijven, die gebaseerd is op wederkerigheid. Dit rapport introduceert een interpretatie van de term “strategische autonomie”, die neigt naar protectionisme. Bovendien wordt opgeroepen tot directe Europese belastingen en andere onwenselijke Europese wet- en regelgeving. Daarom hebben we tegen deze resolutie gestemd.
Stocktaking of European elections (A9-0211/2020 - Pascal Durand)
De leden van de VVD-delegatie delen het standpunt dat de Europese Unie aan democratische legitimiteit kan winnen, maar denken anders over de aanpak. Voorstellen als die over transnationale lijsten en spitzenkandidaten kunnen de afstand van de EU tot de burger vergroten, terwijl de VVD vindt dat we die afstand juist moeten gaan verkleinen. Het organiseren van verkiezingen, inclusief beslissingen over bijvoorbeeld kiesgerechtigden, is daarnaast een nationale competentie en dient dit te blijven. Daarom heeft de VVD-delegatie dit rapport niet kunnen steunen.
Situation of Fundamental Rights in the European Union - Annual Report for the years 2018-2019 (A9-0226/2020 - Clare Daly)
Het Europees Parlement heeft gestemd over een jaarverslag over grondrechten in de EU. Het verslag-Daly heeft betrekking op 2018-2019 en geeft, wat de VVD betreft, terecht een brede dwarsdoorsnede van de naleving van grondrechten in de EU. Dit is noodzakelijk om lessen te trekken voor de toekomst. Een aantal aangenomen tekstvoorstellen – met name op gebied van migratie – kunnen we echter niet steunen. Daarom heeft de VVD-delegatie zich onthouden van stemming op het eindverslag.
Sustainable corporate governance (A9-0240/2020 - Pascal Durand)
De VVD-delegatie ziet de herziening van de richtlijn niet-financiële verslaggeving (RNFV) als een kans om transparantie over de impact van bedrijven op onze leefomgeving te vergroten en tegelijkertijd hun administratieve lasten te verlagen. Het initiatiefverslag gaat echter verder dan dat, bijvoorbeeld door belanghebbenden vergaande inspraakrechten in de bedrijfsvoering te geven en de verwijzing naar vrouwenquota in het voorstel. De voorgestelde maatregelen riskeren de administratieve druk voor bedrijven juist te vergroten, maar solide bewijs voor de effectiviteit van die maatregelen ontbreekt. De VVD kan het verslag daarom niet steunen.
Monitoring the application of EU law 2017, 2018 and 2019 (A9-0270/2020 -Sabrina Pignedoli)
De VVD onderschrijft de conclusie van het verslag, namelijk dat de tenuitvoerlegging van Europees recht in de lidstaten kan worden verbeterd. Dit zal fragmentatie tegengaan en de rechtszekerheid en rechtsbescherming van burgers en bedrijven ten goede komen. Hoewel de VVD amendement 12 van de ID-Fractie inhoudelijk steunt, namelijk dat belastingzaken een nationale bevoegdheid zijn en moeten blijven, valt dit amendement buiten de reikwijdte van het verslag. De VVD heeft zich daarom op dit punt onthouden.
Human Rights and Democracy in the World and the EU policy on the matter - annual report 2019 (A9-0259/2020 - Isabel Santos)
Vandaag heeft het Europees Parlement gestemd over het verslag Mensenrechten en democratie in de wereld, jaarverslag 2019. De VVD ondersteunt de overgrote meerderheid van de uitgangspunten in dit verslag. De VVD staat pal voor mensenrechten, democratische waarden en de vrijheden van media, geloof en geaardheid. Helaas zijn er echter ook een aantal onderdelen die de VVD niet kan steunen. Een uitbreiding van het Statuut van Rome met ‘ecocide’ vindt de VVD contraproductief omdat het de slagvaardigheid van het Internationaal Strafhof ondermijnt en omdat het benodigde draagvlak om dit te realiseren ontbreekt. Ook vindt de VVD de uitgangspunten over migratie in dit verslag onevenwichtig, omdat er bijvoorbeeld geen aandacht is voor terugkeer en opvang in de regio. Een ander aspect is dat de VVD de introductie van een nieuwe Europese aansprakelijkheidsplicht voor vennootschappen niet steunt, omdat dit primair een nationale competentie is en de gevolgen voor de concurrentiepositie voor Europese bedrijven onvoldoende duidelijk zijn. De VVD-delegatie heeft zich vandaag daarom onthouden bij de stemming over dit verslag.
The right to disconnect (A9-0246/2020 - Alex Agius Saliba)
Door technologische ontwikkeling en verdergaande digitalisering zijn we steeds makkelijker bereikbaar, en daar komt nu het vele vanuit huis werken nog bij. Dit brengt stress en extra druk met zich mee en maakt de scheidslijn tussen werk en privé vager. De VVD vindt het daarom van belang dat er goede afspraken worden gemaakt tussen werkgever en werknemer over werktijden en bereikbaarheid. Dat betekent ook dat een werknemer de telefoon moet kunnen wegleggen, of uitschakelen, na werktijd. Maar dit kan voor ieder bedrijf of elke werksituatie anders zijn. Hiervoor bestaat in de ogen van de VVD geen Europese blauwdruk. In het verslag waarover vandaag is gestemd, wordt primair nieuwe, extra Europese wetgeving gevraagd. De VVD is van mening dat bestaande Europese wet- en regelgeving voldoende houvast biedt voor regels rondom een goede balans tussen werk en privéleven. Daarnaast moet er wat de VVD betreft op lidstaatniveau ruimte blijven voor afspraken tussen werkgevers en werknemers over hoe om te gaan met de balans tussen werk en privéleven. Daarom heeft de VVD vandaag tegen dit verslag gestemd. Niet vanwege het belang van het onderwerp, maar vanwege de oproep tot extra Europese wet- en regelgeving.
Reforming the EU list of tax havens (B9-0052/2021)
Het Europees Parlement heeft vandaag gestemd over een resolutie over de herziening van de EU-lijst van belastingparadijzen. De VVD-delegatie steunt de oproep in de resolutie om belastingparadijzen aan te pakken, alsmede de wens tot meer transparantie in de totstandkoming van de EU-lijst van belastingparadijzen. De VVD kan belangrijke onderdelen van de resolutie niet steunen, zoals het opgeven van unanimiteit bij besluitvorming over belastingdossiers en het automatisch aanmerken van een lidstaat als belastingparadijs indien de landspecifieke aanbevelingen op belastinggebied onvoldoende worden opgevolgd. Daarnaast moet de discussie over een minimumniveau aan belastingen in OESO-verband worden gevoerd, zonder dat de Europese Unie op deze uitkomst vooruitloopt. De VVD-delegatie heeft zich vandaag daarom onthouden van stemming.
A WTO-compatible EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (A9-0019/2021 - Yannick Jadot)
De VVD is voor een Europese CO2-grensheffing om oneerlijke concurrentie op mondiaal niveau te voorkomen. Een betrouwbare en transparante wijze om CO2 te berekenen is hierbij van belang. De opbrengsten van deze heffing kunnen echter niet gebruikt worden als Europese belastinginkomsten. Daarom heeft VVD zich onthouden van stemming bij de eindstemming over het initiatiefverslag van het Europees Parlement over een mechanisme voor koolstofcorrectie aan de grens.
Corporate due diligence and corporate accountability (A9-0018/2021 - Lara Wolters)
De VVD vindt dat bedrijven een maatschappelijke verantwoordelijkheid hebben. Europese afspraken over ketenverantwoordelijkheid kunnen hierbij een goed middel zijn om eerlijke handel te stimuleren zonder de concurrentiepositie van bedrijven te schaden. Om de effectiviteit van een dergelijk instrument te kunnen garanderen, is het belangrijk dat de regels proportioneel en voldoende duidelijk zijn. In dit verslag is hier te weinig sprake van, onder andere waar het gaat om een zorgplicht voor niet alleen de toevoerketen, maar de gehele waardeketen, inclusief horizontale relaties. De VVD heeft zich daarom van stemming onthouden bij de stemming over dit verslag, maar ziet de aangekondigde wetsvoorstellen van de Europese Commissie met belangstelling tegemoet.
Children's Rights (B9-0164/2021)
Het Europees Parlement heeft door middel van een resolutie haar mening gegeven over de “EU-strategie voor de rechten van het kind”. Deze strategie moet het kader vormen voor wat de EU doet om de rechten van het kind te bevorderen en beschermen. Als het gaat om rechten van kwetsbare kinderen en de bestrijding van geweld, vraagt het Europees Parlement in de ogen van de VVD terecht aandacht voor onder andere de aanpak van kindhuwelijken en de helaas nog steeds bestaande vreselijke praktijk – ook binnen de EU – van genitale verminking van jonge meisjes. Het Europees Parlement roept de lidstaten echter ook op om voor kinderen die zich op dit moment in bijvoorbeeld IS-kampen bevinden de terugkeer naar landen van herkomst te faciliteren. Daarom heeft de VVD-delegatie zich onthouden van stemming.
New EU-Africa Strategy (A9-0017/2021 - Chrysoula Zacharopoulou)
Stemverklaring over de strategie tussen de EU en Afrika. De VVD onderschrijft het belang van een versterkte samenwerking tussen de Europese Unie en het Afrikaanse continent. In dit verslag wordt terecht de aandacht gevestigd op gezamenlijke uitdagingen op belangrijke gebieden, zoals handel, klimaatverandering en veiligheid. Het creëren van nieuwe eigen middelen om een verhoging van de begroting voor ontwikkelingssamenwerking te bekostigen, is echter iets waar de VVD niet achter kan staan. Ook wordt in het verslag een voorschot genomen op de inhoud van het wetsvoorstel voor Europese ketenverantwoordelijkheid, iets waar de VVD niet op vooruit wil lopen. Ten slotte deelt de VVD-delegatie het standpunt niet dat een EU-reddingsmissie op zee in de context van migratie civiel dient te zijn. De regie moet bij de autoriteiten liggen. De VVD-delegatie heeft zich om bovenstaande redenen onthouden van stemming bij dit verslag.
Accelerating progress and tackling inequalities towards ending AIDS as a public health threat by 2030 (B9-0263/2021)
De VVD steunt de strijd tegen hiv/aids en pleit voor een gecoördineerde, mondiale EU-strategie om deze vreselijke ziekte wereldwijd terug te dringen. Daarom heeft de VVD met volle overtuiging voor deze resolutie van het Europees Parlement gestemd, waarin de strijd tegen hiv/aids centraal staat.De VVD heeft niettemin tegen een amendement gestemd waarin wordt opgeroepen tot de tijdelijke opheffing van de octrooirechten voor coronavaccins.Deze specifieke oproep valt buiten de reikwijdte van dit verslag. De VVD heeft hier dan ook tegen gestemd, omdat de partij van oordeel is dat eerst moet worden gekeken naar de verhoging van productiecapaciteit, de verzekering van de levering van de juiste grondstoffen en het verkrijgen van de nodige knowhow en technologieën om vaccins te produceren.
EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030: Bringing nature back into our lives (A9-0179/2021 - César Luena)
De VVD is voor een ambitieuze aanpak voor biodiversiteitsherstel en steunt de biodiversiteitstrategie van de Europese Commissie in grote lijnen. De positie van het Parlement gaat echter te ver in het voorschrijven van middelen en laat weinig ruimte over voor subsidiariteit. Voor biodiversiteitsherstel is een gebiedsgerichte aanpak en ruimte voor lokale implementatie cruciaal. Bindende restauratiedoelen stellen op lidstaatniveau, eenzijdig inzetten op biologische landbouw en het beperken van bodemroerende visserij helpen hier niet bij. Daarom heeft de VVD onthouden op deze eindstemming.
Meeting the Global Covid-19 challenge: effects of waiver of the WTO TRIPS agreement on Covid-19 vaccines, treatment, equipment and increasing production and manufacturing capacity in developing countries (RC-B9-0306/2021, B9-0306/2021, B9-0307/2021, B9-0308/2021, B9-0309/2021, B9-0310/2021, B9-0311/2021)
Er moet zo snel mogelijk een einde komen aan de coronacrisis. Daar hoort een strategie bij die ervoor zorgt dat iedereen zo snel mogelijk gevaccineerd kan worden. Hoewel de VVD zich kan vinden in een aantal voorstellen in deze resolutie, zoals het delen van kennis en technologietransfers op vrijwillige basis alsook het aanpakken van drempels in de import en export van kostbare grondstoffen, heeft de VVD tegen deze resolutie gestemd. Volgens de VVD leidt een TRIPS-waiver op de korte termijn niet tot meer productie van vaccins als de specifieke kennis, vaardigheid en specialisme niet aanwezig zijn. Bescherming van intellectueel eigendom is juist een voorwaarde voor onderzoek en innovatie die nodig zijn voor het ontwikkelen van vaccins en andere medicijnen. Ook als we in de toekomst nieuwe vaccins nodig hebben om nieuwe varianten van het Covid-19 virus tegen te gaan. Het is daarom belangrijk dat we ons richten op het verhogen van productiecapaciteit en het beschikbaar stellen van de nodige grondstoffen zodat er daadwerkelijk voldoende vaccins beschikbaar zijn voor iedereen.
Trade related aspects and implications of COVID-19 (A9-0190/2021 - Kathleen Van Brempt)
De coronacrisis heeft het belang van handelssamenwerking verder onderstreept. Handel kan ervoor zorgen dat de juiste middelen voor zoveel mogelijk mensen beschikbaar zijn. Daartegenover staat dat de geopolitieke context tijdens de coronacrisis is veranderd en de EU ook assertiever moet worden.Hoewel de VVD zich kan vinden in een aantal voorstellen in dit rapport, zoals het aanpakken van de tekorten van kostbare grondstoffen en het creëren van nieuwe handelsinstrumenten, heeft de VVD tegen dit rapport gestemd.Volgens de VVD leidt een TRIPS-waiver op de korte termijn niet tot meer productie van vaccins als de specifieke kennis, vaardigheid en specialisme niet aanwezig zijn. Bescherming van intellectueel eigendom is juist een voorwaarde voor onderzoek en innovatie die nodig zijn voor het ontwikkelen van vaccins en andere medicijnen.Daarnaast kan de VVD zich niet vinden in een aantal andere voorstellen die handelssamenwerking kunnen belemmeren, zoals het stellen van te strenge eisen aan het sluiten en ratificeren van handelsverdragen.
Breaches of EU law and of the rights of LGBTIQ citizens in Hungary as a result of the adopted legal changes in the Hungarian Parliament (B9-0412/2021, B9-0413/2021)
On 15 June 2021, the Hungarian Parliament voted in favour of amendments proposed by Fidesz MPs that severely restrict freedom of speech and children’s rights. The Law prohibits the ‘portrayal and promotion of gender identity different from sex assigned at birth, the change of sex and homosexuality’ in schools, in television programmes and in publicly available advertisements on any platforms for persons aged under 18, even for educational purposes; the Law disqualifies such content from being considered as a public service announcement or social responsibility advertisement even if intended for adults; the Law introduces amendments to the Child Protection Act, the Family Protection Act, the Act on Business Advertising Activity, the Media Act and the Public Education Act.I consider this Law to be in breach of EU law and of the rights of LGBTIQ citizens in Hungary, in particular the freedom to provide services and freedom of movement of goods as set out in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the Audiovisual Media Services Directive and E-commerce Directive in conjunction with the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Therefore I voted in favour of the resolution ‘Breaches of EU law and of the rights of LGBTIQ citizens in Hungary as a result of the legal changes adopted in the Hungarian Parliament’.
Objection pursuant to Rule 111(3): Technical screening criteria for determining the conditions under which an economic activity qualifies as contributing substantially to climate change mitigation or climate change adaptation and for determining whether that economic activity causes no significant harm to any of the other environmental objectives (B9-0476/2021, B9-0477/2021)
De VVD erkent de waarde van taxonomy als instrument om duurzame investeringen te bevorderen. De VVD is echter ook van mening dat de taxonomy, zoals voorgesteld, niet volledig is. Kernenergie verdient er een plek. Kernenergie is de enige CO2-vrije energiebron die betrouwbaar dag en nacht, in elk seizoen, en overal ter wereld, energie kan leveren. De Commissie komt over een aantal maanden met een nieuwe gedelegeerde handeling. De VVD is van mening dat kernenergie daar als duurzaam aangemerkt moet worden. Instemmen met de huidige moties zou er toe leiden dat de implementatie van de gehele taxonomy vertraagd wordt. Dit is onwenselijk, want daarmee worden duurzame investeringen belemmerd, investeringen die juist ook kansen bieden voor Nederland. Daarom stemt de VVD tegen deze moties, en zet vol in op het opnemen van kernenergie in de volgende gedelegeerde handeling.
Reforming the EU policy on harmful tax practices (including the reform of the Code of Conduct Group) (A9-0245/2021 - Aurore Lalucq)
De VVD is van mening dat schadelijke belastingpraktijken moeten worden aangepakt, omdat daarmee het gelijk speelveld wordt gehandhaafd en economische concurrentie wordt bevorderd. De VVD is dan ook van mening dat de hierop betrekking hebbende wet- en regelgeving actueel moet blijven. Echter, de VVD hecht grote waarde aan de nationale bevoegdheid die geldt voor belastingaangelegenheden en is van mening dat bindende instrumenten hiermee in strijd kunnen zijn. De voorgestelde hervorming van de Code of Conduct tornt daarmee aan het principe van nationale competentie. De VVD onthoudt zich daarom van stemming over het verslag.
Farm to Fork Strategy (A9-0271/2021 - Anja Hazekamp, Herbert Dorfmann)
De “van boer tot bord”-strategie omvat ambitieuze doelen om de voedselproductie van Europa te verduurzamen. De VVD ondersteunt de ambities van de strategie in grote lijnen, maar vindt het niet aanvaardbaar dat de doelen van de strategie vastgesteld zijn zonder te kijken naar de haalbaarheid ervan en de impact op de productie, economie en het milieu. Hoewel het verslag van het parlement goede kanttekeningen plaatst, roept het nog steeds op om de doelen bindend te maken. Daarnaast wordt ook opgeroepen om de ratificatie van de handelsovereenkomst tussen de EU en Mercosur voortijdig uit te sluiten. Daarom heeft de VVD zich van stemming onthouden bij de eindstemming over dit verslag.
Cooperation on the fight against organised crime in the Western Balkans (A9-0298/2021 - Lukas Mandl)
De VVD verwelkomt het rapport dat de georganiseerde misdaar en corruptie met betrekking tot de Westelijke Balkanlanden aan de kaak stelt. Het is belangrijk dat de georganiseerde misdaad en corruptie beter worden bestreden met concrete voorstellen, waaronder door internationale en regionale samenwerking verder te stimuleren, door ondersteuning vanuit de EU aan te bieden en door noodzakelijke hervormingen aan te bevelen. Echter, in het rapport staat ook dat Kosovo heeft voldaan aan alle benodigde eisen om voor visumliberalisatie in aanmerking te komen. Hier verschilt de VVD van mening, aangezien Kosovo nog niet de vereiste vooruitgang op de rechtsstaat heeft aangetoond. Desondanks heeft de VVD-fractie besloten het rapport te steunen omdat het grootste gedeelte te onderschrijven is.
Written questions (43)
An integrated EU approach towards China, including trade, competition and procurement
Consequences for European industry of measures safeguarding steel
Cheap parcels from China
An integrated European approach towards China's unfair trading practices
Rights of LGBT persons in Brunei
Review of public procurement directive
Patent Assertion Entities (PAEs)
Rules of origin after Brexit
Alleged 'LGBTI-free zones' in Poland
Coronavirus pandemic and the US Defence Production Act
Cross-border access to bank accounts
Compliance of self-proclaimed ‘LGBT-free zones’ in Poland with the principle of non-discrimination and the rule of law in view of the Next Generation EU recovery plan
Mass arrest of LGBTI activists in Poland
Proposed UK legislation in breach of the Withdrawal Agreement
Sudden withdrawal by British banks of the accounts of customers in the EU
Transatlantic collaboration on artificial intelligence
Foreign Direct Investment statistics
Hate speech against LGBTI persons by Polish governmental officials
Vans inciting hate speech against LGBTI persons in Poland
IBAN discrimination against EU consumers
Recently proposed bills in Hungary infringing on the rights of LGBTI persons
Human rights abuses facilitated by Chinese tech companies
State of play of EU-Turkey political, economic and trade relations
EU legislation on public procurement
Foreign subsidies and public procurement
EU maritime technology sector and the lack of trade defence
A new EU export credits strategy to support the economic recovery
Attack on the independence of the Polish Commissioner for Human Rights
Legal gender recognition ban in Hungary found to be in violation of EU law
Hungarian Media Authority Regulation’s censorship of LGBTI-friendly ad
Ukraine Government Bill 5488 to criminalise hate crimes, including on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity
Build back better for the world
Turkish police use excessive force to break up Pride march in Istanbul
Violence against LGBTIQ persons during Tbilisi Pride and the ineffective response from the Georgian authorities
Implementation of the Coman ruling
The purchase of disinfection robots by the Commission
EU-US Trade and Technology Council and the role of the European Parliament
Commission recommendation on the prevention of harmful practices
Romania’s failure to implement the Coman and Hamilton judgment
Clarification on the scope of the Measuring Instruments Directive for electric vehicle charging infrastructure
The Recovery and Resilience Facility and the Foreign Subsidies Instrument
Global Gateway and the Blue Dot Network
The race to control technical standardisation
Amendments (1488)
Amendment 10 #
2021/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 a (new)
Citation 15 a (new)
— having regard to the Statement of the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe of 16 May 2019 titled ‘Let’s defend LGBTI defenders’,1a _________________ 1a https://www.coe.int/en/web/commissioner/ -/let-s-defend-lgbti-defenders
Amendment 49 #
2021/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
I a. whereas the situation of LGBTI rights defenders in Europe was described as worrying by the Commissioner for Human Rights, who reported several instances of online and offline harassment, violent assaults, hate campaigns and death threats in Member States and neighbourhood countries; whereas this trend is interlinked with the scapegoating of other minority groups and it contravenes the principle that every person is born equal in dignity and rights;
Amendment 97 #
2021/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that for civil society organisations to thrive, civic space must be an enabling and safe environment free from undue interference, intimidation, harassment and chilling effects, such as SLAPPs, incitement to hatred and/or violence against rights defenders and organisations, and the creation of legal or administrative hurdles affecting their daily operations;
Amendment 130 #
2021/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Recalls that the scapegoating of minorities and vulnerable groups such as women and LGBTI persons is not an isolated event, but functions as a premeditated and gradual dismantling of fundamental rights, which are protected in Article 2 TEU, constituting part of a larger political agenda which has been called ‘anti-gender’ campaigns; calls on Member States to be particularly cautious of initiatives that attempt to roll-back on acquired rights which were designed to prevent and protect persons from discrimination and to promote equality;
Amendment 185 #
2021/2103(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Restates that no proper response has yet been given to Parliament’s initiative on the establishment of an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights to be governed by an interinstitutional agreement between Parliament, the Commission and the Council; calls on the Commission and the Council to immediately enter into negotiations with Parliament on an interinstitutional agreement pursuant to Article 295 TFEU; recalls that the monitoring of civic space is deeply linked with democracy and fundamental rights, and that a mechanism to monitor Article 2 TEU values is the best tool for a holistic approach in such respect;
Amendment 2 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. Whereas the EU has the strictest toy safety legislation in the world that is widely regarded as a global benchmark.
Amendment 4 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
A b. Whereas play is recognised as every child’s right by the United Nation’s Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which all EU member states are signatories; playing contributes to children’s development, health and wellbeing and is an essential part of growing up; studies show toys have can enrich play and keep children playing for longer;
Amendment 5 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
A c. Whereas the EU’s strict toy safety framework is designed to ensure children enjoy the safest play experience possible;
Amendment 6 #
2021/2040(INI)
B a. Whereas the effectiveness of the EU’s TSD is too often undermined by the actions of rogue traders and by the online sale of non-compliant products.
Amendment 7 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
B b. Whereas toy safety rules are stricter than rules for other consumer products that children are exposed to such as clothes, bedlinen, stationery, video game controllers and mobile phones.
Amendment 8 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas, despite the lack of comprehensive data on its full impact, the number of companies operating in the market since the full application of the TSD increased by 10 % from 2013 to 2017, while the turnover of the EU toy industry has constantly increased since its entry into force; whereas 99 % of companies in the sector are SMEs; and the majority of these companies are micro-enterprises; whereas the Joint Research Centre has estimated that the TSD has led to a 13% increase of costs for materials for small & medium sized EU manufacturers.
Amendment 11 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the toy safety directive requires that toys, including the chemicals they contain, are safe, specific requirements and standards can be adapted in case of scientific and technological developments that show the constant emergence of previously unknown risks and challenges related to toys that call for quick adaptations;
Amendment 17 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
E a. Whereas improved sustainability is important, the safety of toys should always take precedence; whereas requirements to improve sustainability should not compromise safety.
Amendment 18 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission’s evaluation report on the TSD, aiming at assessing its functioning since its entry into force; regrets the lack of harmonization in the elaboration of the reports and also in data gathering; stresses the need for transparency and urges the Member State and the Commission to publish the periodic reports from all the MS;
Amendment 19 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Acknowledges the added value of the TSD in improving the safety of children and ensuring an equal level of protection across the single market, compared to the previous directive, and its role in providing legal certainty and a level playing field for the businesses from European Union; regrets that a big part of the third country manufacturers that are selling their products in theSingle Market, especially through the on-line market, do not comply with the European legislation and many toys sold in the EU are still posing significantly, sometimes deadly, threats to children;
Amendment 23 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recognises the key role of standards in allowing for the efficient and agile application of the directive by manufacturers, as well as the role of notified bodies in ensuring compliance when standards are not available or are not applied; regrets the scarcity of the notified bodies insome regions or Member States;
Amendment 28 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes, however, that inconsistencies that call for a revision of the TSD remain; further efforts are needed to ensure the strict safety requirements that are applied by all economic operators and that children enjoy a similar level of protection in relation to other products designed for their use; invites the Commission to continue its evaluation process before a possible revision of the TSD to have targeted updates on the legislation, if needed.
Amendment 35 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Highlights the need for toys that are placed on the EU market to comply with the TSD, as well as the relevant EU legislation on chemicals, in particular the REACH Regulation , the Cosmetics Regulation, the Food Contact Material Regulation, the Batteries Directive, the CLP Regulation, POPs Regulation and the RoHS Directive;
Amendment 38 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that spreading out requirements across several pieces of legislation, and providing for different limit values, can be burdensome and can, in some cases, necessitate duplicate the measuring of substances, as in the case of migration and content limit values; calls on the Commission, therefore, to consider consolidating all applicable limits for toys in onehighlights such approach is needed because the diversity of toys and the need for consistency with legislation for other similar products; calls on the Commission to facilitate the navigation of these different pieces of legislation in order to streamline conformity assessment; for both the market surveillance authorities and economic operators by establishing a data base that clarifies what is required in which circumstances.
Amendment 44 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that the derogation from the prohibition of chemicals that are carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic to reproduction (CMRs) set out in the TSD allows for the presence of those chemicals in concentrations that are too high to ensure the protection of childrentoys; calls on the Commission urgently to substantially reduce the generic limits for derogated CMRs in the TSD; insists that, in line with according to the recommendations made by the scientifical body taking into account the real threat to the health of the children; reminds that as part of the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability, the possibility to derogate from European Commission intends to further restrict CMRs under REACH; calls on the Commission to also target toys, when further ruleestrictions on the presence of CMRs in parts of the toy that are inaccessible to the child should be deletedconsumer goods are proposed under horizontal legislation such as REACH and RoHS;
Amendment 51 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines that lower limit values for chemicals such as nitrosamines and nitrosatable substances in specific toys intended for children below three year old or intended to be placed in the mouth set out at national level compared to those established in the TSD create inconsistencies, even when justified by the Commission; notes, however, that all EU children should enjoy the same high level of protection; acknowledges that this limit value cannot be amended by an implementing act but would require a legislative procedurethat the Commission mandated the European Standardisation Committee CEN in March 2012 to revise the limits for nitrosamines and the lower limits were included in the standard EN 71-12:2016; calls on the Commission, theo refoere, to adapt the limit value to the strictest value in force at national level in a revision of the TSDnce this standard, including the lower limit values for nitrosamines and nitrosatable substances, in the EU Official Journal as soon aspossible;
Amendment 58 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission to propose a hazard identification procedure for endocrine disruptors, based on the definition of the World Health Organization (WHO) and other scientific bodies, and to apply it in a future revision of the TSD to ensure that endocrine disruptors are banned in toys as soon as they are identified if they are representing a threat to the health of the child or if they are in the parts of the toys that are prone to substance transfer, as well as to consider introducing horizontal legislation with that aim, as repeatedly requested by Parliament and by the Council;
Amendment 65 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Is concerned that the stricter provisions for chemicals in toys intended for children aged under 36 months do not take into account the fact that some older children remain vulnerable to dangerous substances; notes that this distinction can result ine need of regulations that will prevent manufacturers from circumventing the provisions by indicating that the toy is intended for children above 36 months even when it is clearly not the case; stresses that several stakeholders and Member States have indicated that this distinction is clearly inadequate and asked for it to be eliminacorrectly implemented; calls on the Commission, therefore, to do so in its revision of the TSDmake an extensive inquiry and in full accordance with the latest scientific evidence of the neuro-motor and psychologic developments of the children according to their age to evaluate if an elimination is needed and to proceed accordingly;
Amendment 68 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Appreciates that the TSD sets stricter provisions for chemicals in toys intended for children aged under 36 months and toys intended to be placed in the mouth to deal with the risk of chemicals that migrate through oral exposure which is particularly present until the age of 24 months old; notes that these limit values have high safety margins and are based on the low body weight of young children, but insists that notwithstanding the high safety margin that already exist, if a chemical is seen as hazardous for children, it should be limited or restricted in all children's goods according to the recommendations of the specialists; calls on the Commission to use REACH to deal with additional restrictions for toys for older children.
Amendment 75 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that the TSD contains an obligation for Member States to perform market surveillance undertaking due account of the precautionary principle, test toys on the market and verify manufacturers’ documentation with a view to withdrawing unsafe toys and taking action against those responsible for placing them on the market; is concerned that the effectiveness of market surveillance under the TSD is limited, putting the health and safety of children at risk and undermining the level playing field for economic operators that comply with the legislation, to the benefit of rogue traders, who do not;
Amendment 81 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020, which aims to improve market surveillance by strengthening and harmonising controls by national authorities to ensure that products entering the single market, including toys, are safe and comply with the rules, and calls on the Member States to implement it fully also by making available the necessary resources (budget and staff);
Amendment 92 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to explore possibilities for using new technologies such as e-labelling, blockchain and artificial intelligence to facilitate the work of market surveillance authorities by providing easily accessible and structured information on products and their traceability;
Amendment 96 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Underlines the importance of well- trained market surveillance officers, including customs officials. Calls on the Commission to finance and coordinate EU-wide training on applying the TSD
Amendment 102 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on the Member States to step up coordination of their market surveillance activities; and to fully digitalize their procedures; calls on the European Commission to organise and finance joint market surveillance actions on toys.
Amendment 105 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Calls on Member States to make sure market surveillance activities are robustly financed;
Amendment 106 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16 b. Is concerned that counterfeit toys can put children at risk and have a negative impact on toy companies that apply all safety requirements; believes it is essential that Know Your Business Customer Requirements are adopted for all types of online intermediaries; welcomes specific operations from law enforcement authorities targeting counterfeit toys, such as Operation Ludus from Europol (2020).
Amendment 124 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Welcomes the guidance of the Commission on Article 4 of Regulation 2019/1020, which clarifies the tasks of economic operators, in particular with regard to products sold online and placed on the EU market from non-EU countries; stresses that compliance with EU rules by all economic operators is key to ensuring the safety of children and providing a level playing field for companies, and calls on market surveillance and customs authorities to perform robust enforcement actions to stop rogue traders from exploiting the EU market;establish an ongoing list of the countries, regions of origin or companies with the highest number of non-compliant toys and prioritize the check according to this list, to perform robust enforcement actions to stop rogue traders from exploiting the EU market; urges the Member States to cooperate and put at each others disposal the list with the countries and companies with the highest rate of non-compliancy.
Amendment 129 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19 a. Highlights concerns that rogue traders can exploit loopholes that may result in unsafe toys being placed on the market, particularly when a seller is based outside the EU and there is usually no EU-based manufacturer, importer or distributor who is liable for the safety of a toy;
Amendment 135 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Stresses that online marketplaces should take additional steps to ensure the safety and compliance of toys sold on their platforms; insists in the strongest terms, in this sense, that it is fundamental to ensure full consistency between different instruments such as the Digital Services Act and the future legislative act revising the GPSD when it comes to the responsibility of online marketplaces and the liability of traders, under the principle ‘what is illegal offline is illegal online’;
Amendment 138 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Highlights the added value of the ‘know your business customer’ principle to increase compliance of toys sold online and traceability of toys sold online; regrets that the product safety pledge has shown limited effects so far; calls, therefore, for increased responsibilities for online marketplaces to detect and remove unsafe and non- compliant toys from their platforms and prevent their reappearanceraders on online market places ; acknowledge the results of the product safety pledge while highlighting its voluntary character and a limited participation of marketoperators ; calls, therefore, for enhanced cooperation of online marketplaces with market surveillance authorities on product safety issues, especially in removing an illegal product upon an order received by relevant authorities and in eliminating or mitigating the risk presented by a product offered online.;
Amendment 142 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Highlights the need to step up cooperation with non-EU countries; to fight more effectively against unsafe and non-compliant toys while ensuring a levelplaying field for European companies; calls on the Commission to publish information on its monitoring activities;
Amendment 149 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Considers it essential to provide for a broader scope for amendments inInvites the Commission to assess the scope of the future revision, including mechanical and physical requirements if and where necessary in particular for children under 36 months, limit values for nitrosamines, labelling provisions for allergenic fragrances and CMRs;
Amendment 153 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Calls on the Commission to clarify the definition of ‘grey zone’ products in the future revision of the TSD; stresses the need for an opened and constructive dialog with all the stakeholders to redefine toys so to eliminate confusion and grey-zones as much as possible.
Amendment 155 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26 a. Considers that clear and up-to date guidance documents are essential for harmonized implementation of the TSD. Guidance helps both market surveillance authorities and economic operators to deal with ‘grey zone’ cases, such as when there is doubt about the correct age classification; calls on the Commission to keep Guidance documents updated, with priority given to revisions of guidance document No. 11 on age classification and of the TSD technical documentation guidance.
Amendment 156 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26 b. Highlights the important role of the toys in the development and formation of the children, the support from the pedagogical point of view in performing new tasks and improvement of learning skills from a very young age; calls on the Commission to revise the toy directive considering improving the safety of toy and in the same time reducing the burden and the administrative and legal costs of the manufacturers in order to ensure a clear path to safe and affordable toys for all children in the European Union.
Amendment 158 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Calls on the Commission to introduce mandatory labelling for toys, providing the consumer at the time of purchase with clear, easily understandable and comparable information on a toy’s estimated lifetime, the extent to which it is reparable and the availability of spare parts, including, where relevant, the availability of the necessary software, and setting out options for repair;Delete
Amendment 161 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27 a. Considers that warnings and safety information are important for consumers. Additional labelling requirements should be kept to a minimum to avoid attention is diverted from this; calls on the Commission to assess the possibility to indicate conformity information not intended for the final consumer electronically;
Amendment 164 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 b (new)
Paragraph 27 b (new)
27 b. Urges the Commission to foster the use of innovative and digital solutions to make information available to consumers and minimise packaging materials while ensuring that safety information is clearly identifiable.
Amendment 165 #
2021/2040(INI)
27 c. Highlights that for the CE- marking, there is discrepancy between the TSD and other harmonized rules that might also apply to some toys, such as the Electromagnetic Compatibility Directive and the Radio Equipment Directive which require the CE marking to be on the product. This is especially problematic if numerous conformity marks for different jurisdictions around the world have to be present. Calls on the Commission to specify in the Blue Guide on EU Product Rules, that a product needs to comply with the CE-marking requirements of one of the applicable legislations if there are conflicting requirements.
Amendment 166 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 d (new)
Paragraph 27 d (new)
27 d. Is concerned by the proliferation of national legislation impacting labelling and information requirements to be displayed on packaging; considers that consumers and the value chain need information to drive more sustainable behavior but measures should be proportionate and not restrictive in a manner contrary to Article 34of the TFEU; believes a single EU-approach should be considered for example through the upcoming revision of the EU Packaging & Packaging WasteDirective
Amendment 168 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Highlights that the lack of consistent EU-wide statistics on toy-related accidentaccidents caused by toys makes it impossible to quantitatively assess the level of protection granted by the TSD; believes that a lack of coordination and funding at EU level is a root cause of the absence of consistent data and calls on the Commission to address this in a future revision through the establishment of a pan-European accident and injury database; for all the products sold in the Union, with a special section for toys, public, user friendly and accessible for consultation for public authorities, consumers and manufacturer; the introduction of the data in the data base shall be made in real time and shall be mandatory for all the injuries and accidents from all the Member States
Amendment 173 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29 a. Calls on the Commission to introduce in the revision of the TSD a data base and templates regarding the data needed for the evaluation of the Regulation that shall beused by all the Member States, all the marketing surveillance authorities and all the notified bodies allowing to gather the same information at the European level and ensuring a harmonized data collection.
Amendment 174 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Calls on the Commission to use the opportunity provided by the TSD revision to introduce indicators to monitor its implementation and effectiveness; urges the Commission to establish a harmonized report comprising the same type of data and the same sections to be submitted regularly by all the Member States to ensure a high quality, non-biased and fact based evaluation of the Regulation.
Amendment 177 #
2021/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30 a. The Commission shell elaborate the general report at the Union level based on the reports gathered from all the Member States. The final report and the reports from the Member State shall be public and easily accessible by all the interested parties.
Amendment 1 #
2021/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Underlines that the European Union and the United States have the most integrated economic relationship in the world, which is also the largest and deepest bilateral trade and investment relationship with bilateral trade in goods and services accounting for more than 1 trillion euros per year; emphasises the importance of reinvigorating our Transatlantic relationship as historic allies and trading partners with the aim of promoting multilateralism, an open rules- based trading system and finding common solutions to pressing global challenges, including the global health crisis; stresses that improved trade relations between the EU and the US will benefit citizens and businesses on both sides of the Atlantic;
Amendment 2 #
2021/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1a. Highlights that the Covid-19 crisis has not reduced but reinforced the need for closer cooperation between the EU and the US, including on the manufacturing and distribution of vaccines;
Amendment 3 #
2021/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Identifies trade policy as a strategic geopolitical tool for the transatlantic agenda; highlights the need to identify joint actions based on shared interests and values in order to contribute to a global sustainable and inclusive economic recovery; stresses that ‘workers and wages’ and more resilient and responsible supply chains should be at the core of such an agenda taking into account that our economic relations are also intertwined with our security interests; therefore welcomes the positive signals from the Biden administration to strengthen bilateral relations with the EU, and calls for renewed cooperation that should bring lasting and concrete results in the years to come; highlights the need to identify joint actions based on shared interests and values in order to contribute to a global sustainable and inclusive economic recovery; emphasises the need to reform the global trading system, so that it improves the global level-playing field and to work together to develop new rules, in particular with regard to unfair trade practices, as unfair competition is heavily affecting our companies and workers; notes that the US trade policy agenda focuses on ‘workers and wages’ and more resilient and responsible supply chains;
Amendment 17 #
2021/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the US support for the new Director-General of the WTO, the US’s return to the Paris Agreement, the WTO tariff rate quota agreement and the temporary suspension of Airbus Boe's return to the Paris Agreement; also welcomes, the swift conclusion of the WTO TRQ agreement, which was the first agreement with the US under the new Biden administration and demonstrates the willingness of this new administration to seek agreements with the EU ing tariffshe WTO framework;
Amendment 22 #
2021/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Welcomes the four-month temporary suspension of Airbus Boeing tariffs as a positive step to finding a lasting solution to removing additional tariffs and proposing new rules for civil aircraft subsidies; notes that the suspension of Airbus Boeing tariffs will end in July, and urges that these tariffs are permanently lifted;
Amendment 27 #
2021/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Notes the move by the Commission to suspend the increase of tariffs against US imports related to the dispute on aluminium and steel; urges the US to remove section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminium and emphasises the need to address the concerns related to the steel and aluminium excess capacity from third countries;
Amendment 32 #
2021/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recognises at the same time that some diverging interests remain; in this regard, urges both sides to resolve bilateral disputes; urges the US to remove unilateral trade measures and refrain from taking further ones; urges the removal of section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminium; calls for a rapid and lasting solution on aircraft subsidias European companies cannot be considered a national security threat; calls for a rapid and lasting solution on aircraft subsidies; and calls for the EU-US Summit in June to be used to seek progress and potentially solve these issues;
Amendment 45 #
2021/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for enhanced cooperation on WTO reform, including reinstating the appellate body,Welcomes the US support for the new WTO Director General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala; calls for enhanced cooperation on WTO reform to make the WTO ready for the green and digital transitions, and address the paralysis of the WTO appellate body as an urgent matter; calls for the need to regulatinge trade in health products, settingdevelop rules for digital trade, set an ambitious environmental agenda, and agreeing on concrete deliverables for the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference (MC12); encourages both sides to stick topromote multilateral agreements and trade based on rules;
Amendment 55 #
2021/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Advocates for a joint strategic approach towards China, addressing the roots of unfair trade practices and tackling industrial subsidies, state-owned enterprises and human rights concern in order to tackle unfair trade practice that lead to market distortions and a lack of a level-playing field as a matter of urgency; calls for the EU and the US to find an approach to tackle industrial subsidies and SOEs, forced technology transfers, theft of intellectual property, obliged joint ventures, market barriers and address human rights concerns; urges to build upon the trilateral agreement on industrial subsidies with the US and Japan whilst also developing an autonomous instrument against unfair foreign subsidies; calls for the EU and the US to exchange information on foreign investments in strategic sectors, including on potential hostile takeovers;
Amendment 75 #
2021/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. While promoting dialogue and common action, calls on the Commission to assertively promote the EU’s interests and react to US unwarranted duties, extraterritorial sanctions and market barriers; calls on the Commission to draft its proposal on an instrument to deter and counteract coercive actions by third countries to tackle the illicit extraterritorial effects of third countries sanctions and legislations in order to support European companies targeted by these sanctions and who are operating in compliance with international law;
Amendment 77 #
2021/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. While promoting dialogue and common action, calls on the Commission to assertively promote the EU’s interests and react to US unwarranted duties, extraterritorial sanctions and market barriers, including in public procurement; calls for a dialogue on the Buy American Act and address market access issues for EU companies in public procurement and enhance access to markets for services;
Amendment 86 #
2021/2038(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Encourages both sides to engage in an ambitious dialogue and find a framework for joint action and look for selective agreements, such as on trade & technology as well as conformity assessments which will particularly benefit SMEs; calls for a stronger regulatory, green and digital partnership through the Trade and Technology Council and a coordinated approach to critical technologies, a carbon border adjustment mechanism andsetting international standards for critical and emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence, and digital trade more broadly; welcomes the proposal by the Commission for a Transatlantic AI Agreement to set such standards and develop ethical guidelines; and find common grounds for a CBAM as well as digital and global taxes.
Amendment 3 #
2021/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that in 2020, in the COVID- 19 context, China for the first time ranked as the EU’s largest partner for trade in goods, with the trade balance further deteriorating to the EU’s detriment; calls on the Commission to deeply analyse the EU's dependency on China in certain strategic and critical sectors, as the pandemic has revealed, using all our policies and setting out plans to make our supply chains more resilient, more diversified and reduce dependency;
Amendment 20 #
2021/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is convinced that the EU-China bilateral trade and investment relationship is of strategic importance and should be rules-based, with the multilateral trading system and the notion of reciprocity at its core;
Amendment 30 #
2021/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is concerned about the increasingly unbalanced EU-China bilateral economic and trade relationship; stresses that rebalancing and a more level playing field are vital to EU interests; recalls the overall objective for the European Union to build its open strategic autonomy;
Amendment 37 #
2021/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Repeats its deep concern about the many barriers that European businesses face when accessing and operating on the Chinese market; is worried that China’s ‘dual circulation strategy’ referred to in its 14th Five Year Plan will further deteriorate the business environment for EU companies; is extremely concerned that several international companies, notably in the apparel and textiles sector, have been subject to an extensive and widespread boycott after expressing concern about the reports on forced labour in Xinjiang and taking the decision to cut supply-chain ties with Xinjiang; strongly condemns the aggressive political coercion exercised against them by the Chinese Government; highlights again its particular concern about the market distorting practices of Chinese state-owned enterprises, forced technology transfers and data localisation, industrial overcapacity in sectors such as steel and the related dumping of exports, and other unfair trading practices; calls on the Commission and the Member States to step up their cooperation at WTO-level with like-minded allies to develop a joint approach to tackle these Chinese unfair trading practices, including a new initiative on fighting counterfeiting;
Amendment 45 #
2021/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. calls on China to play a more active part in multilateral initiatives at WTO-level such as the Trade and Climate, Trade and Health and the implementation of the SDGs; calls on China to play a more active role in the WTO reform, especially in restoring all the WTO dimensions, from monitoring, creating new rules and solving disputes; urges China to fully comply with all its WTO obligations;
Amendment 52 #
2021/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. calls on the Member States to allow for a swift adoption of an International Procurement Instrument to ensure reciprocal access to third country public procurement markets, in order to help European businesses which are facing discrimination and lack of access to the Chinese public procurement markets that remain largely closed;
Amendment 63 #
2021/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. WelcomNotes the conclusion at the political level of the EU-China Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI); recalls that the CAI has to be considered in the context of a strengthened EU toolbox of unilateral measures; underlines it will thoroughly scrutinise the agreement, including its sustainable development section, and take stock of the human rights context, before determining its position; highlights the European Parliament resolution of 20 May 2021 on Chinese countersanctions on EU entities and MEPs and MPs which states that any consideration of CAI, as well as any discussion on ratification by the European Parliament, has justifiably been frozen because of the Chinese sanctions in place; notes that in its resolution the European Parliament demands that China lift the sanctions before Parliament can deal with the CAI, without prejudice to the final outcome of the CAI ratification process;
Amendment 77 #
2021/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Highlights the urgent need to re- balance EU-China relations through the adoption of a more assertive toolbox of autonomous measures while recognising the need to maintain an open dialogue with Chinese government on other common challenges such as the global fight against climate change;
Amendment 79 #
2021/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Calls on the Commission to propose an EU mandatory and horizontal due diligence legislation as a matter of urgency in order to ensure that EU companies and non-EU companies operating in the Single Market respect human rights, social and environmental standards through their supply chain as well as to eliminate the risk of forced labour and human rights abuses from their supply chains;
Amendment 84 #
2021/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5 c. Is extremely concerned by the recent unilateral trade-related measures taken by China against Australia in retaliation to the Australian critics on the Chinese COVID-19 crisis management; calls on the Commission, in this very worrying context, to propose urgently its instrument to deter and counteract coercive actions by third countries in order to be able in future to respond to any illegal and unilateral measures adopted against the EU interests and international law;
Amendment 86 #
2021/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Paragraph 5 d (new)
5 d. Urges the Commission to present a blacklist and to propose an instrument to ban on the importation of goods produced using child labour or any other form of forced labour or modern slavery;
Amendment 88 #
2021/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 e (new)
Paragraph 5 e (new)
5 e. Reiterates its full support to the EU FDI Screening Regulation, putting in place for the first time an EU-level mechanism to coordinate the screening of foreign investments in strategic sectors; calls on Member States to adopt urgently a national screening mechanism if they do not have one yet, in line with the Commission guidelines from March 2020; recalls the importance to strengthen the existing EU FDI Screening Regulation in order to make sure that any potential investments which could be a threat to the EU security and public order, in particular with regard to Chinese state- owned and state-controlled enterprises in European strategic sectors, are blocked;
Amendment 89 #
2021/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 f (new)
Paragraph 5 f (new)
5 f. welcomes the Commission regulation proposal on foreign subsidies distorting the internal market; calls for a swift adoption of this regulation, making sure that thresholds and the procedures allow for an efficient instrument, in order to tackle the Chinese unfair trading practices in the European Single Market;
Amendment 90 #
2021/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 g (new)
Paragraph 5 g (new)
5 g. Takes note of the recently agreed Regional Comprehensive Economic partnership (RCEP) and highlights the absence of provisions on trade and sustainability, including labour and social standards, environmental and climate objectives; calls on the Commission to analyse the impacts of the RCEP on the EU presence in the region;
Amendment 91 #
2021/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 h (new)
Paragraph 5 h (new)
5 h. Reiterates its call on the Commission and the Council to start the scoping exercise and formally launch the negotiations with Taiwan for an Investment Agreement;
Amendment 92 #
2021/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the entry into force of the EU-China Agreement on geographical indications (GIs), and reiterates the importance of effective and exemplary implementation of the Agreement; underlines that this limited agreement on GIs could serve as a model and basis for future GIs agreements; highlights the crucial role that the Chief Trade Enforcement Officer (CTEO) will play in monitoring and improving compliance with this Agreement; calls on the CTEO to react immediately in the event that the Agreement is not implemented correctly.
Amendment 10 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 26 a (new)
Citation 26 a (new)
— having regard to LGBTIQ Equality Strategy (2020-2025) (COM(2020)698),
Amendment 30 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas independent journalism and access to pluralistic information are key pillars of democracy; whereas civil society is essential for any democracy to thrive and the shrinking of the space available for civil society work can negatively impact democracies;
Amendment 60 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) are lawsuits or other legal actions (e.g. injunctions, asset-freezing) based on civil and criminal law, as well as the threats of such actions, with the purpose of preventing reporting on breaches of Union and national law, corruption or other fraudulent practices or of blocking public participation; and freedom of expression and of assembly
Amendment 83 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas SLAPPs have become an increasingly widespread practice used against journalists, academics, civil society andhuman rights defenders and civil society organisations, including NGOs, as demonstrated by many cases throughout the Union, such as the chilling case of investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, who was reportedly facing 47 civil and criminal defamation lawsuits, (resulting in the freezing of her assets) on the day of her strongly condemned assassination on 16 October 2017, and the lawsuits her heirs continue to face; whereas other illustrative and alarming cases include Realtid Media, which was repeatedly threatened with a lawsuit in a different jurisdiction from where the reporting in question took place, and Gazeta Wyborcza, which continues to be sued by a number of public entities and officials on a regular basis;
Amendment 85 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas the LGBTIQ Equality Strategy acknowledges that civil society organisations protecting and advancing the rights of LGBTIQ people increasingly report that they face hostility, coinciding with the rise of the anti-gender (and anti- LGBTIQ) movement; whereas LGBTI activists are often the targets of defamation campaigns due to their advocacy work for LGBTI equality; whereas Polish activists such as the ‘Atlas of Hate’ group and the creator of the ‘LGBT-free zone’ photo project (Bart Staszewski) are currently facing several SLAPP cases and are liable for dozens of thousands of euros if they lose them;
Amendment 86 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas SLAPPs against civil society, journalists and human rights defenders often serve the purpose of harassing them and their activities, often causing them to consider whether to continue exercising their freedom of expression or to instead exercise self- censorship and restraint in order to avoid legal repercussions; whereas many civil society organisations, including NGOs, journalists and human rights defenders may consider the trade-off to be too costly and instead opt for self-censorship; whereas this illustrates the ‘chilling effect’ SLAPPs have on those seeking to exercise rights freely;
Amendment 128 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights that SLAPPs are a direct attack on the exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms; underlines that fundamental rights and democracy are linked to upholding the rule of law, and that undermining freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, media freedom and public democratic participation threatens Union values as enshrined in Article 2 of the TEU; welcomes the fact that the rule of law report includes SLAPP lawsuits in its assessment of media freedom and pluralism across the Union, and points to best practices in countering them; calls for the annual report to include a thorough assessment of the legal environment for the media, and investigative journalism in particular as well as the chilling effect that SLAPPs can have on civil society, human rights defenders and activists;
Amendment 151 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that public participation also has an important role to play in the proper functioning of the internal market, as it is often through public participation that breaches of Union law, including fundamental rights, corruption and other practices threatening the proper functioning of the internal market are made known to the public;
Amendment 177 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights that in recent years online hate speech has become increasingly widespread against journalists, NGOs, academics and, civil society organisations, including NGOs, and human rights defenders, including those defending LGBTQIQ rights, thus threatening media freedom, freedom of expression and assembly, as well as public safety given that online hate speech can incite real-worldoffline violence;
Amendment 197 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that SLAPPs are often meritless, frivolous or based on exaggerated claims, and that they are not initiated for the purposes of obtaining a favourable judicial outcome but rather only to intimidate, harass, tire out, put psychological pressure on or consume the financial resources of journalists, academics, civil society and NGOs,organisations, including NGOs, and human rights defenders with the ultimate objective of blackmailing and forcing them into silence through the judicial procedure itself; points out that this chilling effect can lead to self- censorship, suppressing participation in democratic life, and also discourages others from similar actions, from entering into these professions or from proceeding with relevant associated activities;
Amendment 224 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses, with regard to this problem, that all Member States lack harmonised minimum standards to protect journalists, academics, civil society and NGOorganisations, including NGOs, and human rights defenders and to ensure that fundamental rights are upheld in the Member States;
Amendment 251 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Agrees with the numerous civil society organisations, academics, legal practitioners and victims who point to the need for legislative action against the growing problem of SLAPPs; urgently calls, therefore, for the Brussels I and Rome II Regulations to be amendments in order to prevent ‘libel tourism’ or ‘forum shopping’; urgently calls for the introduction of a uniform choice of law rule for defamation, as well as for proposals for binding Union legislation on harmonised and effective safeguards for victims of SLAPPs across the Union, including through a directive; argues that without such legislative action, SLAPPs will continue to threaten the rule of law and the fundamental rights of freedom of expression, assembly, association and information in the Union; is concerned that if measures only address lawsuits regarding infordefamation, actions based on other civil matters or criminal procedures may still be used;
Amendment 275 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Considers that it is essential to adopt a legislative measure protecting the role of journalists, academics, civil society andhuman rights defenders and civil society organisations, including NGOs, in preventing breaches of Union law and ensuring the proper functioning of the internal market; urges the Commission to present a proposal for legislation that sets out safeguards for persons investigating and reporting on these matters of public interest;
Amendment 322 #
2021/2036(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Underlines the urgent need for a robust fund for supporting victims of SLAPPs; stresses the importance for victims and potential victims of SLAPPs to have easy and accessible information about these type of cases, legal aid and support;
Amendment 28 #
2021/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)
Citation 14 a (new)
– having regard to the Commission’s Communication "Gender Equality Strategy (2020-2025)", published on 5 March 2020,
Amendment 29 #
2021/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 b (new)
Citation 14 b (new)
– having regard to the Commission’s Communication "Strategy on victim’s rights (2020-2025)", published on 24 June 2020,
Amendment 30 #
2021/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 c (new)
Citation 14 c (new)
– having regard to the Commission’s Communication "LGBTIQ Equality Strategy (2020-2025)", published on 12 November 2020,
Amendment 31 #
2021/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 d (new)
Citation 14 d (new)
– having regard to the Commission’s Communication: "EU Strategy on the rights of the child (2020-2025)", published on 24 March 2021,
Amendment 84 #
2021/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the European Institute for Gender Equality defines femicide as the killing of women and girls because of their gender; whereas it can take different forms such as the murder of women as a result of intimate partner violence, killing of women and girls because of their gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics, as well as female and intersex genital mutilations and so called "honour killings";
Amendment 134 #
2021/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Condemns all forms of violence against women and girls in all their diversity and other forms of gender-based violence, such as violence against LGBTI persons, and deplores the fact that women and girls continue to be exposed to psychological, physical, sexual and economic violence, including sexual exploitation and trafficking in human beings, both online and offline;
Amendment 154 #
2021/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that violence against women and other forms of gender-based violence are the result of the unequal distribution of power, patriarchal structures, and gender stereotypes, that have led to domination over and discrimination against women and LGBTI persons by men; underlines that this situation is aggravated by social and economic inequalities;
Amendment 176 #
2021/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines the wide range of psychological impacts that gender-based violence has on victims, including and witnesses, including feeling unsafe or vulnerable, stress, concentration problems, anxiety, panic attacks, low self-esteem, depression, post- traumatic stress disorder, lack of trust and of sense of control; recalls that gender- based violence also has a social and economic impact;
Amendment 213 #
2021/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Insists on actions to prevent gender- based violence by addressing the underlying causes, including counteracting sexism, gender stereotypes and patriarchal values; underlines the need for gender equality to have a central place in education and the need for awareness- raising campaigns; recalls the Commission’s proposal in the Gender Equality Strategy for an EU-wide campaign on gender stereotypes and calls on Member States to fully support and implement the initiative when launched;
Amendment 241 #
2021/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Highlights the need for targeted policies to address the situation of survivors who experience intersectional forms of discrimination, such as women refugees, asylum seekers and migrants, indigenous women, racialised women, women from religious and ethnic minorities, lesbian, bisexual and trans, trans and intersex women, elderly women and women with disabilities, as well as non- binary persons;
Amendment 258 #
2021/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls that violations of sexual and reproductive rights are a form of violence against women and girls, as well as transgender and non-binary persons, as reflected in the LGBTIQ Equality Strategy;
Amendment 288 #
2021/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on Member States to take all necessary measures to promote the protection of women and girls in all their diversity and all survivors of gender-based violence against all forms of violence, including by paying greater attention to the needs of survivors who experience intersectional forms of discrimination and violence;
Amendment 299 #
2021/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Underlines the obligation on Member States to ensure that there is support and services for survivors of gender-based violence; recalls the importance, in that context, of support to independent civil society and women’s and specialised shelter organisations;
Amendment 304 #
2021/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Member States to step up their work in order to ensure that victims have access to justice, including restorative justice, and to guarantee that the rights of the victim are placed at the centre in order to avoid discrimination, traumatisation or revictimisation during judicial, medical and police proceedings; underlines with concern that most Member States still have issues with complete/correct transposition and/or practical application of the Victim’s Rights Directive, as reflected in the Commission’s Strategy on victim’s rights, and calls on their due diligence for its complete and correct transposition;
Amendment 328 #
2021/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses that gender-based violence is a serious crime and a widespread violation of fundamental rights in the Union which needs to be addressed with greater efficiency and determination on a common basis; stresses that gender-based violence is the result of a patriarchal society that has a cross-border dimension; points, in particular, at the growing anti- gender and anti-women movements, which are well organised and have a cross-border nature, and which therefore call for a coordinated EU response;
Amendment 348 #
2021/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Stresses that the special need to combat violence against women and girls in all their diversity and other forms of gender-based violence on a common basis also results from the need to establish minimum rules concerning the definition of criminal offences and sanctions;
Amendment 367 #
2021/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Commission to propose a directive on gender-based violence that implements the standards of the Istanbul Convention and includes the following elements: prevention, including through gender-sensitive education programming directed at both girls and boys in all their diversity, and empowerment of women and girls in all their diversity; support services and protection measures for survivors; combating all forms of gender-based violence, including violations of women’s, transgender's and non-binary persons' sexual and reproductive health and rights; and minimum standards for law enforcement;
Amendment 16 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Whereas the fight against discrimination in the EU is a shared responsibility; whereas acts of discrimination not only violates the EU fundamental rights, but also further contributes to the EU’s rule of law deterioration; notes that discrimination, hate speech and hate crimes against LGBTIQ people are still prevalent across the EU;
Amendment 26 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Stresses on current and further deterioration of democracy and rule of law puts additional risk of discrimination on LGBTIQ people;
Amendment 37 #
2021/2025(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Calls on the EU and its Member States to exercise political will and high commitment on all levels of authorities to alleviate discrimination; calls on the EU and its Member States to ensure proper and independent functioning of the judicial system in particular with regard to the protection of fundamental rights.
Amendment 131 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Is alarmed by the legislative measures adopted in some Members States under the pretext of COVID-19 measures; reaffirms its position that such measures need to respect EU fundamental rights and the rule of law and considers that equal treatment of persons is crucial1a; _________________ 1a Texts adopted, P9_TA(2020)0307.
Amendment 134 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8 b. Expresses concern at the use of legal measures by governments and powerful individuals to silence critics, such as the use of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs), or the use of laws curtailing the right to freedom of expression in a manner incompatible with international human rights law, for example against LGBTI and women’s activists;calls on the Commission to accelerate the setting up of the expert group on SLAPPs as foreseen in the European Democracy Action Plan, to begin its work as soon as feasible and to ensure any upcoming legislative proposal addresses these issues;
Amendment 183 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Stresses in particular the deterioration of the independence of some Member States’ equality bodies since the publication of the reports, which constitutes an immediate threat to the fundamental rights of citizens;
Amendment 19 #
2021/2003(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that trade policy is not gender neutral and that better collection of gender-disaggregated data, together with clear indicators, is needed to adequately assess the different impacts of trade policy on women and men; reiterates its call for the EU and its Member States to include in ex ante and ex post impact assessments the country-specific and sector-specific gender impact of EU trade policy and agreements; calls on the Commission to work together with international partners, such as the WTO, to collect data, analyse the impact of trade on women and translate data into concrete proposals to improve women’s role in the international trade system;
Amendment 37 #
2021/2003(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recognises the disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the participation in trade of female entrepreneurs and women; underlines that women are adversely affected both as entrepreneurs, employees, and often as the head caretaker of their family; calls for COVID-19 recovery strategies to pay special attention to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs), which are often run by women, and to sectors with higher female participation (agriculture, tourism, garment and retail); underlines that women often lack access to finance compared to their male counterparts; calls on the Commission to address the gender gap in investment possibilities for women entrepreneurs;
Amendment 48 #
2021/2003(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes with concern the persistent gender gap in digital access and digital skills; notes that women have less access to skills development compared to their male counterparts, preventing them from developing their business, or their possibilities as employee; calls for the Commission and the Member States to support female entrepreneurs and employees in acquiring the necessary skills through trade policy, such as the Generalised Scheme of Preferences, Economic Partnership Agreements, development cooperation and Aid for Trade;
Amendment 127 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) Children are particularly exposed to risks relating to products. Of all the products notified as dangerous in the Safety Gate/RAPEX system in 2019 as many as 32% were toys or products for childcare. For this reason, strong safety requirements for standards on products for children are needed.
Amendment 147 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Specific cybersecurity risks affecting the safety of consumers as well as protocols and certifications can be dealt with by sectorial legislation. However, it should be ensured, in case of gaps in the sectorial legislation, that the relevant economic operators and national authorities take into consideration risks linked to new technologies, respectively when designing the products and assessing them, in order to ensure that changes introduced in the product do not jeopardise its safety. Connected devices should be subjected to horizontal cybersecurity requirements such as under the future Cyber Resilience Act, which should lay down cybersecurity standards covering the entire lifecycle of the product.
Amendment 154 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Distance selling, including online selling, should also fall within the scope of this Regulation. Online selling has grown consistently and steadily, creating new business models and new actors in the market such as the online marketplaces. Increasingly, online sellers accept customer orders without keeping goods sold in stock (dropshipping). This poses specific problems for product safety, as the retailer is responsible for marketing and selling a product, but has little or no control over product quality, storage, inventory management, or shipping.
Amendment 158 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) Online marketplaces play a crucial role in the supply chain - allowing economic operators to reach an indefinite number of consumers - and therefore also in the product safety system. They should be considered an economic operator when they fulfil the role of a fulfilment service provider. It should be clear for consumers when buying on the marketplace which role in the supply chain of a particular product they fulfill and correspondingly, what the consumer’s rights are in case of an unsafe product.
Amendment 166 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) Online marketplaces should act with due care in relation to the content hosted on their online interfaces that concerns safety of products, in accordance with the specific obligations laid down in this Regulation. Accordingly, due diligence obligations for all online marketplaces should be established in relation to the content hosted on their online interfaces that concerns safety of products. This means at the least, that they are required to check and delist products that have been reported in the Safety Gate portal or by the national market surveillance authorities.
Amendment 170 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) In order to be able to comply with their obligations under this Regulation, in particular in respect of timely and effective compliance with the orders of public authorities, processing of notices of other third parties and cooperating with market surveillance authorities in the context of corrective measures upon request, online marketplaces should have in place an internal mechanism for handling product safety-related issues. Additionally, the interface of the online marketplace should allow consumers to easily notify product safety issues and have their rights vis-a- vis the economic operator responsible explained. Online marketplaces should share these notices with the market surveillance authorities.
Amendment 171 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) The obligations imposed by this Regulation on online marketplaces should neither amount to a general obligation to monitor the information which they transmit or store, nor to actively seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity, such as the sale of dangerous products online. Online marketplaces should, nonetheless, expeditiously remove content referring to dangerous products from their online interfaces, upon obtaining actual knowledge or, in the case of claims for damages, awareness of the illegal content, in particular in cases where the online marketplace has been made aware of facts or circumstances on the basis of which a diligent economic operator should have identified the illegality in question, in order to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting services under the 'Directive on electronic commerce' and the [Digital Services Act]. Online marketplaces should process notices concerning content referring to unsafe products, received in accordance with [Article 14] of Regulation (EU) …/…[the Digital Services Act], within the additional timeframes established by this Regulation. Online marketplaces are obliged to prevent these identical products, which have been previously and repeatedly reported by market surveillance authorities as unsafe, from reappearing on their websites. They are obliged to use state-of-the-art technology to detect these products from reappearing.
Amendment 179 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) For the purposes of [Article 19] of Regulation (EU) …/…[the Digital Services Act], and concerning the safety of products sold online, the Digital Services Coordinator should consider in particularwork closely together with consumer organisations and associations representing consumers’ interest, upon their request, as trusted flaggers, provided that the conditions set out in that article have been met.
Amendment 185 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) It is also important that online marketplaces closely cooperate with the market surveillance authorities, law enforcement authorities and with relevant economic operators on the safety of products. An obligation of cooperation with market surveillance authorities is imposed on information society service providers under Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 in relation to products covered by that Regulation and should therefore be extended to all consumer products. For instance, market surveillance authorities are constantly improving the technological tools they use for the online market surveillance to identify dangerous products sold online. For these tools to be operational, online marketplaces should grant access to their interfaces. Moreover, for the purpose of product safety, if market surveillance authorities cannot retrieve the required data from the primarily responsible economic operator, they may also need to scrape data from the online marketplaces. based on a targeted request.
Amendment 197 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
Recital 51
(51) Member States should notify in the Safety Gate both compulsory and voluntary corrective measures that prevent, restrict or impose specific conditions on the possible marketing of a product because of a serious risk to the health and safety of consumers or, in case of products covered by Regulation (EU) No 2019/1020, also to other relevant public interests of the end- users. To inform other stakeholders about the origins of previous incidents, notifications in the Safety Gate should explain how a serious risk occurred and include more detailed information where possible, such as an European Article Number.
Amendment 199 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) Under Article 34 of Regulation (EU) No 2019/1020, Member States authorities are to notify measures adopted against products covered by that Regulation, presenting a less than serious risk, through the information and communication system referred to in the same article, while corrective measures adopted against products covered by this Regulation presenting a less than serious risk should be notified in the Safety Gate. Member States and the Commission should make available to the public information relating to risks to the health and safety of consumers posed by products. It is opportune for consumers and businesses that all information on corrective measures adopted against products posing a risk are contained in the Safety Gate, allowing relevant information on dangerous products to be made available to the public through the Safety Gate portal. Member States are therefore encouraged to notify in the Safety Gate all corrective measures on products posing a risk to the health and safety of consumers. The database and website of the Safety Gate should be easily findable and accessible for all consumers.
Amendment 211 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 62
Recital 62
(62) When a product already sold to consumers turns out to be dangerous, it may need to be recalled to protect consumers in the Union. Consumers might not be aware that they own a recalled product. In order to increase recall effectiveness, it is therefore important to better reach consumers concerned. Direct contact is the most effective method to increase consumers’ awareness of recalls and encourage action. It is also the preferred communication channel across all groups of consumers. In order to ensure the safety of the consumers, it is important that they are informed in a quick and reliable way. Economic operators should therefore use the customer data at their disposal to inform consumers of recalls and safety warnings linked to products they have purchased. Therefore, a legal obligation is needed to require economic operators to use any customer data already at their disposal to inform consumers of recalls and safety warnings. In this respect, economic operators will make sure to include the possibility to directly contact customers in the case of a recall or safety warning affecting them in existing customer loyalty programmes and product registration systems, through which customers are asked, after having purchased a product, to communicate to the manufacturer on a voluntary basis some information such as their name, contact information, the product model or serial number. While economic operators are primarily responsible for executing recalls, online marketplaces should at least provide information to economic operators and market surveillance authorities and support in the communication to consumers.
Amendment 213 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 64 a (new)
Recital 64 a (new)
(64a) The Commission shall publish guidance to market surveillance authorities to ensure more uniform enforcement and legally certain communication when dealing with recall notifications and respective requests by competent authorities. Member States should also ensure that the authorities have sufficient expertise and resources to ensure effective enforcement.
Amendment 231 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
1. ‘product’ means any item, including software or products embedded with software, interconnected or not to other items, supplied or made available, whether for consideration or not, in the course of a commercial activity including in the context of providing a service – which is intended for consumers or can, under reasonably foreseeable conditions, be used by consumers even if not intended for them;
Amendment 240 #
2021/0170(COD)
13. ‘economic operator’ means the manufacturer, the authorized representative, the importer, the distributor, the fulfilment service provider 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 in accordance with this Regulation;. Online marketplaces can be considered economic operator, when they fulfil the role of a fulfilment service provider.
Amendment 251 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) in the absence of European standards referred to in point (a), as regards the risks covered by health and safety requirements laid down in the law of the Member State where the product is made available on the market, if it conforms to such national requirements., including those laid down by [ the Cyber Resilience Act and the expected renewed standards on children’s products ];
Amendment 254 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts determining the specific safety requirements necessary to ensure that products which conform to the European standards satisfy the general safety requirement laid down in Article 5, taking into account the criteria listed in Article 7(1). Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 42(3).
Amendment 268 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) the appropriate cybersecurity features that cover the entire lifecycle necessary to protect the product against external influences, including malicious third parties, when such an influence might have an impact on the safety of the product;
Amendment 272 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
(ia) the connectivity of a product.
Amendment 274 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point i b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point i b (new)
(ib) Risks are further specified in the Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2019/417 of 8 November 2018 laying down guidelines for the management of the European Union Rapid Information System ‘RAPEX’ established under Article 12 of Directive 2001/95/EC on general product safety and its notification system;
Amendment 294 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3
Article 8 – paragraph 3
3. Manufacturers or the person responsible for making a product available on the Union market as referred to in Article 15 shall keep distributors, importers and online marketplaces in the concerned supply chain informed of any safety issue that they have identified.
Amendment 298 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Manufacturers or the person responsible for making a product available on the Union market as referred to in Article 15 shall draw up technical documentation of the product. The technical documentation shall contain, as appropriate:
Amendment 299 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Manufacturers shall draw up technical documentation of the product before a product is made available on the Union market. The technical documentation shall contain, as appropriat at least, where applicable:
Amendment 302 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new)
(ca) where relevant, (CE) certifications and the European Article Number.
Amendment 310 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 9 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Manufacturers of products to which software updates or other digital alterations may change the product throughout its lifecycle, posing new risks to the safety of users, shall provide specific safeguards to mitigate these risks.
Amendment 319 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. A European or non-European manufacturer may, by a written mandate, appoint an authorised representative.
Amendment 347 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
The economic operators shall ensure that they have internal processes for product safety in place, allowing them to respect the general safety requirement laid down in Article 5all the obligations laid down in this legislation, including the general safety requirement laid down in Article 5. The product safety and compliance program should include at least accident recording and investigation processes, a compliance verification process and risk assessment with protective measures to reduce risk. This program should be audited by a third party auditor. This obligation shall apply to operators of harmonised and non-harmonised products.
Amendment 356 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. Article 4(1), (2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 shall also apply to products covered by this Regulation, meaning that any product subject to this legislation may only be made available on the EU market if there is an economic operator established in the Union. For the purposes of this Regulation, references to “Union harmonisation legislation” in Article 4(1), (2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 shall be read as “Regulation […]”.
Amendment 357 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The responsible person should be able to handle consumer complaints regarding product safety.
Amendment 359 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. In addition to the tasks referred to in Article 4(3) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020, the economic operator referred to in Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 as well as economic operators of harmonised products, shall periodically carry out sample testing of randomly chosen products made available on the market. When the products made available on the market have been subject to a Commission decision adopted under Article 26(1) of this Regulation, the economic operator referred to in Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 shall carry out, at least once a year, for the entire duration of the decision, representative sample testing of products made available on the market chosen under the control of a judicial officer or any qualified person designated by the Member State where the economic operator is situated.
Amendment 372 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Economic operators who make available certain products, categories or groups of products, which bear a very serious risk to the safety of consumers, on the market, are required to register with their EU contact details with the market surveillance authority in the Member State where the product is offered.
Amendment 378 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. The manufacturer shall ensure that, through the Safety Business Gateway referred to in Article 25, an accident resulting in the risk to or actual damage of the health or safety of a consumer caused by a product placed or made available on the market is notified, within two working days at the latest from the moment it knowshas been notified about the accident, to the competent authorities of the Member State where the accident has occurred. The notification shall include the type and identification number of the product as well as the circumstances of the accident, if known. The manufacturer shall notify, upon request, to the competent authorities any other relevant information.
Amendment 411 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Online marketplaces shall take the necessary measures to receive and process the orders issued in accordance with this paragraph. They shall act upon receipt of the order issued without undue delay, and in any event within two working days in the Member State where the online marketplace operates, from receipt of the order. They shall inform the issuing market surveillance authority of the effect given to the order by using the contacts of the market surveillance authority published in the Safety Gate. , or whether more information is needed to give effect to that notice. In cases where an European Article Number or another identification number is communicated to the online marketplace, it shall ensure that all identical products that are offered under that code are removed from their platform and shall not reappear.
Amendment 425 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 20 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) name, registered trade name or registered trade mark of the manufacturer, as well as the postal or electronic address and telephone number at which they can be contacted;
Amendment 426 #
2021/0170(COD)
(ba) where the trader is registered in a trade register or similar public register, the trade register in which the trader is registered and its registration number or equivalent means of identification in that register;
Amendment 427 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 5 – point b b (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 5 – point b b (new)
(bb) the name, address, telephone number and electronic mail address of the economic operator, within the meaning of Article 3(13) and Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and the Council;
Amendment 428 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 5 – point d a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 5 – point d a (new)
(da) a self-certification by the trader committing to only offer products or services that comply with the applicable rules of Union law and where applicable confirming that all products have been checked against the Safety Gate;
Amendment 429 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. The online marketplace allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders shall, upon receiving that information before allowing the display of the product or service on its online interface, and until the end of the contractual relationship, make best efforts to assess whether the information referred to paragraph 5 is reliable and complete, by checking the information provided by the trader through the use of Safety Gate or through direct requests to the trader to provide supporting documents from reliable sources.
Amendment 430 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 5 b (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. The online marketplace shall make best efforts to identify and prevent the dissemination, by traders using its service, of offers for products or services which do not comply with this Regulation through measures such as: a) random checks on the products and services offered to consumers in addition to the obligations referred to in paragraph 1 and 2 of this Article. b) regularly checking and delisting products that have been reported in the Safety Gate portal or by the national market surveillance authorities. c) using state-of-the-art technology to prevent products which have been previously reported as unsafe from reappearing on their marketplace.
Amendment 431 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 5 c (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. The interface of online marketplaces should allow consumers to easily: a. Notify where they can report product safety issues in accordance with [Article 14] of Regulation (EU) ../..[the Digital Services Act]. Online marketplaces should share product safety notices they receive with market surveillance authorities; b. Understand the role of the online marketplace in the supply chain regarding a specific product; c. Understand which rights the consumer therefore has in case of an issue relating to product safety.
Amendment 434 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 6 – point a
Article 20 – paragraph 6 – point a
(a) cooperating to ensure effective product recalls, including by abstaining from putting obstacles to product recalls;such as by informing consumers and providing contact details to market surveillance authorities
Amendment 436 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 6 – point e
Article 20 – paragraph 6 – point e
(e) upon request of the market surveillance authorities, when the data is not available through the responsible economic operator, online marketplaces or online sellers have put in place technical obstacles to the extraction of data from their online interfaces (data scraping), allowing to scrape such data based on a targeted request for product safety purposes based on the identification parameters provided by the requesting market surveillance authorities.
Amendment 442 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall further develop and maintain a rapid alert system for the exchange of information on corrective measures concerning dangerous products (‘the Safety Gate’) and economic operators that have repeatedly impeded this regulation.
Amendment 448 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. The Commission shall make a separate overview of the manufacturers and traders whose products were notified and found to be unsafe in the Safe Gate more than three times, and the manufacturers that have been deleted from online marketplaces as a result of repeated infringements.
Amendment 449 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 8 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Economic operators should be informed about the decision to include their product in the Safety Gate with undue delay. Where an economic operator believes that his product has been wrongly included in the Safety Gate, he should be able to provide comments to the relevant market surveillance authority. The recall procedure would not be stopped until the claim of the economic operator has been found legitimate.
Amendment 450 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 8 b (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. The Commission shall publish guidance to market surveillance authorities to ensure more uniform enforcement and legally certain communication when dealing with recall notifications and respective requests by competent authorities.
Amendment 473 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. For the purpose of Article 31(1) and Article 19, the Commission shall maintain a Safety Gate portal, providing the general public with free access to selected information notified in accordance with Article 24. The Commission shall ensure that this website is easily findable and accessible for the general public.
Amendment 490 #
2021/0170(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 a (new)
Article 36 a (new)
Article 36a Amendments to Directive 2020/1828/EC on Representative Actions for the Protection of the Collective Interests of Consumers The following is added to Annex I of Directive 2020/1828/EC: Article 5, 6, 7, 15, 18, 20, 26, 31, 33, 35 of the Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a General Product Safety Regulation
Amendment 7 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission’s intention to create a genuine single market for data as it will be the backbone of Europe’s data economy and EU's competitiveness; considers that ensuring trust in digital services is fundamental for the digital single market and should be at the heart of both public policy and business models;
Amendment 13 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the EU approach to digitisation should be human-centred, value-oriented and based on the concept of the social market economy; underlines that choosing a third path to digitisation should not mean that the EU becomes without supporting national protectionistm; stresses, therefore, that every non-EU player should still be welcomthird-country market participants should be able to operate in the single European data space as long as they meet the EU’s ethical, technological, privacy and security standards; stresses in this respect the necessity to create a level-playing field between EU and third-country market players;
Amendment 13 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the EU approach to digitisation should be human-centred, value-oriented and based on the concept of the social market economy; underlines that choosing a third path to digitisation should not mean that the EU becomes without supporting national protectionistm; stresses, therefore, that every non-EU player should still be welcomthird-country market participants should be able to operate in the single European data space as long as they meet the EU’s ethical, technological, privacy and security standards; stresses in this respect the necessity to create a level-playing field between EU and third-country market players;
Amendment 25 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Urges the Commission to empower consumers to put them in control of their data and to ensure that the single market for data is grounded in European values and fairness in competition; believes that citizens’ data could help in developing innovative green solutions and services that would benefit European consumers and companies; asks the Commission to consider how to support data altruismprovide a specific legal basis and a clear definition of "data altruism" and consider how to support it in full compliance with European legislation;
Amendment 32 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that the new strategy should be implemented by means of a principle-based and innovation-friendly EU legal framework, which should be proportionate and avoidseek to lower unnecessary administrative burdens, where they exist, for small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and start-ups, and should be combined with concrete measures, guidance, private- public codes of conduct and programmes, strong investments, and, if necessary, new sector- specific laws;
Amendment 32 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that the new strategy should be implemented by means of a principle-based and innovation-friendly EU legal framework, which should be proportionate and avoidseek to lower unnecessary administrative burdens, where they exist, for small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and start-ups, and should be combined with concrete measures, guidance, private- public codes of conduct and programmes, strong investments, and, if necessary, new sector- specific laws;
Amendment 35 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Believes that the current fragmentation of the single market and diverging rules between Member States are hampering the development of a genuine common European data space and calls for effective and coordinated actions to leverage the scale of the EU single market;
Amendment 36 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the Commission, prior to any legislative initiatives, to perform an in- depth evaluation and mapping of the existing legislation to assess whether adjustments or additional requirements are needed to support the EU data industry and safeguard fair competition for all affected actors and to avoid legal overlaps with potential upcoming legislation to implementing the Data Strategy;
Amendment 36 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the Commission, prior to any legislative initiatives, to perform an in- depth evaluation and mapping of the existing legislation to assess whether adjustments or additional requirements are needed to support the EU data industry and safeguard fair competition for all affected actors and to avoid legal overlaps with potential upcoming legislation to implementing the Data Strategy;
Amendment 38 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses the need for consultations and impact assessments prior to legislative proposals, in order to identify possible negative consequences for market participants, notably SMEs and start-ups;
Amendment 38 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses the need for consultations and impact assessments prior to legislative proposals, in order to identify possible negative consequences for market participants, notably SMEs and start-ups;
Amendment 39 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Considers that ensuring access to data is crucial for citizens but also for our businesses' innovation and growth, especially for start-ups and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and welcomes the actions foreseen by the European Commission in its communication to tackle the current lack of data availability;
Amendment 42 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Asks the Member States to fully implement the Directive on open data and the re-use of public sector information ("Open Data Directive") and the Commission and Member States to promote a culture of wide reuse of available data; furthermore, highlights the need to ensure easy access to data to all relevant institutional and societal actors and to economic operators, especially to SMEs and start-ups, tackling the existing barriers and promoting the use of modern web and API-based services for convenient and fast retrieval, browsing and processing of available data;
Amendment 43 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the key importance of fostering access to data for EU businesses, especially for SMEs and start-ups; considers that voluntary data sharing between businesses based on fair and transparent contractual arrangements, triggered by incentives in the form of subsidies and tax breaks, would help to achieve this goal would help to achieve this goal; believes that the new data strategy must aim at increased data sharing in the EU and at encouraging investment in data sharing projects, including through balanced public-private partnerships;
Amendment 43 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the key importance of fostering access to data for EU businesses, especially for SMEs and start-ups; considers that voluntary data sharing between businesses based on fair and transparent contractual arrangements, triggered by incentives in the form of subsidies and tax breaks, would help to achieve this goal would help to achieve this goal; believes that the new data strategy must aim at increased data sharing in the EU and at encouraging investment in data sharing projects, including through balanced public-private partnerships;
Amendment 45 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights the need to create a single European data space with the aim of ensuring the free flow of non-personal data across borders and sectors; stresses the importance to extend the flow of data also to third countries, provided that the compliance with the EU data protection legal framework is ensured; underlines the principle of the free flow of non-personal data as imperative for a single market for data, providing a level playing field for data sharing between stakeholders; considers that business-to-business (B2B) and business-to-government (B2G) data sharing should be voluntary, while participation in data spaces should be incentivized, and while mandatory access to data should also be envisaged to remedy potential market failures;
Amendment 46 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Asks the Commission and Member States to ensure that the new data strategy will contribute to a speedy implementation of the Directive on Open Data making public sector and publicly funded data re- usable; considers that, to facilitate that, Member States should be encouraged to communicate best practices among each other;
Amendment 46 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Asks the Commission and Member States to ensure that the new data strategy will contribute to a speedy implementation of the Directive on Open Data making public sector and publicly funded data re- usable; considers that, to facilitate that, Member States should be encouraged to communicate best practices among each other;
Amendment 47 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Requests the Commission to evaluate the impact, in particular the increased financial burden, of the prerequisite of requiring open access to publicly funded research data on research institutions, as the important requirements for open access should not result in a drain on publicly funded research in Europe;
Amendment 47 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Requests the Commission to evaluate the impact, in particular the increased financial burden, of the prerequisite of requiring open access to publicly funded research data on research institutions, as the important requirements for open access should not result in a drain on publicly funded research in Europe;
Amendment 51 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Underlines that a safe and trusted ecosystem where storing, processing and exchanging data under the highest cybersecurity standards is a precondition for the development of a truly single market for data and for the creation of the new data spaces; recalls that increased connectivity brings about increased cyber threats and welcomes the announced revision of the Directive on security of network and information systems ("NIS Directive") to improve the current EU Cybersecurity legal framework;
Amendment 51 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. States that fair, simple, intelligible, secure, interoperable and affordable voluntary data sharing agreements between companies from the same supply chain and different sectors, that either monetise the participation of data providers or enable ‘give and take’ schemes, will further accelerate the development of the EU data economy; calls on the Commission to further reflect on the concept of data value, as well as to better define and lay down the scope of "data altruism";
Amendment 51 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. States that fair, simple, intelligible, secure, interoperable and affordable voluntary data sharing agreements between companies from the same supply chain and different sectors, that either monetise the participation of data providers or enable ‘give and take’ schemes, will further accelerate the development of the EU data economy; calls on the Commission to further reflect on the concept of data value, as well as to better define and lay down the scope of "data altruism";
Amendment 53 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of defining fair contractual conditions with the aim of addressing imbalances in market power; underlines that a single European data space will require companies to be allowed to closely cooperate with each other, and therefore considers that safe harbours and block exemptions on cooperation for data sharing and pooling, as well as more guidance for businesses on competition law matters from the Commission, are needed; expects the upcoming Digital Markets Act proposal of the Commission to address those issues; furthermore, stresses the need for the Commission to monitor any market failures and to take adequate action, if and where necessary, including to consider using mandatory access to data as a remedy;
Amendment 53 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of defining fair contractual conditions with the aim of addressing imbalances in market power; underlines that a single European data space will require companies to be allowed to closely cooperate with each other, and therefore considers that safe harbours and block exemptions on cooperation for data sharing and pooling, as well as more guidance for businesses on competition law matters from the Commission, are needed; expects the upcoming Digital Markets Act proposal of the Commission to address those issues; furthermore, stresses the need for the Commission to monitor any market failures and to take adequate action, if and where necessary, including to consider using mandatory access to data as a remedy;
Amendment 62 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recommends further strengthening interoperability and establishing consensus-based, industry-led common standards in order to guarantee that the movement of data between different machines and entities can take place in an innovative manner; calls on the Member States to ensure access to public information and high-quality data held by public authorities, notably in the area of justice, without prejudice to the Regulation on general data protection and the ePrivacy Directive;
Amendment 62 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recommends further strengthening interoperability and establishing consensus-based, industry-led common standards in order to guarantee that the movement of data between different machines and entities can take place in an innovative manner; calls on the Member States to ensure access to public information and high-quality data held by public authorities, notably in the area of justice, without prejudice to the Regulation on general data protection and the ePrivacy Directive;
Amendment 63 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Stresses the economic and societal importance of easily accessible and free of charge public sector data in the view of their re-use; calls for clear rules for business-to-government (B2G) data sharing, in particular with regards to possible fees to be derived from the costs related to the processing of requests for re-use of data;
Amendment 70 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Calls on the Member States for an effective implementation of the Regulation on the free flow of non- personal data, with the objective to allow data to be stored and processed everywhere in the EU without unjustified restrictions; recalls that data localisation requirements within the Union are prohibited unless justified on grounds of public security in compliance with the principle of proportionality and reminds that any such existing requirements must be repealed by 30 May 2021;
Amendment 78 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Recalls the existing general data protection regime as stipulated in Regulation 2016/679/EU on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data; highlights the need to finalise the revision of the ePrivacy regulation with the aim of creating a level-playing field for EU companies with regards to the acquisition, use, and notably transfer of data;
Amendment 78 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Recalls the existing general data protection regime as stipulated in Regulation 2016/679/EU on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data; highlights the need to finalise the revision of the ePrivacy regulation with the aim of creating a level-playing field for EU companies with regards to the acquisition, use, and notably transfer of data;
Amendment 83 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that thealthough existing liability principles and technology-neutral liability rules are already fit for the digital economy and most emerging technologies; states that there are nevertheless some cases, such as those concerning operators of AI systems, where newregimes might, in general, be fit for the digital age, there are certain areas, such as the area of Artificial Intelligence and similar technologies, where new or additional liability rules armight be necessary to provi, in order the affected persons with adequate compensation; o enhance legal certainty and to provide for an adequate compensation scheme for the legitimate use of data;
Amendment 83 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that thealthough existing liability principles and technology-neutral liability rules are already fit for the digital economy and most emerging technologies; states that there are nevertheless some cases, such as those concerning operators of AI systems, where newregimes might, in general, be fit for the digital age, there are certain areas, such as the area of Artificial Intelligence and similar technologies, where new or additional liability rules armight be necessary to provi, in order the affected persons with adequate compensation; o enhance legal certainty and to provide for an adequate compensation scheme for the legitimate use of data;
Amendment 84 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Recalls that data is the central element for AI development and that AI systems rely on and process large volumes of data and that these systems often utilise structured data; the data strategy should aim at increased data accessibility through tackling existing barriers and promoting the use of modern web and API-based services for convenient and fast retrieval, browsing and processing of available data;
Amendment 84 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Recalls that data is the central element for AI development and that AI systems rely on and process large volumes of data and that these systems often utilise structured data; the data strategy should aim at increased data accessibility through tackling existing barriers and promoting the use of modern web and API-based services for convenient and fast retrieval, browsing and processing of available data;
Amendment 86 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines the need to improve access to European cloud services and to address interoperability issues, which now constitute a significant barrier for an effective data sharing, by including codes of conduct, certification and standards, in a ‘cloud rulebook’; considers proportionality to be the guiding principle for data quality and interoperability requirements; calls on the Commission to consider promoting existing standards to avoid unnecessary transaction costs and to provide high quality standards for sectors and data spaces of high importance for significant societal challenges.;
Amendment 88 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses that the implementation of the European Data Strategy must strike a balance between promoting the wider use and sharing of data and protecting intellectual property rights (IPR), privacy and trade secrets; underlines that data used for the training of AI algorithms sometimes relies on structured data such as databases, copyright-protected works and other creations enjoying IP protection which may not usually be considered as data;
Amendment 88 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses that the implementation of the European Data Strategy must strike a balance between promoting the wider use and sharing of data and protecting intellectual property rights (IPR), privacy and trade secrets; underlines that data used for the training of AI algorithms sometimes relies on structured data such as databases, copyright-protected works and other creations enjoying IP protection which may not usually be considered as data;
Amendment 89 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Recognises the rise of the edge computing paradigm, especially considering the ongoing rollout of 5G networks and subsequent business models, and stresses the need to make sure that technical and legal solutions for providing effective access to data on the edge are found; emphasises the urgent need to address the emerging cybersecurity and data interoperability challenges that the unprecedented scale and the distributed nature of edge computing brings along, including the challenges in machine authentication, data provenance, privacy, and integrity;
Amendment 92 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Highlights that in order to unlock the potential of digital technologies, it is necessary to remove unnecessary legal barriers, so as not to hamper the growth of or innovation in the Union’s developing data economy;
Amendment 92 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Highlights that in order to unlock the potential of digital technologies, it is necessary to remove unnecessary legal barriers, so as not to hamper the growth of or innovation in the Union’s developing data economy;
Amendment 96 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Is of the belief that the data-drivenCalls for prior impact assessments to be conducted in the context of new digital tecohnomy does not require major changes to the existing IPR framework and thus notes that the Commission should carefully assess what legal adjustments are really necessary; welcomes, in this regard,logies prior to new legislative proposals or proposed changes to existing legislation; welcomes the Commission’s intention to revise the Database Directive and to possibly further clarify the application of the Trade Secrets Directivedirective on the protection of trade secrets;
Amendment 96 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Is of the belief that the data-drivenCalls for prior impact assessments to be conducted in the context of new digital tecohnomy does not require major changes to the existing IPR framework and thus notes that the Commission should carefully assess what legal adjustments are really necessary; welcomes, in this regard,logies prior to new legislative proposals or proposed changes to existing legislation; welcomes the Commission’s intention to revise the Database Directive and to possibly further clarify the application of the Trade Secrets Directivedirective on the protection of trade secrets;
Amendment 102 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Welcomes the intention to address the current limitations of the data portability and to enhance the portability rights for individuals under the Article 20 of the GDPR;
Amendment 102 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to assess to what extent the application of foreign jurisdictions’ legislation, such as the US CLOUD Act or 2017 China’s National Intelligence Law, might lead to legal uncertainty and disadvantages for Union residents and businesses and whether any action is needed in this regard.
Amendment 102 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to assess to what extent the application of foreign jurisdictions’ legislation, such as the US CLOUD Act or 2017 China’s National Intelligence Law, might lead to legal uncertainty and disadvantages for Union residents and businesses and whether any action is needed in this regard.
Amendment 105 #
2020/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Underlines the close link between data and AI and stresses that data availability and data quality are crucial for the development of effective, well- functioning and unbiased systems of artificial intelligence;
Amendment 5 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the European Union needs to take urgent steps to close the gap with the US and China to be at the forefront of ensuring a competitive data- driven global economy and to become a leader in setting digital standards;
Amendment 6 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 12 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. SNotes the risks of incompatibility between approaches of different trading partners when it comes to the regulation of digital trade; strongly supports multilateral solutions for digital trade rules and calls for the plurilateral WTO negotiations on e- commerce to be concluded as a matter of urgency; regrets that, in the absence of global rules, EU companies are faced with non-tariff barriers in digital trade such as unjustified data localisation and mandatory technology transfer requirements; supports making the WTO moratorium on electronic transmissions permanent; calls for the EU to further work with partners, for instance within the OECD and WTO, to set global standards for AI, in the interest of reducing trade barriers and promoting trustworthy AI in line with the EU's values;
Amendment 15 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 18 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. NStresses the centrality of data flows to digital trade, and that apart from being a means of production, data itself has become a tradable asset; notes that data access and processing are often indispensable to providing competitive digital services, notably in AI; calls on the Commission to adopt digital trade rules that increase the competitiveness of EU business and facilitate the free transfer of data flowsflow of non- personal data across borders while respecting EU data protection rules; highlights that in line with the GDPR, personal data can be transferred to third countries via adequacy decisions, standard contractual clauses and binding corporate rules; calls for data protection considerations to be raised in future trade agreements, with the aim to facilitate the adequacy decision process with trading partners;
Amendment 23 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 27 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 32 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 36 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 37 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the conclusion of the rules-based Asian Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement, which deepens the economic integration of the region; regrets, however, the lack of a robust sustainable development chapter in the RCEP; believes that the conclusion of the RCEP should encourage the EU to help set global rules for the digital economy; supports in this regard the establishment of an EU-US Trade and Technology Council and the work on a Transatlantic AI Agreement to help facilitate trade and the development of compatible rules and common standards in digital trade; calls on both parties to use the momentum of the new Biden administration to begin working on these issues urgently, and to find an agreement at the OECD on fair taxation for the digital economy;
Amendment 38 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 40 #
2020/2216(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines the role of digital trade and the use of blockchain for instance in facilitating access to global value chains for SMEs and contributing to women’s economic empowerment. making cross-border trade processes and commercial transactions more efficient and less costly; Highlights in particular the benefits these could bring to contributing to women’s economic empowerment and also using blockchain to facilitate due diligence for companies; Calls for Digital Trade to be a pillar of the EU's new Trade Strategy; Further calls for Digital Trade Chapters to be included in all future FTAs;
Amendment 41 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 47 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 52 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 146 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 171 #
2020/2216(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. cCalls on the Commission and the Member States to make 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 oftaking the risk profile and the possible welfare gain of their product into account; believes that these tools can help encourage innovation without any detriment to consumer protection;
Amendment 178 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 #
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 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 #
2020/2216(INI)
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 #
2020/2216(INI)
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;
Amendment 41 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 16 a (new)
Citation 16 a (new)
- having regard to the report of the Council of Europe’s Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination of 18 October 2017 on promoting the human rights of and eliminating discrimination against intersex people,
Amendment 43 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 16 b (new)
Citation 16 b (new)
- having regard to the report of the Council of Europe’s Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination of 22 April 2015 on discrimination against transgender people in Europe,
Amendment 55 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 a (new)
Citation 25 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 14 February 2019 on the rights of intersex people;1a _________________ 1a Texts adopted, P8_TA(2019)0128
Amendment 116 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) are based on the rights of all individuals to have their bodily integrity and personal autonomy respected; definhave their sexual orientation and gender identity fully respected; decide whether, with whom and when to be sexually active; decide whether, when and who to marry and when, whether and by what means to have a child or children; have access to the information and support necessary to achieve all of the above9 ; _________________ 9 Guttmacher-Lancet Commission, Executive Summary on sexual and reproductive health and rights, The Lancet, London, 2018, https://www.guttmacher.org/guttmacher- lancet-commission/accelerate-progress- executive-summary
Amendment 151 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas SRHR challenges and obstacles include: a lack of access, denial of medical care based on personal beliefs, gender-based violence, gynaecological and obstetric violence, a lack of comprehensive sexuality education, denial of access to information/education, a lack of available contraception methods, limited access to medically assisted reproduction treatments, forced sterilisation, including in the context of legal gender recognition, high rates of STIs and HIV, disparities in maternal mortality, high adolescent pregnancy rates, harmful gender stereotypes and practices such as female and intersex genital mutilation, early, forced and child marriages and honour killings; , honour killings and so-called “conversion therapy” practices, which can take the form of sexual violence such as “corrective rape” on lesbian and bisexual women and girls, as well as transgender persons; whereas the enjoyment of SRHR for LGBTI persons may be severely hindered due to the omission in sexual education curricula of the diversity of sexual orientation, gender identity, expression and sex characteristics;
Amendment 161 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Amendment 164 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
F b. whereas in certain circumstances transgender men and non-binary persons may also undergo pregnancy and should, in such cases, benefit from measures for pregnancy and birth-related care without discrimination on the basis of their gender identity;
Amendment 210 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas no woman should die in childbirth and evidence-based maternity, pregnancy and birth-related care is a human right;
Amendment 290 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Recalls the views endorsed by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, which recommended trans- specific healthcare such as hormonal treatment and surgery to be accessible and reimbursed by public health insurance schemes;1a _________________ 1aCDDH Report on the implementation of Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)5 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on measures to combat discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity, ¶130, accessible at https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_det ails.aspx?ObjectId=09000016809f9ba0
Amendment 315 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls that all medical interventions related to SRHR must be undertaken with prior, personal and fully informed consent;
Amendment 319 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Reaffirms its call on Member States to adopt legislation ensuring that intersex persons are not subjected to non- vital medical or surgical treatment during infancy or childhood, and that their right to bodily integrity, autonomy, self- determination and informed consent is fully respected;
Amendment 322 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Amendment 341 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Recalls that the imparting of information should reflect the diversity of sexual orientations, gender identities, expressions and sex characteristics, so as to counter misinformation based on stereotypes or biases; calls on Member States to develop age-appropriate sexual education curricula inclusive of the former;
Amendment 405 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Invites the Member States to review their national legal provisions on abortion and bring them in line with international human rights standards and regional best practices by ensuring that abortion at a woman’s and any pregnant person's request is legal in early pregnancy and even beyond if the woman’sir health or life is in danger;
Amendment 407 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Underlines that all the rights afforded to women by law regarding abortion care must apply to all persons undergoing pregnancy, including transgender and non-binary persons, without discrimination on grounds of their gender identity or gender expression and in line with international human rights practices;
Amendment 410 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading d
Subheading d
Maternity, pregnancy and birth-related care for all
Amendment 414 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls upon the Member States to adopt measures to ensure that all women and pregnant persons have access to affordable, evidence-based maternity, pregnancy and birth-related care;
Amendment 431 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Calls upon the Member States to ensure that maternity, pregnancy and birth-related care must be equally accessible to all persons undergoing pregnancy without discrimination of any kind, notably on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity;
Amendment 484 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls upon the Commissioner for Equality to promote and protect SRHR and to include them in the next EU gender equality simplementation of the EU gender equality strategy and the EU LGBTIQ Equality Strategy;
Amendment 500 #
2020/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Calls upon the Commission to strengthen its actions to counter the backlash against women’s rights and SRHR;
Amendment 6 #
2020/2137(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Reiterates that global value chains are the key feature of the global economy and that trade policy must contribute to a transparent production process throughout the value chain and; demonstrate compliance with environmental, social and safety standards in line with the Paris Climate Agreement and promote the achievement of the SDGs;
Amendment 38 #
2020/2137(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes with concern that less than 1 % of companies publicly list their suppliers, even in high-risk sectors; notes that publicly listed companies, unlisted public companies and private companies registered in the EU may have different obligations under national law in regards to sustainable corporate governance; recalls the importance of levelling the playing field vis-a-vis companies registered outside of the EU;
Amendment 4 #
2020/2136(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. Considering the current tensions generated by the UK's failure to comply with its obligations under the Protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland;
Amendment 23 #
2020/2136(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. 1. Is deeply concerned about recent decisions taken unilaterally by the United Kingdom and going against the full implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement to which both parties have committed; supports the actions taken by the Commission and calls on the UK to quickly return to a cooperative and good faith attitude;
Amendment 28 #
2020/2136(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4 c. 3. Stresses the difficulties encountered by the EU delegation in the United Kingdom with regard to the recognition of its status, at a time when its work is particularly necessary following the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union; hopes that solutions can be found and implemented rapidly to enable the EU delegation in the United Kingdom to fulfil its mission effectively;
Amendment 7 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that Europe's 25 million small and medium- sized enterprises (SMEs) are the backbone of the EU economy employing around 100 million people and accounting for more than half of Europe’s GDP; underlines that the proper functioning of the internal market and the creation of a capital market union remains an absolute priority for SMEs;
Amendment 10 #
2020/2131(INI)
1 a. Welcomes the new SME Strategy for a Sustainable and Digital Europe, especially its focus on the EU’s twin transitions to a sustainable and digital economy as well as on reducing regulatory burden for SMEs and improving their market access and access to financing; believes that focusing on digital and innovative solutions will increase Europe’s global competitiveness as a whole;
Amendment 17 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Welcomes the European Union trade policy review responding to the new global challenges and taking into account the lessons learned from the coronavirus crisis; emphasizes that it must recognise the challenges faced by SMEs in international trade;
Amendment 27 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Encourages the Commission to fully support SMEs inUnderlines that global markets are a crucial source of growth for SMEs; notes however that only 600 000 SMEs export goods outside the EU; encourages the Commission to fully support SMEs and to effectively implement the new SME strategy in order to overcominge all barriers that prevent their access to third- countryinternational markets; requests therefore for the Commission to continue the inclusion of an SME chapter in every trade agreement; underlines the need for the effective enforcement of trade agreements as a priority task of the Chief Trade Enforcement Officer (CTEO); welcomes the recent appointment of the first CTEO and highlights its important role in ensuring that SMEs get maximum value from EU trade agreements;
Amendment 33 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Highlights the significance of the ongoing plurilateral WTO negotiations on e-commerce; calls for a comprehensive and ambitious set of rules, to facilitate the free flow of data across borders while guaranteeing European data protection standards, to address digital trade barriers including data localisation requirements and ensure that businesses, especially SMEs, can compete globally on a level playing field;
Amendment 37 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to be more active in its support of national and regional export agencies in order to allow SMEs to overcome the information gap and take better advantage of trade agreements; opines, in this respect, that the Commission could set up an SME internationalisation platform to monitor progress; recalls that the EU Delegations also have a crucial role in providing support by addressing queries and practical difficulties of SMEs linked to the implementation of FTAs;
Amendment 41 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to take greaterinto account of the role of SMEsSME specifities in all chapters of trade and investment negotiations, including when it comes to negotiating public procurement chapters in trade agreements; welcomes the announcement from the Commission that it will launch a new information portal on customs procedures and formalitiesto raise awareness of SMEs on trade policies and provide detailed information on customs procedures and formalities for exporting to third countries; asks the Commission to reach out to businesses at the earliest possible stage when setting up new information portals or improving already existing ones to ensure that the information needs of SMEs in particular can be met in a practical way; calls on the Commission to deliver on its objective of launching a self-assessment tool for rules of origin to help SMEs assess whether a product benefits from preferences under a given trade agreement; reiterates, in this context also the importance of streamlined and simplified rules of origin;
Amendment 57 #
2020/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to strengthen the EU’s safeguard and trade defence instrumentstrade toolbox in order to better protect European industrybusinesses, in particular when it affects sectors with a majority of SMEs; urges the Commission to raise more awareness among stakeholders about trade defence instruments (TDI) and increase its support to SMEs in facilitating their access to TDIs.
Amendment 10 #
2020/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the European Ombudsman launched a Strategic Initiative on the leave rights of certain EU staff members and the best interests of the child (SI/1/2019/AMF)1a, which led to the harmonisation of rules between the European Commission and the Council regarding leave rights of staff members who become parents through surrogacy; whereas no comparable results were produced in the European Parliament due to unwillingness to adapt its rules on leave; _________________ 1a https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/op ening-summary/en/113554
Amendment 123 #
2020/2125(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Amendment 9 #
2020/2118(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 16 a (new)
Citation 16 a (new)
- having regard to the UNAIDS Progress Report to the 47thMeeting of the UNAIDS Programme Coordinating Board of 23 November 2020, entitled “COVID- 19 and HIV: Progress Report 2020";1a _________________ 1a https://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/ media_asset/COVID-19_HIV_EN.pdf
Amendment 71 #
2020/2118(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated human rights violations and stigma and discrimination faced by people living with HIV, LGBTI persons and other vulnerable groups, underlining the critical need for COVID-19 responses to be rooted in human rights and equality, as learned from the HIV response; whereas key populations have on occasion suffered from denied access to services or discriminatory enforcement of the COVID-19 response under lockdown orders;
Amendment 246 #
2020/2118(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Notes that research globally indicates that stigma and discrimination continue to affect people living with HIV, key populations and vulnerable groups; recalls UNAIDS’ conclusions that people and groups associated with COVID-19 have also experienced negative perceptions and actions; highlights that vulnerable and marginalised populations continue to be stigmatised, including through HIV and COVID-19 intersections, such as people living in poverty, the homeless, refugees, migrants, sex workers, persons who use drugs, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons;1a _________________ 1aCOVID-19 and HIV: Progress report 2020, ¶80, accessible on https://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/ media_asset/COVID-19_HIV_EN.pdf.
Amendment 31 #
2020/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the mainstreaming of the European Green Deal into the communication on the Trade Policy Review (TPR) and calls for a concrete action plan, roadmap and timeline to make this ambition a reality;
Amendment 39 #
2020/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the incorporation of the Paris Agreement as an essential element in all trade, investment and partnership agreements; stresses that ratification of the International Labour Organization (ILO) core conventions and respect for human rights are requirements for concluding FTAs; asks for ambitious chapters on gender and on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), as well as dedicated chapters on digital trade to be included in all trade agreements;
Amendment 68 #
2020/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that high up-front costs, which willcould only repay themselves over time, and a lack of know-how and equipment are currently preventing developing countries from ‘going green’; demands that the Commission use all trade instruments at its disposal to increase financial support, technical assistance, technology transfers and digital penetration in order to empower developing countries and enable them to achieve sustainable resilience;
Amendment 93 #
2020/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses the need for more coherency and transparency in scrutinising EU trade policy; underlines that coherent, clear, measurable and objective criteria for the EU’s trade policy and regular discussions between the Commission and European Parliament can contribute to more transparency and engagement of EU citizens, better dialogue between the Commission and the European Parliament, more policy coherence and better scrutiny of all aspects of trade policy; stresses the role of ex-ante, intermediate and ex-post sustainable impact assessment in this regard; calls on the Commission to engage with the European Parliament at all stages of its proposals that fall under the EU’s trade policy and ensure that the European Parliament can exercise its role as scrutiniser;
Amendment 116 #
2020/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the importance of ensuring fair competition and a level playing field for European businesses in both the internal market and third-country markets; stresses, in this regard, the importance of trade defence instruments and; underlines that the enforcement regulation should have a positive contribution to the goal of ensuring fair competition and a level playing field, and stresses that TSD could be subjected to the enforcement regulation; calls on the Commission to swiftly complete the EU’s trade defence toolbox through legislative proposals in 2021, giving priority to an anti-coercion instrument, an instrument to tackle distortions caused by foreign subsidies and state-owned enterprises and to the conclusion of negotiations on the International Procurement Instrument12 ; underlines the role of the Chief Trade Enforcement Officer (CTEO) in working with the European Parliament in a transparent manner to discuss and address issues related to trade defence instruments; __________________ 12Amended proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 January 2016 on the access of third- country goods and services to the Union’s internal market in public procurement and procedures supporting negotiations on access of Union goods and services to the public procurement markets of third countries (COM(2016)0034).
Amendment 136 #
2020/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Is convinced that the EU is too dependent on a limited number of suppliers for critical goods and services; insists that the EU should overcome these undesirable dependencies via a mix of policies to incentivise companies to stockpile, diversify sourcing strategies and promote nearshoring, which could create new trading opportunities for partners in the Eastern and Southern Neighbourhoods; underlines the role that trade agreements should have in diversifying supply and open trade relations for critical goods and services; stresses that shortening or altering supply chains to the EU’s neighbourhood and Africa can have a positive effect on their sustainable, green, inclusive and resilient economic growth, as well as for the EU’s strategic interests;
Amendment 149 #
2020/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to come up with a digital trade strategy to increase the market access of European businesses and protect EU citizens’ rights under the GDPR13 ; underlines the acceleration of the digital revolution due to COVID-19 and stresses the importance of the EU taking the lead in setting standards for a sustainable, digital-driven global economy and keeping international data flows open; underlines that the EU can set a global standard for fair and resilient digital trade in its bilateral and multilateral engagements; calls upon the Commission to make meaningful progress on setting ambitious rules for e-commerce in the WTO; underlines that the digital chapter in the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement can serve as a model for future trade agreements; __________________ 13Regulation (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 (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 167 #
2020/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Underlines that international trade governance has an importantessential role to play in the rapid development of medical treatments and vaccines, the rapid scaling up of production, the development of resilient global value chains and equitable market access for the whole world; stresses, in this context, that the COVID-19 pandemic mustshould be used to provide impetus for more concerted international cooperation and to boost global preparedness for health emergencies;
Amendment 175 #
2020/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Stresses that global supply chains for raw materials, production and distribution of vaccines benefit from open trade relations; underlines that protectionism in the production and distribution of vaccines can hinder addressing the global pandemic; recognises that the EU is relatively one of the largest exporters of vaccines to third countries, but that on an absolute level, these exports are not yet sufficient to tackle the global pandemic;
Amendment 180 #
2020/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Is concerned about the recent rise in variants of COVID-19, as well as export restrictions on vaccines by the main manufacturing countries such as the US, the UK, China and India and by the EU and emphasises that this endangers the rapid global scaling up of vaccine production capacity; urges the Commission to engage with producing countries to swiftly eliminate export barriers and to replace the export authorisation mechanism with an export and import notification requirement; insists on having timely and comprehensive access to such data;
Amendment 192 #
2020/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Underlines that the vaccines against COVID-19 and its variants arshould be a global public good and that multilateral efforts should be focused on ramping up global production capacities and technology transfers, including in low and middle- income countries; strongly welcomes, in this regard, the Global C19 Vaccine Supply Chain and Manufacturing Summit held on 8 and 9 March 2021 and calls for the establishment of structural platforms to rapidly scale up vaccine production in more countries;
Amendment 201 #
2020/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Emphasises that international trade policy must play a proactive role in this endeavour by facilitating trade in raw materials, alleviating shortages of qualified and experienced personnel, solving supply chain problems and revisiting the global framework for intellectual property rights for future pandemics; insists, in this regard, on a pro-active and constructive dialogue about a temporary waiver of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) in order to ensure that countries do not face retaliation over COVID-19 related patent infringements during the pandemic; underlines the efforts made by the Director-General of the WTO in bringing members forward in the discussion on trade and health initiatives;
Amendment 234 #
2020/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Underlines that in order to revive the WTO negotiating function, the EU must work together with likeminded partners to find common ground for WTO reform in the broadest sense; stresses that special attention has to be paid to developing countries and their specific needs in relation to economic growth, sustainable development and WTO reform; reaffirms that meaningful progress in WTO reform needs a broad consensus and coalitions of likeminded partners;
Amendment 269 #
2020/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Underlines the importance of the EU-Africa relationship and fostering close political and economic cooperation between the continents; stresses the importance of having a robust partnership with the African continent based on reciprocity, equality and shared interests; underlines that various trade policy instruments can complement the Commission’s efforts in this regard; calls on the Commission to foster an inclusive trade policy approach with Africa and to contribute to sustainable development, economic growth and resilience, taking into account the wide variety in levels of economic development on the continent;
Amendment 273 #
2020/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 b (new)
Paragraph 27 b (new)
27b. Underlines the commitment to our partnership with Latin America and the Caribbean and our trade relations with the region; expresses its concern about the impact COVID-19 has on the continent for its sustainable development and its economic resilience; reiterates that the pandemic affected women in Latin America and the Caribbean severely; calls on the Commission to maintain a structural dialogue with our partners in Latin America and the Caribbean; calls on the Commission to include the Overseas Countries and Territories and to take into account their specific trade needs and relationships with the EU;
Amendment 275 #
2020/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 c (new)
Paragraph 27 c (new)
27c. Underlines that Asia is developing economically and has an important role in the global economy at the moment, especially for goods imports to Europe; stresses the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is both an opportunity for expanding European trade, as well as a potential threat to the EU’s trade efforts in the region; calls on the Commission to remain engaged with the region and proactively promote rules- based trade relations;
Amendment 4 #
2020/2115(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that as Asia is home to the world’s largest population and fastest- growing economies, increasing efficient and sustainable connectivity between the EU and Asia, with an open, rules-based multilateral trading system that ensures a level playing field, will and reciprocity, can play a key role in mutual economic growth and will be an important factor in the recovery from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic;
Amendment 8 #
2020/2115(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that the EU-Asia connectivity strategy should go hand in hand with efforts to increase access to respective markets, including public procurement, and promote an open and transparent investment environment, unlocking opportunities and contributing to global competitiveness; Regrets that many countries in Asia still apply protectionist economic policies creating an unfair playing field for European businesses; notes that allowing free trade flows will buildcontributes to strengthening economic resilience and to ensure the global availability of products through the diversification of supply chains;
Amendment 14 #
2020/2115(INI)
3. Believes that efficient and sustainable connections and networks between Europe and Asia through priority transport corridors, including air, sea and land transport, and high-capacity network links as well as more efficient and reliable customs procedures, that build on digitalisation and administrative simplification, will increase trade flows between the EU and Asia; acknowledges the existence of an investment gap in connectivity and recognises the need to mobilise and strengthen cooperation with private investors, national and international institutions, and multilateral development banks; Stresses that the facilitation of trade between the EU and Asian partners through improved connectivity should at the same time result in the strengthening of customs performance and management, notably in enforcing Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs), as a tool to fight against fraud and prevent counterfeit goods entering the single market;
Amendment 19 #
2020/2115(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Recalls the potential of New Arctic shipping routes of reducing by up to 40 percent the time and distance between Europe and Asia, creating new trading hubs, with a significant impact on trade flows; Stresses that the management of these new routes should be sustainable and in line with international rules and norms, preventing any additional pressure on the Arctic ecosystem;
Amendment 27 #
2020/2115(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines the importance of the existing network of bilateral, regional and multilateral trade agreements and the bilateral cooperation between the EU and Asian partners, with successful examples of strategic partnerships in Japan, South Korea and Singapore, Singapore and Vietnam, as well as ongoing negotiations, such as the Comprehensive Agreement on Investments with China; calls on the Commission to start a scoping exercise for the investment negotiations with Taiwan;
Amendment 39 #
2020/2115(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to ensure the enforcement of trade agreements and make existing ones more ambitious, in particular by promoting sustainable EU norms and standardsand international environmental and social norms and standards, such as the respect of ILO Conventions and the Paris Climate Agreement.
Amendment 41 #
2020/2115(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Recalls that EU and Asia are important partners on sustainable development, notably on the delivery of the United Nations 2030 Agenda, and that the promotion of efficient and sustainable connectivity is an essential element, together with trade, of a broader strategic partnership with Asian partners.
Amendment 17 #
2020/2077(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. RAcknowledges the need for a comprehensive legal framework on circular economy; regrets the lack of international and European standards on waste quality and end-of-waste criteria as this hinders a viable trade policy that is conducive to the circular economy; calls on the Commission to present harmonised standards on waste quality and end-of- waste rules, a legal definition of recyclable waste, and to include these in future FTAs; and introduce these standards on an international level; believes that a revision of the Waste Shipment Regulation would provide an opportunity to put an end to the export of the EU’s waste problems and therefore welcomes the Commission's announcement of revising this regulation;
Amendment 27 #
2020/2077(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that in the transition to a circular economy particular attention must be given to key supply chains where the EU’s environmental footprint is significant; underlines the need for transparency and increased traceability in these supply chains and calls on the Commission to tackle notably the efficient use of resources and sustainable production and consumption patterns in the garment sector under its future ‘EU Strategy for Textiles’; welcomes the planned ‘Circular Electronics Initiative’ and underlines the need to in this context define how e-waste can be exported for re- use and recycling;
Amendment 42 #
2020/2077(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to identify and abolish barriers that prevent or restrict market access for circular products from outside the EU and to investigate the possibilities and benefits of reducing tariffs on certain products in order to encourage the development of the circular economy; calls on the Commission to take into account the special needs of EU’s small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and to support them in the implementation of their business strategies to export circular products;
Amendment 63 #
2020/2077(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Encourages the Commission to engage in regulatory dialogues and cooperation with the EU’s trading partners to further support the objectives of the circular economy; calls on the Commission and Member States to further deploy efforts in international fora (UNCTAD, WTO, G20, G7) to pursue the EU’s agenda on circular economy and ensure a global level playing field with international partners; stresses that particular attention must be given to how less developed partner countries can benefit from the circular economy; calls for an assessment of the impact of increased intra-EU recycling rates on countries strongly relying on waste imports; calls on the Commission in particular to integrate the circular economy principles in its strategy ‘Towards a comprehensive Strategy with Africa’.
Amendment 7 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the COVID-19 crisis has had a profound impact on global production and has prompted the European Union to consider its future industrial strategyommission’s proposal on a future EU industrial strategy was published at the very beginning of the COVID-19 crisis and has since been complemented by a further package of recovery measures for Europe’s industry and SMEs; notes that the Strategy focuses on business recovery in a first phase, reconstruction and transformation in a second phase.;
Amendment 16 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that this crisis has demonstrated the need for the EU to adjust its industrial strategy by strengthening the defence of its strategic interests without abandoning international trade; believes that the EU must strike the right balance between protection and openness of its markets, while defending fair competition rules at global level;
Amendment 26 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the fact that the Competitiveness Council on 15 May 2020 referred to 14 industrial ecosystemsCommission having identified 14 coherent industrial ecosystems, representing more than 50 % of EU added value, whose strategic independence shouldmust be ensured;
Amendment 27 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that the EU labour market must be at the heart of the EU’s future industrial strategy; points out that any industrial transformation, besides economic aspects, should focus on the preservation of existing and the creation of new employment;
Amendment 29 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Emphasizes that strong and sustained investment into higher professional education, in particular in STEM fields, will be a key element to stimulate digital innovation, to generate skilled work force and to reduce skill mismatches between job opportunities and job seekers;
Amendment 30 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Is of the opinion that the “Important Projects of Common European Interest” should emphasise projects linked to the Digital Single market, designed to bring together public and private sectors to undertake large- scale projects contributing to the Union’s objectives, thereby encouraging the development of important collaborative projects which promote common European interests, such as the digital transformation; welcomes a reform of the Commission’s guidelines in this regard;
Amendment 31 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Is of the opinion that the creation of a European data economy will be essential in shaping the industrial strategy for Europe; stresses that a European data economy should be human-centric, respect fundamental rights, and be in compliance with privacy rules, data protection, and intellectual property rights;
Amendment 32 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 e (new)
Paragraph 3 e (new)
3e. Stresses the importance of a European single market for data, addressing the challenges which result from a significant increase in legally available data; stresses that individuals, employees and companies in Europe should retain control over their data, based on secure data infrastructures and trusted value chains; considers it vital that the industrial strategy includes measures to build sovereign digital infrastructures and to encourage companies to store and process their data on European soil;
Amendment 33 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 f (new)
Paragraph 3 f (new)
3f. Considers it essential to promote data sharing among public administrations, businesses, research institutions and the public, while respecting data protection and privacy rules, trade secrets and intellectual property rights;
Amendment 34 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 g (new)
Paragraph 3 g (new)
3g. Welcomes the Commission’s announcement to propose an Intellectual Property Action Plan, which assesses the need to upgrade the legal framework, to ensure a smart use of IPR for AI and to address counterfeited products; stresses that the purpose of such an Action plan should furthermore be to uphold Europe’s sovereignty and to promote a global level playing field of IPR protection;
Amendment 35 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 h (new)
Paragraph 3 h (new)
3h. Stresses that the digital transformation will be a key driver for Europe to regain its technological and digital sovereignty and shall therefore be at the heart of any future industrial strategy for Europe;
Amendment 44 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the need for a trade policy capable of diversifying the EU’s sources of supply, and for European companies to be encouraged to be flexible and capable, when needed, of urgently reorienting their production towards vital productsdependence on third country technology and raw materials; urges the Union to increase investment in sectors that are strategic for the EU’s autonomy and the Union’s sovereignty to tackle EU’s dependency;
Amendment 47 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 69 #
2020/2076(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission to help tack the crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic by pursuinge an ambitious industrial policy ofwhich stimulatinges innovation in prosperous technologies of the future, in particular those using artificial intelligence.such as artificial intelligence, robotics, quantum and high performance computing;
Amendment 31 #
2020/2043(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Supports, in the absence of a global carbon price and a multilateral solution, a market-based EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) on condition that it is compatible with EU free trade agreements (FTAs) and WTO rules (by being non- discriminatory and not constituting a disguised restriction on international trade) and EU free trade agreements (FTAs), and that it is proportionate, based on the polluter pays principle and fit for purpose in delivering the climate objectives;
Amendment 37 #
2020/2043(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. notes that any revenue from a EU CBAM must contribute to the aim of reducing global carbon emissions and to ensure WTO compatibility;
Amendment 54 #
2020/2043(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that the general exception clause of Article XXprovisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), such as Articles I, III and XX GATT, should be the basis for any CBAM design and its only rationale should be an environmental one – reducing global CO2 emissions and preventing carbon leakage;
Amendment 65 #
2020/2043(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for thorough impact assessments and for the utmost transparency of the process leading to the CBAM, as well as engagement with the EU’s trading partners to build coalitions and avoid any possible retaliations; notes that the impact assessment must be conducted with the goal of reducing total global emissions, and that is must include the effects on sustainable innovation and changing trade flows and supply chains;
Amendment 92 #
2020/2043(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Considers that international trade and trade policy, as key enablers of the transition towards a climate neutral, resource efficient, circular global economy, need to support global efforts towards the achievement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and international environmental commitments, such as the Paris Agreement, including efforts to reduce pollution, combat climate change and carbon leakage, and promote more sustainable production and consumption;
Amendment 104 #
2020/2043(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Urges the Commission to advance environmental sustainability in the WTO, with the UN SDGs and the Paris Agreement at the core of its work, also by updating the multilateral rules;
Amendment 5 #
2020/2041(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights that, while there are a number of dynamic middle income countries on the African continent, its economic development is still relatively weak in comparison to other parts of the world; stresses that many of its countries will therefore face almost insurmountable challenges caused by the COVID-19 crisis and the effects of climate change; highlights that due to their economic situation, not all of these countries are able to take lockdown measures similar to those taken in developed countries and therefore the containment of the COVID- 19 virus has been impeded;
Amendment 25 #
2020/2041(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights that the European Union still has important economic ties with African states, and that China has intensified its economic engagement in Africa;
Amendment 40 #
2020/2041(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines that the role of many African states in the international division of labour does not promote their sustainable development; calls on the Commission to create a strategy aimed at assisting the African nations with value chain development in order for more added value to be generated within the African continent;
Amendment 48 #
2020/2041(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to reformappropriately revise its current version of its strategy entitled ‘Towards a comprehensive Strategy with Africa’ with a view to addressing the needs of the African countries and regions in the wake of this health and economic crisis;
Amendment 80 #
2020/2041(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. CUnderlines the vital importance of meeting the goals as set by the Paris Climate Agreement; calls for a concrete proposal that establishes common initiatives on a renewable energy supply on the African continent;
Amendment 109 #
2020/2041(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 d (new)
Paragraph 10 d (new)
10 d. Highlights that the future partnership between the European Union and the African Union should be one that is built upon shared values with respect for human rights and good governance;
Amendment 110 #
2020/2041(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 e (new)
Paragraph 10 e (new)
10 e. Underlines that Africa and sub- Saharan Africa in particular will have the highest population growth in the coming decades; calls in this respect for the EU to follow the Task Force for Rural Africa (TFRA) conclusions on the need of investments to Africa food chains with a focus to be given to value-added commodities;
Amendment 6 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)
Citation 5 a (new)
— having regard to the Commission communication of 12 November 2020 entitled ‘LGBTIQ Equality Strategy (2020-2025)’,
Amendment 19 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
— having regard to its resolution of 11 March 2021 on the declaration of the EU as an LGBTIQ Freedom Zone,1a _________________ 1a Texts adopted, P9_TA(2021)0089
Amendment 59 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 16 a (new)
Citation 16 a (new)
— having regard to the Fundamental Rights Agency’s ‘EU LGBTI Survey II: A long way to go for LGBTI equality',1a _________________ 1a https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra _uploads/fra-2020-lgbti-equality-1_en.pdf
Amendment 63 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the first objective of the Union’s Gender Equality Strategy 2020- 2025 focuses on ending gender-based violence and describes it as ‘one of our societies’ biggest challenges’; whereas the Union’s LGBTIQ Equality Strategy recalls that everyone has a right to safety, be it at home, in public or online;
Amendment 71 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas violence against women and other forms of gender-based violence are widespread in the Union and are to be understood as an extreme form of discrimination; whereas gender-based violence is rooted in the unequal distribution of power between women and men, in sexism and gender norms and stereotypes, which have led to domination over and discrimination against women by menand girls in all their diversity by men; whereas gender-based violence also occurs due to perceived deviation from gender norms;
Amendment 85 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas violence against women and LGBTI persons and gender-based violence present different but not mutually exclusive forms and manifestations; whereas those different forms of violence are often interlinked with, and inseparable from, offline violence because they can precede, accompany or continue them;
Amendment 103 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas cyber harassment, cyber stalking, cyber bullying, trolling, online hate speech, flaming, doxxing, dead- naming and image- based sexual abuse are among the most common types of gender- based cyberviolence; whereas some Member States have adopted specific legislation on some of those particular forms only;
Amendment 108 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
D a. whereas hate speech against LGBTI persons is pervasively common, in particular online, and legislation is notably absent from some Member States’ legislative framework to prevent, address and sanction such forms of online abuse; whereas, at present, 15 Member States do not include gender identity in hate speech legislation; whereas the Commission has proposed to extend the list of ‘EU crimes’ under Article 83(1) TFEU to cover hate crime and hate speech, including when targeted at LGBTIQ people;
Amendment 125 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
E a. whereas the EU LGBTI Survey II conducted by FRA shows that 10% of LGBTI persons had experienced cyber harassment due to being LGBTI in the last year, including on social media; whereas intersex and trans people are over-proportionally affected (16%); whereas teenagers 15-17 years old experienced cyber-harassment due to being LGBTI the most (15%), as compared with other age groups (7%- 12%);
Amendment 130 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas women in all their diversity can be targeted by cyberviolence either individually or as members of a specific community; whereas intersectional forms of discriminationtargeting of LGBTI persons is often on the grounds of their gender identity, gender expression or sex characteristics; whereas intersectional forms of discrimination increase the exposure to violence for women belonging to ethnic minorities, with disabilities, as well as lesbian, bisexual, transgender and intersex women, and can exacerbate the consequences of gender- based cyberviolence;
Amendment 144 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas some women and LGBTI persons, such as politicians, women in public positions, journalists, bloggers and human rights defenders, are particularly impacted by gender-based cyberviolence, and whereas this is causing not only psychological harm and suffering to them but also deterring them from participating digitally in political, social and cultural life;
Amendment 186 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Welcomes the Commission’s commitments under the LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025 concerning hate speech online, and the proposal to extend the list of ‘EU crimes’ under Article 83(1) TFEU to cover hate crime and hate speech, including when targeted at LGBTIQ people;
Amendment 190 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the COVID-19 pandemic has increased the risk of domestic violence and abuse because victims are forced to spend more time with perpetrators and they tend to be more isolated from support networks; highlights that many LGBTI persons were forced to be confined with family members, legal guardians or co-habitants who harassed, abused or exposed them to violence; calls on Member States to increase the assistance they offer through specialised shelters, helplines and support services to protect victims and facilitate the reporting of gender-based violence;
Amendment 248 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that inter alia stress, concentration problems, anxiety, panic attacks, low self-esteem, depression, post- traumatic stress disorder, lack of trust and lack of sense of control, caused by cyberviolence, can have an impact on mental health and may lead to self-harm and suicidal ideation;
Amendment 261 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Member States to give particular attention to women belonging to groups put in a vulnerable situation, such as women belonging to ethnic minorities, with disabilities, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and intersex women, as well as LGBTI persons in general and in particular LGBTI youth, as regards gender-based cyberviolence and to develop specific support services and educational programmes dedicated to those specific groups;
Amendment 285 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Recalls that gender norms and stereotypes are at the core of gender discrimination and are one of the main barriers to the entry of women and girls in the ICT and digital fields; stresses the need to tackle the gender gap in the ICT sector through education, awareness-raising campaigns and the promotion of the representation of women in the sector;
Amendment 289 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Recalls that the labelling of LGBTI persons as an ‘ideology’ is spreading in online and offline communication and the same is true with regard to ongoing campaigning against so-called ‘gender ideology’ or in favour of ‘anti-gender movements’; highlights that LGBTI activists are often the targets of defamation campaigns, online hate speech and cyberbullying and abuse due to their advocacy work for LGBTI equality;
Amendment 351 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 3
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 3
The scope should cover any form of gender-based violence committed, assisted or aggravated in part or fully by the use of ICT, such as mobile phones and smartphones, the internet, social media platforms or email, against a woman because she is a woman, or affects women disproportionately. The scope should encompass gender-based violence against LGBTIQ persons, who are targeted because of their gender, gender identity, gender expression or sex characteristics.
Amendment 358 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 4 – indent 3
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 4 – indent 3
- ICT-related violations of privacy (including the accessing, sharing and manipulation of private data or images, including intimate data without consent, image-based sexual abuse and non- consensual disclosure of sexual images, doxxing, dead-naming, identity theft);
Amendment 363 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 4 – indent 6
Annex I – Recommendation 2 – paragraph 4 – indent 6
- sexist, transphobic or interphobic hate speech (including: posting and sharing violent content, use of sexist or gendered comments and insults, abusing women for expressing their own views and for turning away sexual advances, inciting to hatred against individuals on grounds of their gender identity, expression or sex characteristics);
Amendment 373 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Annex I – Recommendation 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Member States should implement a series of measures in order to prevent gender- based cyberviolence, having an intersectional approach:
Amendment 376 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
Annex I – Recommendation 3 – paragraph 1 – indent 1
- awareness-raising and educational programmes involving all relevant actors and stakeholders to address the root causes of gender-based cyberviolence, within the general context of gender-based violence in order to bring about changes in social and cultural attitudes and remove gender norms and stereotypes, while promoting responsible behaviour on social media and increasing literacy about the safe use of the internet;
Amendment 428 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 4
Annex I – Recommendation 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 4
- aggravating circumstances, depending on the profile of the women and, girls and LGBTI victims (exploiting specific characteristics, vulnerabilities of women and girl, girls and LGBTI persons online);
Amendment 436 #
2020/2035(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – Recommendation 6 – paragraph 1
Annex I – Recommendation 6 – paragraph 1
The Commission and Member States should collect and publish disaggregated and comparable data on gender-based cyberviolence, in particular on the different forms of gender-based cyberviolence, not only based on law enforcement reports but also on women’sthe experiences of women and LGBTI persons.
Amendment 2 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas an agreement with the UK must ensure a balance of rights and obligations, respect the full integrity and proper functioning of the EU’s internal market and customs union, and guarantee a level playing field for businesses as well as a high level of consumer protection;
Amendment 5 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
A b. whereas during the transition period, EU law across all policy areas, is still applicable to, and in, the UK, with the exception of provisions of the Treaties and acts that were not binding upon, and in, the UK before the Withdrawal Agreement entered into force; whereas on the 14th of May 2020, the European Commission opened infringement proceedings against the UK for failure to comply with EU rules on free movement;
Amendment 6 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
A c. whereas the European Parliament gave its position on the proposed mandate for negotiations for a new partnership with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in its resolution the 12 February 2020.
Amendment 7 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
Amendment 8 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the negotiations on the future partnership shouldcan only be premised on the effective and full implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement and its three protocols;
Amendment 13 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas the United Kingdom (UK) ceased to be a Member State of the European Union (EU) on 31 January 2020.
Amendment 21 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the EU and the UK agreed in the Political Declaration to convene at a high level in June 2020 to take stock of progress of the implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement and of the negotiations with the aim of agreeing action to move forward with negotiations on the future relationship;
Amendment 22 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas unity of the EU and its Member States should maintain their unity throughout the negotiations in order to defend the interests of their citizens in the best possible waythroughout the negotiations is essential in order to defend the interests of the EU, including those of its citizens in the best possible way; whereas the EU and its Member States have remained united throughout the negotiation and adoption of the Withdrawal Agreement and ever since; whereas this unity is reflected in the adoption of the negotiating mandate entrusted to the EU negotiator and Head of the EU Task Force Michel Barnier, who enjoys the strong support of the EU and its Member States;
Amendment 23 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that under no circumstance a third country can have the same rights or enjoy the same benefits as a Member State; stresses that the rights and privileges associated with the access to the internal market go hand in hand with strict obligations for full respect of and compliance with internal market rules; recalls, therefore, that a balanced, ambitious and wide-ranging free trade agreement can only be agreed if a level playing field is secured through stipulation, proper implementation and effective enforcement of robust commitments;
Amendment 27 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the EU and UK agreed in the Political Declaration that the future relationship should be underpinned by shared values such as the respect for and safeguarding of human rights and fundamental freedoms, democratic principles, the rule of law, and support for non-proliferation, international rules-based order including support for non-proliferation, protection of the environment and that these values are an essential prerequisite for cooperation within the framework of the Political Declaration; whereas the future relationship should incorporatebe conditioned to the United Kingdom’s continued commitment to respect the framework of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR);
Amendment 29 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
I a. whereas the Political Declaration states that the future economic partnership will be underpinned by provisions ensuring a level playing field for open and fair competition.
Amendment 31 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I b (new)
Recital I b (new)
Amendment 32 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I c (new)
Recital I c (new)
I c. whereas facing a global pandemic and its foreseeable geopolitical, economic and social consequences reinforces the necessity to improve cooperation mechanisms between partners and allies.
Amendment 41 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Welcomes and insists that the Commission continues its practice to provide timely information to the Parliament on the negotiations, in line with the information that is shared with the Member States;
Amendment 42 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Strongly believes that transparency benefits the negotiation process and is also beneficial to citizens and businesses as it allows them to better prepare for the post-transition phase;
Amendment 44 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Stresses the importance of an overarching chapter on the needs and interests of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) with regard to market access facilitation issues including, but not limited to, compatibility of technical standards, and streamlined customs procedures with the aim of preserving and generating concrete business opportunities and fostering their internationalisation; emphasizes the need to enhance the ability of SMEs to benefit from trade in the future EU-UK economic partnership, including through the sharing of information on laws, regulations, and customs; encourages the Parties to set up SME contact points;
Amendment 50 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that ambitious arrangements should be included to facilitate electronic commerce and data flows, to address unjustified barriers to trade by electronic means, and to ensure an open, secure and trustworthy online environment for businesses and consumers, in conformity with EU rules on data protection;
Amendment 53 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Underlines that the covid-19 pandemic directly affects the negotiation process; recognizes the willingness by both parties to continue negotiations during the covid-19 pandemic through virtual means in order to limit the extent of the delay; acknowledges that negotiations through virtual means pose additional challenges; calls on the parties to hold face-to-face meetings once this is deemed safe;
Amendment 55 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Strongly believes that the negative impact of the covid-19 pandemic on global trade and economic relations serves as an additional incentive to make substantial progress in the negotiations and work towards a comprehensive and ambitious partnership;
Amendment 66 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point iv
Paragraph 4 – point iv
(iv) the safeguarding of the EU legal order and the role of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) as the sole body responsible for interpreting EU law in this respect;
Amendment 70 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point vi
Paragraph 4 – point vi
(vi) a level playing field, ensuring equivalent standards in social, labour, environmental, competition and State aid policies, including through a robust and comprehensive framework on competition and State aid control, dispute settlement and enforcement mechanisms;
Amendment 72 #
2020/2023(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Calls on the Parties to work towards simplification of their requirements and formalities for customs procedures in order to reduce the time and costs thereof for traders or operators, including small and medium-sized enterprises;
Amendment 75 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point vii a (new)
Paragraph 4 – point vii a (new)
(vii a) the Parties' commitments to international agreements to tackle climate change including those which implement the United-Nations Framework Conventions on Climate Change, in particular the Paris Agreement should constitute an essential element of the future agreement.
Amendment 91 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Recalls that without a balanced and long-term fisheries agreement that ensures reciprocal access to waters and resources with respect to the principle of sustainable management of fisheries and marine ecosystems and ensuring a level playing field, there will be no economic and trade partnership agreement;
Amendment 92 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Emphasises the importance of making substantial progress on all topics in parallel, including on those that showed limited to no progress such as the level-playing field, governance, law enforcement as well as the timely conclusion of a fisheries agreement;
Amendment 94 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises the importance of being ready for the UK’s withdrawal from the internal market and the customs union at the end of the transition period on 31 December 2020, regardless of the outcome of the negotiations; stresses that the consequences will be even more significant should no agreement be reached; welcomes, in this regard, the Commission’s sector-specific ‘readiness notices’, which seek to ensure that EU industry is ready for the inevitable shock that the UK’s withdrawal from the single market will cause; encourages the European Commission and Member States to enhance their efforts in order to fully inform European citizens and businesses of the risks that the transition period might end before an agreement is reached, in order to allow for and support adequate preparedness to such an unintended but possible outcome.
Amendment 105 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Recalls the negotiating directives, which set out that Gibraltar will not be included in the territorial scope of the agreement to be concluded between the EU and the UK, and that any separate agreement will require the prior agreement of the Kingdom of Spain;
Amendment 119 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls that the Withdrawal Agreement is the instrument for implementing the arrangements for the UK’s withdrawal, that it is not subject to any sort of renegotiation of its provisions and that the onlysole purpose of the EU-UK Joint Committee is to oversee its application; underlines the importance of the effective implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement as a litmus test for the good faith that the UK brings to the negotiating process and recalls that the outcome of the negotiations would be linked to ion the future relationship should be linked to implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement;
Amendment 128 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Insists on having solid guarantees that the UK will implementthe full implementation by the UK of the Withdrawal Agreement effectively and in its entirety before the end of the transition period; stresses that monitoring its implementation should be an integral part of the work on the future relations;
Amendment 130 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8 b. Pays special attention to the full respect of citizens' rights as defined in the Withdrawal Agreement; is determined to ensure that Member States fully respect and protect rights of British citizens living in the European Union under the Withdrawal Agreement; is equally committed to monitor closely that the UK fully respects and protects the rights of EU citizens living on its soil under the Withdrawal Agreement;
Amendment 131 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Insists the European Parliament to be fully and immediately informed of all the discussions held and decisions taken by the Joint Committee; recalls in this respect the obligations stemming from Council Decision (EU) 2020/135 of 30 January 2020 on the conclusion of the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United-Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community2, and in particular Article 2(3) thereof, which provides that Parliament must be in a position to exercise fully its institutional prerogatives throughout the Joint Committee proceedings;
Amendment 134 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Insists that the European Parliament is regularly informed regarding the implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement;
Amendment 135 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8 c. Notes with concern that the COVID19 pandemic had significant consequences on the possibility for EU citizens living in the UK to apply to the EU settlement scheme as front offices have been closed due to the lockdown decided by British authorities;
Amendment 137 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that under the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland, designed and adopted in order to ensure the absence of a hard border on the island of Ireland while protecting the integrity of the Single market after the end of the transition period the UK, while being a third country, will have the task of implementing parts of the Union Customs Code, which will require unprecedented structures to be set up even before the end of the transition period, necessitating due consideration for the issue of proper implementation and enforcement; calls on the Commission to carry out efficient checks and controls; expresses concern at the repeated refusal expressed by the British authorities to authorize the opening of a permanent office for EU officials in Belfast to monitor the good implementation of the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland; notes that the term goods ‘at risk of subsequently being moved into the Union’ used in Article 5 of that Protocol is unclear and depends on subsequent decisions of the Joint Committee which are exempt from formal European Parliament scrutiny; requests to be kept fully informed on the application of that Article and any proposals for decisions of the Joint Committee in that regard;
Amendment 146 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Emphasises the need to proceed with the necessary measures for the introduction of customs procedures for goods entering Northern Ireland from Great Britain, as well as necessary sanitary and phytosanitary controls and other regulatory checks;
Amendment 162 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Takes note that the UK has chosen to establish its future economic and trade partnership with the EU on the basis of a ‘Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement’ as laid down in the UK’s Approach to Negotiations; emphasises that, while the European Parliament is supportive of the EU constructively negotiating a balanced, ambitious and comprehensive FTA with the UK, by its nature an FTA will never be equivalent to ‘frictionless’ trade; expresses concern at the intention of the UK government to move away from zero tariffs and zero quota and avoid any commitments on the level playing field; emphasizes, in this regard, that the agreement should ensure open and fair competition, and prevent distortions in trade and unfair competitive advantages; shares the Commission’s negotiating position whereby the scope and ambition of an FTA that the EU would agree to is conditional on the UK agreeing to provisions related to the level playing field, given the geographical proximity and integration of markets, as well as on the conclusion of an agreement on fisheries;
Amendment 168 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Notes that contrary to the UK’s claim of relying on existing precedents, many proposals in the UK draft legal proposals go significantly beyond what has been negotiated by the EU in other FTAs with third countries in recent years, for example in the area of financial services, mutual recognition of professional qualifications and conformity assessment, equivalence of the SPS regime, or the cumulation of Rules of Origin;
Amendment 178 #
2020/2023(INI)
(-i) a level playing field;
Amendment 179 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point i
Paragraph 13 – point i
(i) reciprocal arrangement for mutually beneficial market access for goods, services, public procurement, recognition of professional qualifications and where relevant foreign direct investment to be negotiated in full compliance with World Trade Organization (WTO) rules while recalling the necessary difference of treatment between a third country and a Member State;
Amendment 216 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point ix
Paragraph 13 – point ix
(ix) an overarching chapter on the needs and interests of micro-enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) with regard to market access facilitation issues including, but not limited to, compatibility of technical standards, and streamlined customs procedures with the aim of preserving and generating concrete business opportunities and fostering their internationalisation; noteregrets that the UK’s approach to the negotiations does not include specific provisions reflecting these objectives;
Amendment 247 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 – introductory part
Paragraph 16 – introductory part
16. Recalls its determination to prevent any kind of ‘dumping’ in the framework of the future EU-UK relationship; considerspoints out that a key outcome of the negotiations is to guarantee a level playing field through robust commitments and enforceable provisions on:
Amendment 249 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 – point i
Paragraph 16 – point i
(i) competition and State aid, which should prevent undue distortion of trade and competition and include provisions on state-owned enterprises; regrets, with regard to State aid, that the UK approach does not reflect the same ambition and only covers subsidies;
Amendment 253 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 – point ii
Paragraph 16 – point ii
(ii) relevant tax matters, including the fight against tax evasion and avoidance and, money laundering and terrorism financing;
Amendment 263 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Points out that these provisions should ensure that standards are not lowered, while empowering both parties to modify commitments over time to lay down higher standards or include additional areas; stresses, moreover, that commitments and provisions should be enforceable by autonomous interim measures, a solid dispute settlement mechanism and remedies, to provide the Union with the ability to adopt sanctions as a last resort in every covered areas, including in relation to sustainable development with a view to dynamic alignment;
Amendment 271 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Strongly believes that the UK should adhere to the evolving standards on taxation and, anti-money laundering and counter terrorism financing legislation within the EU acquis, including tax transparency, the exchange of information on tax matters and anti-tax avoidance measures, and should address the respective situations of its Overseas Territories, its Sovereign Base Areas and its Crown Dependencies and their non- compliance with EU good governance criteria and transparency requirements;
Amendment 273 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Stresses that in line with the 5th Money Laundering Directive (EU) 2015/849, of the European Parliament and the Council and the recommendation of the European Parliament to the Council, the Commission and the Vice- President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs on measures to cut off sources of income for jihadists and to combat the funding of terrorism 2017/2203 of 26th February 2018, the United Kingdom shall fully implement the anti-money- laundering and anti-terrorist financing tax legislation contained in the Directive, as well as its posterior developments and refinements, in particular in the areas of fiscal transparency, exchange of information and measures to combat tax evasion, and shall implement and enforce such legislation in its Overseas Territories, Sovereign Base Areas, Crown Dependencies and Territories under its authority or jurisdiction. Furthermore, for the purposes of combating money-laundering and the financing of terrorism, the United Kingdom should exchange information with the intelligence units of the Union and of the Member States to make possible to identify the identity of the owners of virtual currency and transfers and trust payments, as well as the origin and recipients of Hawala or similar transfers, incorporating them to the standards of transparency required for an equitable taxation.
Amendment 293 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Recalls that this is contrary to the provisions of the Political Declaration, which envisages an ambitious, broad, deep and flexible partnership in the field of foreign policy, security and defence and contains a part dedicated specifically to the EU-UK future security partnership, and to which the UK has agreed;
Amendment 376 #
2020/2023(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Points out that the entire Agreement with the UK as a third country, including among others provisions on the level playing field and fisheries, should include the establishment of a coherent and solid governance system as an overarching framework, covering the joint continuous supervision and management of the Agreement as well as dispute settlement and enforcement mechanisms with sanctions and interim measures where necessary with respect to the interpretation and application of the Agreement’s provisions;
Amendment 1 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3 a (new)
Citation 3 a (new)
- having regard to Directive 2013/11/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004, Regulation (EU) No 524/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on online dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive2009/22/EC (Regulation on consumer ODR) and Directive 2009/22/EC (Directive on consumer ADR), and Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters,
Amendment 3 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)
Citation 5 a (new)
- having regard to the commitment of the European Commission President, Ms. Ursula von der Leyen, to upgrade the liability and safety rules for digital platforms, services and products, and complete the Digital Single Market via a Digital Services Act,
Amendment 10 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8
Citation 8
- having regard to Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights,
Amendment 11 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
- having regard to the 2007 Lugano Convention and the 1958 New York Convention,
Amendment 25 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas some businesses offering digital services enjoy, due to strong data- driven network effects, market dominance that makes it increasingly difficult for other players to compete and difficult for new businesses to even enter the market;
Amendment 33 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas ex-post competition law enforcement alone cannot effectively address the impact of the market dominance of certain online platforms on fair competition in the digital single market;
Amendment 55 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas content hosting platforms often employ automated content removal mechanisms that raise legitimate rule of law concerns, in particular when they are encouraged to employ such mechanisms pro-actively and voluntarily, resulting in content removal taking place without a clear legal basis, which is in contravention ofautomated content removal mechanisms, employed by content hosting platforms, raise legal concerns, in particular as regards possible restrictions of freedom of expression and information, protected under Article 101 of the European Convention on Human Rights, stating that formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties governing the exercise of freedom of expression and information must be prescribed by lawCharter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
Amendment 65 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the civil law regimes governing content hosting platforms’ practices in content moderation are based on certain sector-specific provisions at Union level as well as on laws passed by Member States atand national level, and there arewith notable differences in the obligations imposed on content hosting platforms and in the enforcement mechanisms of the various civil law regimes; whereas this situationand enforcement mechanisms deployed; whereas this situation creates a fragmented Digital Single Market and, therefore, requires a response at Union level;
Amendment 68 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas the choice of algorithmic logic behind such recommendation systems, comparison services, content curation or advertisement placements remains not solely but also at the discretion of the content hosting platforms with little possibility for public oversight, which raises accountability and transparency concerns;
Amendment 72 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas the terms and conditions of platforms, which are non-negotiable, often indicate both applicable law and competent courts outside the Union, which represent an obstacle as regards access to justice; whereas the question of which private international law rules relate to rights to data is ambiguous in Union law as well Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters lays down rules on jurisdiction; whereas Regulation (EU) 2016/679 on the protection of natural persons with regards to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, clarifies the data subject’s right to private enforcement action directly against the controller or processor, regardless of whether the processing takes place in the Union or not and regardless whether the controller is established in the Union or not; whereas Article 79 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 stipulates that proceedings shall be brought before the courts of the Member State in where the controller or processor has ian international lawestablishment or, alternatively where the data subject has his or her habitual residence;
Amendment 77 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)
Recital P a (new)
Pa. whereas it is important to assess the possibility of tasking an existing or new European Agency, or European body, with the responsibility of ensuring a harmonised approach across the Union and address the new opportunities and challenges, in particular those of a cross- border nature, arising from ongoing technological developments.
Amendment 94 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Requests the Commission that the regulation includes a universal definition of ''dominant platforms'' and lay down its characteristics.
Amendment 112 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Insists that the regulation must proscribehibit content moderation practices that are discriminatory;
Amendment 116 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recommends the establishment of a European Agency tasked with monitoring and enforcing compliance with contractual rights as regards content management, auditing any algorithms used for automated content moderation and curation, and impThe application of this regulation should be closely monitored by an existing or new European Agency, or European body, tasked, in particular, to ensure compliance by content hosting platforms with the provisions of this Regulation. The relevant Agency or European body should review compliance with the standards laid down for content management on the basis of transparency reports and an audit of algorithms employed by content hosting penalties for non- compliancelatforms for the purpose of content management;
Amendment 124 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls for content hosting platforms to evaluate the risk that their content management policies of legal content pose to society e.g. public health, disinformation, and, on the basis of a presentation of reports to the relevant European Agency or European body, have a dialogue with the relevant European Agency or European body and the relevant national authorities biannually;
Amendment 125 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Suggests that content hosting platforms regularly submit transparency reports to the European Agencpublish and submit comprehensive transparency reports, including on their content policies, to the existing or new European Agency, or European body, concerning the compliance of their terms and conditions with the provisions of the Digital Services Act; further suggests that content hosting platforms make available, in an easily accessible manner, their content policies and publish their decisions on removing user-generated content on a publicly accessible database;
Amendment 144 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Takes the firm position that the Digital Services Act must not contain provisions forcing content hosting platforms to employ any form of fully automated ex-ante controls of content, and considers that any such mechanism voluntarily employed by platforms must be subject to audits by the European Agencrelevant, existing or new, European Agency or European body to ensure that there is compliance with the Digital Services Act;
Amendment 181 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls for content hosting platforms to give users the choice of whether to consent to the use ofuse targeted advertisingement based on the user’s prior interaction with content on the same content hosting platform or on third party websites, only after having obtained prior consent by the user, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679;
Amendment 184 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Further calls for users to be guaranteed an appropriate degree of influence over the criteria according to which content is curated and made visible for them; affirms that this should also include the option to opt out from any content curation;
Amendment 188 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Suggests that content hosting platforms publish all sponsoreships and advertisements madeclearly visible to their users, indicating who has paid for them, and, if applicable, on behalf of whom they are being placed at all times;
Amendment 214 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Considers that non-negotiable terms and conditions should neitherall not prevent effective access to justice in Union courts nor disenfranchise Union citizens or businesses and that the status of access rights to data; calls on the Commission to assess if the protection of access rights to personal and non-personal data with regards to protection under private international law is uncertain and leads to disadvantages for Union citizens and businesses;
Amendment 230 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – introductory part – indent 1 a (new)
Annex I – part A – introductory part – indent 1 a (new)
- The proposal focuses on content moderation and curation, and civil and commercial law rules with respect to digital services. Other aspects, such as regulation of online market places, are not addressed, but should be included in the Regulation on Digital Services Act to be proposed by the European Commission.
Amendment 246 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part I – section 1 –indent 2 a (new)
Annex I – part A – part I – section 1 –indent 2 a (new)
- It should provide a dialogue between major content hosting platforms and the relevant, existing or new, European Agency or European body together with national authorities on the risk management of content management of legal content.
Amendment 255 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part I – section 1 –– indent 5
Annex I – part A – part I – section 1 –– indent 5
- It should fully respect Union rules protectingthe Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as well as Union rules protecting users and their safety, privacy and personal data, as well as other fundamental rights.
Amendment 262 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part I – section 2 – introductory part
Annex I – part A – part I – section 2 – introductory part
A European Agency on Content Management should be establishedsks the Commission to entrust an existing or new European Agency or European body with the following main tasks:
Amendment 295 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part I – section 2 – indent 4 – subi. 3
Annex I – part A – part I – section 2 – indent 4 – subi. 3
- failure to provide access for the European Agencrelevant, existing or new, European Agency or European body to content moderation and curation algorithms for review;
Amendment 302 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part I – section 2 – indent 4 – subi. 4
Annex I – part A – part I – section 2 – indent 4 – subi. 4
- failure to submit transparency reports to the European Agencrelevant, existing or new, European Agency or European body;
Amendment 308 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part I – section 3 –– introductory part
Annex I – part A – part I – section 3 –– introductory part
The Digital Services Act should contain provisions requiring content hosting platforms to regularly publish and provide transparency reports to the Agency. Suchrespective, existing or new, European Agency or European body. Such reports should be comprehensive, following a consistent methodology. Transparency reports should, in particular, include:
Amendment 315 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part I – section 3 –– indent 1 – subi. 3
Annex I – part A – part I – section 3 –– indent 1 – subi. 3
- the total number of removal requests complied with, and the total number of referrals of content to competent authorities,
Amendment 317 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part I – section 3 –– indent 1 – subi. 8
Annex I – part A – part I – section 3 –– indent 1 – subi. 8
- information on the enforcement of terms and conditions and information on the court rulings received to remove and/or delete terms and conditions for being considered illegal per Member State.
Amendment 324 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part II – section 1 – indent 1
Annex I – part A – part II – section 1 – indent 1
- Measures to lminimitze the data collected by content hosting platforms, based on inter alia interactions of users with content hosted on content hosting platforms, for the purpose of completing targeted advertising profiles, in particular by imposing strict conditions for the use of targeted personal advertisements and by requiring prior consent of the user.
Amendment 325 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part II – section 1 – indent 1
Annex I – part A – part II – section 1 – indent 1
- MEnforcement of existing measures to limit the data collected by content hosting platforms, based on inter alia interactions of users with content hosted on content hosting platforms, for the purpose of completing targeted advertising profiles, in particular by imposing strict conditions for the use of targeted personal advertisements.
Amendment 328 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part II – section 1 – indent 2
Annex I – part A – part II – section 1 – indent 2
- Users of content hosting platforms should be given the choice to opt in or out of receiving targeted advertisementand withdraw their consent to be subject to targeted advertisements, in line with data protection and privacy rules.
Amendment 330 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part II – section 1 – indent 3 – introductory part
Annex I – part A – part II – section 1 – indent 3 – introductory part
- Content hosting platforms should make available an archive of sponsoreships and advertisements that were shown to their users, including the following:
Amendment 331 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part II – section 1 – indent 3 – subi. 1
Annex I – part A – part II – section 1 – indent 3 – subi. 1
- whether the advertisement or sponsorship is currently active or inactive,
Amendment 332 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part II – section 1 – indent 3 – subi. 2
Annex I – part A – part II – section 1 – indent 3 – subi. 2
- the timespan during which the advertisement or sponsorship was active,
Amendment 333 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part II – section 1 – indent 3 – subi. 3
Annex I – part A – part II – section 1 – indent 3 – subi. 3
- the name and contact details of the advertisersponsor or advertiser and, if different, on behalf of whom the advertisement or the sponsorship is being placed,
Amendment 334 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part II – section 1 – indent 3 – subi. 6
Annex I – part A – part II – section 1 – indent 3 – subi. 6
Amendment 353 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part II – section 4 – indent 1
Annex I – part A – part II – section 4 – indent 1
- include the effective enforcement of existing measures ensuring that non- negotiable terms and conditions do not include provisions regulating private international law matters to the detriment of access to justice,
Amendment 357 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – part II – section 4 – indent 2
Annex I – part A – part II – section 4 – indent 2
- include measures clarifying private international law rules as regards data in a way that isto inter alia consider the activities of platforms, so that they are not detrimental to Union subjects,
Amendment 371 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 6 a (new)
Annex I – part B – recital 6 a (new)
(6a) In order to ensure evaluation of the risks presented by the content amplification, this Regulation establishes a biannual dialogue on content management policies of legal content between major content hosting platforms and the respective, existing or new European Agency, or European body together with relevant national authorities.
Amendment 375 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 7
Annex I – part B – recital 7
(7) In order to ensure, inter alia, that users can assert their rights they should be given an appropriate degree of influence over the curation of content made visible to them, including the possibility to opt out of any content curation altogether. In particular, users should not be subject to curation without specific consent.
Amendment 394 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 15
Annex I – part B – recital 15
(15) In order to ensure that users and notifiers to make use of referral to independent dispute settlement bodies as a first step, it must be emphasised that such referral should not preclude any subsequent court action. Given that content hosting platforms which enjoy a dominant position on the market can particularly gain from the introduction of independent dispute settlement bodies, it is appropriate that they take responsibility for the financing of such bodies. These bodies shall be provided with adequate resources to ensure their competence and independence.
Amendment 396 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 16
Annex I – part B – recital 16
(16) Users should have the right to referral to a fair and independent dispute settlement body, as an alternative dispute settlement mechanism, to contest a decision taken by a content hosting platform following a notice concerning content they uploaded. Notifiers should have this right if they would have had legal standing in a civil procedure regarding the content in question.
Amendment 397 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 17
Annex I – part B – recital 17
(17) As regards jurisdiction, the competent independent dispute settlement body should be that located in the Member State in which the content forming the subject of the dispute has been uploaded. For natural persons, it should always be possible to bring complaints to the independent dispute body of their Member States.
Amendment 400 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 19
Annex I – part B – recital 19
(19) This Regulation should include obligations to report on its implementation and to review it within a reasonable time. For this purpose, the independent dispute settlement bodies established pursuant to this Regulation should submit reports on the number of referrals brought before them, including the number of referrals dealt withthe decisions taken – anonymising personal data as appropriate – including the number of referrals dealt with, data on systemic problems, trends and the identification of traders not complying with the decisions of the alternative dispute settlement body.
Amendment 405 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 21
Annex I – part B – recital 21
(21) Action at Union level as set out inThe application of this Regulation wshould be substantially enhanced with the establishment of a Unioclosely monitored by an existing or new European aAgency tasked with monitoring and, or European body tasked, in particular, to ensuringe compliance by content hosting platforms with the provisions of this Regulation. The Agencrespective Agency or European body should review compliance with the standards laid down for content management on the basis of transparency reports and an audit of algorithms employed by content hosting platforms for the purpose of content management ‒
Amendment 416 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 3 –point 1 a (new)
Annex I – part B – Article 3 –point 1 a (new)
(1a) 'Dominant platforms' or 'dominant content hosting platforms' means an information society service with several of the following characteristics: (a) ‘bottleneck power’ – which means the capacity to develop or preserve its user base because of network effects which lock-in a significant part of its users, or its positioning in the downstream market allows it to create economic dependency; (b) a considerable size in the market, measured either by the number of active users or by the annual global turnover of the platform; (c) integration into an business or network environment controlled by its group or parent company, which allows for leveraging market power from one market into an adjacent market; (d) a gatekeeper role for a whole category of content or information; (e) access to large amounts of high quality personal data, either provided by users or inferred about users based on monitoring their online behaviour. Data indispensable for providing and improving a similar service, as well as being difficult to access or replicate by potential competitors;
Amendment 421 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 3 –point 5 a (new)
Annex I – part B – Article 3 –point 5 a (new)
(5a) 'Sponsorship' means content payed for or placed on behalf of a third party;
Amendment 427 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Annex I – part B – Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Dominant content hosting platforms shall evaluate the risks of their content management policies.
Amendment 431 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 4 – paragraph 4
Annex I – part B – Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Content hosting platforms shall provide users with an appropriate degree of influence over the curation of content made visible to them, including the choice of opting out of content curation altogether. In particular, users shall not be subject to content curation without their specific prior consent.
Amendment 436 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 4 a (new)
Annex I – part B – Article 4 a (new)
Article 4a Structured risk dialogue on content curation As part of a structured risk dialogue with the existing or new European Agency, or European body together with the relevant national authorities, the dominant content hosting platforms shall present a report to the Commission or relevant Agency or European body on their risk management of content curation on their platform and how they mitigate these risks.
Amendment 439 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 5 – subparagraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 5 – subparagraph 1
Any natural or legal person or public body to which content is provided through a website or, application, or another software, shall have the right to issue a notice pursuant to this Regulation.
Amendment 446 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 7 –introductory part
Annex I – part B – Article 7 –introductory part
A notice regarding content shall be made in writing and shall include at least the following information:
Amendment 447 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 7 –point a
Annex I – part B – Article 7 –point a
(a) a link to the content in question and, where appropriate, e.g. video, a timestamp;
Amendment 461 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – introductory part
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – introductory part
Once a decision has been taken, content hosting platforms shall inform all parties involved in the notice procedure about the outcome of the decision, providing the following information in a clear and simple manner:
Amendment 464 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 10– point b
Annex I – part B – Article 10– point b
(b) whether the decision was made by a human or an algorithm and in the latter case, whether a human review has taken place;
Amendment 465 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – point c
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – point c
(c) information about the possibility for review as referred to in Article 11 orand judicial redress for either party.
Amendment 467 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 11
Annex I – part B – Article 11
Amendment 475 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 13 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall establish independent dispute settlement bodies for the purpose of providing quick and efficient extra-judicial recourse when decisions on content moderation are appealed against. The independent dispute settlement bodies should as a minimum comply with the quality requirements for consumer ADR bodies set down under Directive 2013/11/EU.
Amendment 477 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 13 – paragraph 3
Annex I – part B – Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. The referral of a question regarding content moderation to an independent dispute settlement body shall not preclude a user from being able to have further recourse in the courts unless the dispute has been settled by common agreement.
Amendment 479 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 13 – paragraph 4
Annex I – part B – Article 13 – paragraph 4
4. Content hosting platforms that enjoy a dominant position on the market shall contribute financially to the operating costs of the independent dispute settlement bodies through a dedicated fund. Member States shall ensure these bodies are provided with adequate resources.
Amendment 482 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 14 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. The uploader shall have the right to refer a case of content moderation to the competent independent dispute settlement body where the content hosting platform has decided to remove or, take down or make invisible content, or otherwise to act in a manner that is contrary to the action preferred by the uploader as expressed by the uploader.
Amendment 484 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 14 – paragraph 3
Annex I – part B – Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. As regards jurisdiction, the competent independent dispute settlement body shall be that located in the Member State in which the content that is the subject of the dispute has been uploaded. For natural persons, it should always be possible to bring complaints to the independent dispute body of their Member States.
Amendment 486 #
2020/2019(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 14 – paragraph 4
Annex I – part B – Article 14 – paragraph 4
4. Where the notifier has the right to refer a case of content moderation to an independent dispute settlement body in accordance with paragraph 2, the notifier may refer the case to the independent dispute settlement body located in the Member State of habitual residence of the notifier or the uploader, if the latter is using the service for non-commercial purposes.
Amendment 2 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)
Citation 2 a (new)
- having regard to the communication from the Commission of 11 January 2012, entitled “A coherent framework for building trust in the Digital Single Market for e-commerce and online services” COM/2011/0942 final,
Amendment 5 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 b (new)
Citation 2 b (new)
- having regard to the Memorandum of Understanding on the sale of counterfeit goods via the internet of 21 June 2016 and its review in the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee of 29 November 2017, entitled “ A balanced IP enforcement system responding to today's societal challenges” (COM (2017) 707) final,
Amendment 6 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3 a (new)
Citation 3 a (new)
- having regard to the Communication from the Commission of 28 September 2017, entitled “Tackling Illegal Content Online: Towards an enhanced responsibility of online platforms” (COM (2017) 555), and its Recommendation of 1 March 2018 on measures to effectively tackle illegal content online (COM (2018) 1177),
Amendment 7 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 14 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The upcoming legislative proposal on the Digital Services Act should fully respect the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as well as Union rules protecting consumers and their safety, privacy and personal data, as well as other fundamental rights;
Amendment 17 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Recalls the importance of the key principles of the e-Commerce Directive, namely the country of origin principle, the limited liability clause and the ban on general monitoring obligation, to remain valid in the legislative proposal on the Digital Services Act;
Amendment 18 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Stresses the need for a definition of ‘dominant platforms’ and lay down their characteristics;
Amendment 22 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. NStresses the enforcement of existing Regulation (EU) 2016/679 on the protection of natural persons with regards to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data and notes that since the online activities of individuals allow for deep insights into their personality and make it possible to manipulate them, the collection and use of personal data concerning the use of digital services should be subjected to a specific privacy framework and limited to the extent necessary to provide and bill the use of the servicethis framework;
Amendment 23 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council2 (“the E-Commerce Directive”) has been one of the most successful pieces of Union legislation and has shaped the Digital Single Market as we know it today; whereas the E-Commerce Directive was adopted 20 years ago and no longer adequately reflects the rapid transformation and expansion of e- commerce in all its forms, with its multitude of different emerging services, providers and challengeswhereas since its adoption 20 years ago, the European Court of Justice has issued a number of judgments in relation to it; whereas the clarifications made by the European Court of Justice should be codified; __________________ 2 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market ('Directive on electronic commerce') (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1).
Amendment 33 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas, despite the clarifications made by the European Court of Justice, the need to go beyond the existing regulatory framework is clearly demonstrated by the fragmented approach of Member States to tackling illegal content online, by the lack of enforcement and cooperation between Member State, currently Member States have fragmented approach to tackling illegal content online as, since the entry into force of Directive 2000/31/EC, some Member States have adopted their own rules on 'notice-and-action' mechanisms; whereas there are therefore increasing differences between such national rules; whereas, as a consequence, the service providers concerned cand by the inability of the existing legal framework to promote effective market entrye subject to a range of different legal requirements which are diverging as to their content and sconsumer welfarpe;
Amendment 35 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas a recent Parliament 1a study shows that the potential gain of completing the Digital Single Market for services could be up to €100 billion; whereas the Digital Services Act should not only be a way to regulate those services but should also aim at unlocking this potential to the benefit of the European economy; __________________ 1a“Europe’s two trillion euro dividend, Mapping the Cost of Non-Europe 2019- 2024”, EPRS, PE 631.745, April 2019
Amendment 35 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that automated tools are unable to differentiate illegal content from content that is legal in a given context; highlights that human review of automated reports by service providers does not solve this problem as private staff lack the independence, qualification and accountability of public authorities; stresses, therefore, that the Digital Services Act should explicitly prohibitregulate any obligation on hosting service providers or other technical intermediaries to use automated tools for content moderation, and refrain from imposing notice-and-stay- down mechanisms; insists that content moderation procedures used by providers should not lead to any ex-ante control measures based on automated tools or upload-filtering of content;
Amendment 38 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas the E-Commerce Directive provides the foundations for the Digital Single Market by setting out the country of origin principle, forbidding any form of prior authorisation, establishing a limited liability regime and a ban on a general monitoring obligation, and great care must be taken to not alter these principles if the Commission decides to propose to amend, widen, or limit this Directive;
Amendment 39 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the social and economic challenges brought by the COVID-19 pandemic are showing the resilience of the e-commerce sector and its potential as a driver for relaunching the European economy; whereas, at the same time, the pandemic has also exposed serious shortcomings of the current regu the Commission contacted a number of platforms, social media, search engines and market places rapidly to require their cooperation in taking down scams from their platforms; whereas platfory framework which call for action at Union level to address the difficulties identified and to prevent them from happening in the futurems replied positively to this call for cooperation and since then a rapid and efficient information exchange is in place; whereas, at the same time, the pandemic has also shown that platforms and online intermediation services need to step up their efforts to rapidly detect and take down fake claims and tackling the misleading practices of rogue traders in a consistent and coordinated manner, in particular of those selling false medical equipment online; whereas this calls for action at Union level to have a more coherent and coordinated approach to combat these misleading practices;
Amendment 45 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that the responsibility for enforcing the law, deciding on the legality of online activities and ordering hosting service providers to remove or disable access to illegal content as soon as possible should rest with independent, and after the provider and involved parties have been informed, should rest with independent dispute settlement bodies with possible appeal to judicial authorities; considers that only a hosting service provider that has actual knowledge of the existence of illegal content and its illegal nature should be subject to content removal obligations;
Amendment 46 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas scandals recently emerged regarding data harvesting and selling, Cambridge Analytica, fake news, political advertising and manipulation and a host of other online harms (from hate speech to the broadcast of terrorism);
Amendment 48 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas Directive (EU) 2019/770, Directive (EU) 2019/771, and Directive (EU) 2019/2161 were all adopted less than a year ago and are still in the process of being implemented and transposed into national legislation;
Amendment 49 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D c (new)
Recital D c (new)
Dc. whereas Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services only came into force in July 2019 and is only binding on platforms from 12 July 2020;
Amendment 50 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D d (new)
Recital D d (new)
Dd. whereas the COVID-19 pandemic has shown how vulnerable EU consumers are to misleading trading practices by dishonest traders selling illegal products online that are not compliant with Union safety rules or imposing unjustified and abusive price increases or other unfair conditions on consumers; whereas this problem is aggravated by the fact that often the identity of these companies cannot be established;
Amendment 55 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 62 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission’s commitment to submit a proposal for a Digital Services Act package, and, on the basis of Article 225 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), calls on the Commission to submit such a package on the basis of the relevant Articles of the Treaties, following the recommendations set out in the Annex hereto;
Amendment 62 #
2020/2018(INL)
5a. Stresses the need of the enforcement of existing measures to limit the data collected by content hosting platforms, based on inter alia interactions of users with content hosted on content hosting platforms, for the purpose of completing targeted advertising profiles, in particular by imposing strict conditions for the use of targeted personal advertisements;
Amendment 63 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Insists that the regulation must prohibit content moderation practices that are discriminatory;
Amendment 64 #
2020/2018(INL)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Amendment 81 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses that Commission should, ahead of a possible revision of the E- Commerce Directive, complete a full public consultation, including an in person stakeholder hearing, and a full impact assessment, take into account the lessons learned from the COVID-19 crisis and from the European Parliament resolutions; similarly, stresses that this must also apply to other potential pieces of the Digital Services Act package;
Amendment 84 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Underlines that, if a revision is approved by the co-legislators, that implementation of the final adopted legislations should be supported by the adoption of Vademecums and implementation guidelines;
Amendment 120 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that a level playing field in the internal market between the platform economy and the "traditional" offline economy, based on the same rights and obligations for all interested parties - consumers and businesses - is needed; considers that social protection and social rights of workers, especiallythe Digital Single Act should not tackle the issue of platform wor collaborative economy workers should be properly addressed in a specific instrument, accompanying the future regukers; notes that a report is being prepared by the relevant committee of the European Parliament on “Fair working conditions, rights and social protection for platfory frameworkm workers - New forms of employment linked to digital development”;
Amendment 127 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to focus its work and to ensure that any legislation is targeted and limited; encourages the Commission to refrain from any attempt to cover all long standing Digital Single Market issues within a single package; underlines that the previous Commission already had an extensive digital agenda and that there is a need to assess its effect before regulating again on the same issue; underlines in particular that 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 131 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Amendment 147 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. Stresses that any future legislative proposals should seek to remove current, and prevent potentially new barriers in the supply of digital services by online platforms; underlines, at the same time, that new Union obligations on platforms must 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 148 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 d (new)
Paragraph 6 d (new)
6d. Recalls that the E-Commerce Directive was drafted in a technologically neutral manner in order to avoid amendments of the legal framework arising from the fast pace of innovation in the IT sector; asks the Commission to ensure that any revisions continue to respect this technologically neutral manner;
Amendment 152 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Believes that the principles that governed the legislators when regulating information society services providers in the late 90’s are still valid and should be used when drafting any future proposals, namely: (a) To provide appropriate information on a wide scale (b) To prevent the creation of fresh obstacles and the re-fragmentation of the internal market (c) To reduce disputes to a minimum (d) To avoid the risks of over-regulation (e) To protect general interests more effectively and to identify any need for rules quickly (f) To step up administrative cooperation (g) To strengthen Union participation in international discussions;
Amendment 175 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 190 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses that the Digital Services Act should achieve the right balance between the internal market freedoms and the fundamental rights and principlestrengthen the internal market for services while protecting rights set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular freedom of expression;
Amendment 195 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 203 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 216 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Considers that the current transparency and information requirements set out in the E-Commerce Directive on information society services providers and their business customers, that provide services to consumers (B2B2C) and the minimum information requirements on commercial communications, should be substantially strengthened;
Amendment 231 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to require intermediate service providers to verifycollect 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 when those business partners have a direct relationship with consumers through the intermediate service, and to ensure that the information is updated in case competent authorities informed the providers of any inaccuracy;
Amendment 239 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the Commission to introduce enforceable obligations on internet service providers aimed at increasing transparency and information, if proposing measures on internet service providers aimed at increasing transparency and information, to take into account the difference between the underlining hosting internet service provider on the one hand and a platform or other websites and its users on the other; stresses that internet service providers often have no contractual relations with a platform’s business users or consumers, including having no legal right to view or access data stored; asks the Commission to ensure that enforcement measures are targeted in a way that takes this difference into account and does not force the breach of privacy and legal process; considers that these obligations should be proportionate and enforced by appropriate, effective and dissuasive penalties;
Amendment 250 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Underlines the need for due process; stresses the need to prevent the abuse of transparency, redress and other systems by businesses in order to confront other businesses; believes that any revisions must seek to balance the rights of all users and ensure that the law is not drafted to favour one legitimate interest over another;
Amendment 272 #
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 Act should also address the concrete challenges not already covered by current legislation that they present in terms of ensuring non-discrimination, transparency and explainabilityon the data sets and the explainability - to the extent possible - 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 281 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Recalls that the protection of personal data subject to automated decision-making processes is already covered, among others, by the General Data Protection Regulation and none of the proposals should seek to repeat or amend such measures;
Amendment 282 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17b. Underlines that algorithms can be protected as trade secrets within the meaning of the Directive 2016/943; stresses that any supervision of such algorithms, where needed, must be carried out by the national regulatory authority of the country of origin, on a case by case basis, only when a Member State has reason to believe that it has algorithmic bias, and be subject to clear confidentiality rules;
Amendment 283 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17c. Believes that the focus of the Commission should be on potential bias within datasets or in the output, rather than on the algorithms themselves;
Amendment 288 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Considers that consumers shouldusers have the right to be properly informed and their rights should be effectively guaranteed when they interact with automated decision-making systems and other innovative digital services or applications; further considers that users should be informed when a service is personalised to its users and whether the personalisation can be switched off or otherwise limited; believes that it should be possible for consumusers to request checks and corrections of possible mistakes resulting from automated decisions, as well as to seek redress for any damage related to the use of automated decision-making systems;
Amendment 297 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Stresses that digital services should not exclusively use automated decision-making systems for consumer support;
Amendment 303 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses that the existence and spread of illegal content online is a severe threat that, such as incitement to terrorism, illegal hate speech, or child sexual abuse material, as well as infringements of intellectual property rights and consumer protection online undermines citizens' trust and confidence in the digital environment, and which also harms the economic development ofharms healthy platform ecosystems in the Digital Single Market and severely hampers the development of legitimate markets for digital services;
Amendment 310 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Believes that allowing new innovative business models to flourish and strengthening the Digital Single Market by removing barriers to the free movement of digital content, barriers which creates national fragmented markets and a demand for illegal content, have been proven to work in the past, especially in relation to the infringements of intellectual property rights;
Amendment 319 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Notes that there is no ‘one size fits all’ solution to all types of Stresses the need to distinguish between ‘illegal and ’, ‘harmful content and cases of misinformation online; believes, however, that a more aligned approach at Union level, taking into account the different types of content, will make’, and other content; notes that some content linked to religious belief or political positions, for instance, might be considered harmful without being illegal; considers that 'harmful' legal content should not be regulated or defined in the fDight against illegal content more effectiveital Service Act as they are protected by the freedom of expression;
Amendment 328 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Stresses also that content that might be seen as 'illegal' in some Member States, may not be seen as such in others as only some type of 'illegal' content are harmonised in the EU; notes that there is therefore no ‘one size fits all’ solution to all types of 'illegal' content;
Amendment 329 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20b. Believes, however, that a more aligned approach at Union level, taking into account the different types of content and online platforms and based on cooperation and exchange of best practices, will make the fight against 'illegal' content more effective;
Amendment 330 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 c (new)
Paragraph 20 c (new)
20c. Underlines the need to adapt the severity of the measures that need to be taken by service providers to the seriousness of the infringement, so that the fight against terrorism, illegal hate speech, or child sexual abuse material take clear precedence over other types of infringements;
Amendment 340 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Considers that voluntary actions and self-regulation by online platforms across Europe have brought some benefits, but and additional measures are needed in ordershould be taken to ensure the swift detection and removal of illegal content online;
Amendment 342 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Would welcome the adoption of measures which would allow online intermediaries to do further self-controls of content on their sites without fear of increased liability under the E-Commerce Directive; at the same time, disagrees with any measures which would require self- controls in order to qualify for limited liability protections;
Amendment 345 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)
Paragraph 21 b (new)
21b. Underlines, however, the need to prevent a general monitoring of content uploads and for a light-handed approach by online intermediaries as to user uploaded content of a non-commercial nature; underlines that algorithms are not able to fully understand context and the legal uses of content as outlined in EU and different national legislations; believes that filters based on algorithms alone systematically lead to the removal of legitimate content (‘false positives’) and the corruption of such systems to the benefit of unfair commercial practices; asks where there is a doubt as to a content being of an 'illegal' nature, that this content should not be removed before further investigation;
Amendment 347 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 c (new)
Paragraph 21 c (new)
21c. Asks the Commission to issue a study on the removal of content and data during the COVID-19 crisis by automated decision-making and the level of removals in error (false positives) that were included in the number of items removed;
Amendment 364 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Stresses that such a ‘notice-and- action’ mechanism must be human- centric and give the benefit of the doubt to users; underlines that safeguards against the abuse of the system should be introduced, including against repeated false flagging, unfair commercial practices and other schemes; underlines that for many small traders, the removal of even a single product can result in the collapse of a business;
Amendment 368 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 b (new)
Paragraph 22 b (new)
22b. Notes the challenges around the enforcement of legal injunctions issued within Member States other than the country of origin of a service provider; stresses the need to investigate this issue outside the scope of the Digital Service Act and any ‘notice-and-action’ mechanism;
Amendment 371 #
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; in this context, underlines that the legal liability regime and ban on general monitoring should not be weakened via a possible new legislation or the amendment of other sections of the E-commerce Directive, including the amendment of the definitions laid down in the Directive;
Amendment 386 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Asks the Commission to review the Annex to the E-Commerce Directive and, where relevant, remove or further limit the derogations granted there; notes that a significant and ever increasing part of the Digital Single Market is made up of services included there within;
Amendment 390 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)
Paragraph 23 b (new)
23b. Notes that online intermediaries might encrypt or otherwise prevent outside access to their content by third parties, including hosting intermediaries, who do not have the encryption key; believes therefore that any requirements should take this and similar practical problems into account;
Amendment 397 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Notes that while online platforms, such as online market places, have benefited both retailers and consumers by improving choice and lowering prices, at the same time, they have allowed sellers, in particular from third countries, to offer products which often do not comply with Union rules on product safety and do not sufficiently guarantee consumer rightsan increasing number of non-compliant sellers - especially from third countries – are offering unsafe or illegal products in the European market;
Amendment 421 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Asks the Commission to act at global level for minimum requirements for business information disclosure when trading online with consumers, the promotion of good practice via the development of new guidelines and the use of existing standards and the creation of a network of consumer centres to help European consumers to handle disputes with traders based in non-EU countries;
Amendment 426 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26b. Notes the continued issues of the abuse or wrong application of selective distribution agreements to limit the availability of products and services across borders within the Single Market and between platforms; asks the Commission to act on this issue within any wider review of Vertical Bloc Exemptions and other policies under Article 101 TFEU while refraining from its inclusion in the Digital Services Act;
Amendment 428 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 c (new)
Paragraph 26 c (new)
26c. Treatment of contracts [NEW SECTION TITLE]
Amendment 429 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 d (new)
Paragraph 26 d (new)
26 d. Asks the Commission to review all notifications under Article 9, paragraph 3 of the E-Commerce Directive and, where the Commission believes they are no longer merited, to require Member States to remove such requirements; asks, moreover, that this review take part every two years instead of five;
Amendment 430 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 e (new)
Paragraph 26 e (new)
26 e. Notes the rise of “smart contracts” 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/EU, and that they are not subject to national barriers to application, such as notarisation requirements;
Amendment 431 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 f (new)
Paragraph 26 f (new)
26 f. Asks the Commission, while recalling earlier efforts, to further review the practice of End User Licensing Agreements (EULAs) and Terms and Conditions Agreements (T&Cs) and to seek ways to allow greater and easier engagement for consumers, including in the choice of clauses; notes that EULAs and T&Cs are often accepted by users without reading them; notes, moreover, that when a EULA and T&Cs does allow for users to opt-out of clauses, service providers may require users to do so at each use, often in bad faith, to encourage acceptance;
Amendment 460 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28a. Underlines that additional ex-ante regulation on small and medium-sized enterprises should be avoided wherever possible and that additional requirements on systemic platforms should not lead to additional requirements for those businesses that use them;
Amendment 478 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Considers that a central regulatory authority should be established which should be responsible for the oversight and compliance with the Digital Services Act and have supplementary powers to tackle cross-border issues; it should be entrusted with investigation and enforcement powAsks the Member States to strengthen national regulatory authorities with the financial means and staff to allow for full oversight of online intermediaries established within their territories; believes that the Commission, through the Joint Research Centre, should be empowered to provide expert assistance to the Member States, upon request, towards the analysis of technological, administrative, or other matters in relation to the Digital Single Market legislative enforcement; encourages the Member States to pool and share best practices between national regulators, and to grant regulators legal authority to communicate between themselves in a secure manners;
Amendment 497 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Calls on the Commission to strengthen and modernise the current provisions on out-of-court settlement and court actions to allow for an effective enforcement and consumer redressconsumer redress; underlines that such measures should seek to support consumers that do not have the financial or legal means to use the court system and should not weaken the legal protections of small businesses and traders that national legal systems provide;
Amendment 502 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32a. Calls on national regulators and the Commission to provide further advice and assistance to EUSMEs about their rights;
Amendment 512 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part I – paragraph 2
Annex I – part I – paragraph 2
The Digital Services Act should guarantee that online and offline economic activities are treated equally and on a level playing field which fully reflects the principle that “what is illegal offline is also illegal online” and equally “what is legal offline is also legal online”;
Amendment 522 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part I – paragraph 5
Annex I – part I – paragraph 5
The Digital Services Act should build upon the rules currently applicable to online platforms, namely the E-Commerce Directive and the Platform to Business Regulation1 while refraining from proposing measures that were rejected by the co-legislators during its negotiation. __________________ 1 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).
Amendment 529 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part I – paragraph 6 – indent 1 – subi. 1
Annex I – part I – paragraph 6 – indent 1 – subi. 1
- a revised framework with clear due diligence transparency and information obligations;
Amendment 556 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part II – paragraph 2
Annex I – part II – paragraph 2
The territorial scope of the future Digital Services Act should be extended to cover also the activities of companies and service providers established in third countries, when they offertarget or direct services or goods to consumers or users in the Union;
Amendment 558 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part II – paragraph 3
Annex I – part II – paragraph 3
The Digital Services Act should maintainreview the derogation set out in the Annex of the E- Commerce Directive, and, in particular,f deemed necessary, revise them, while maintaining the derogation of contractual obligations concerning consumer contracts;
Amendment 561 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part II – paragraph 4
Annex I – part II – paragraph 4
The Digital Services Act should maintain the possibility for Member States to setseek to further harmonise consumer protection across the Union, in alignment with Directive (EU) 2019/770 and Directive (EU) 2019/771 and to maintain a higher level of consumer protection and pursue legitimate public interest objectives in accordance with EU law;
Amendment 574 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part III – paragraph 1 – indent 1
Annex I – part III – paragraph 1 – indent 1
- clarify to what extent “new digital services”, such as social media networks, collaborative economy services, search engines, wifi hotspots, online advertising, cloud services, content delivery networks, and domain name services fall within the scope of the Digital Services Act;
Amendment 577 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part III – paragraph 1 – indent 2
Annex I – part III – paragraph 1 – indent 2
- clarify the nature of the content hosting intermediaries (text, images, video, or audio content) on the one hand, and commercial online marketplaces (selling physical and digital goods) on the other;
Amendment 588 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part III – paragraph 1 – indent 4 a (new)
Annex I – part III – paragraph 1 – indent 4 a (new)
- refrain from seeking to define or act upon “harmful content”;
Amendment 598 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part III – paragraph 1 – indent 5 a (new)
Annex I – part III – paragraph 1 – indent 5 a (new)
- seek to codify the decisions of the European Court of Justice, where needed, and while having due regard to the main different pieces of legislation which use these definitions;
Amendment 599 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – title
Annex I – part IV – title
IV. DUE DILIGENCETRANSPARENCY AND INFORMATION OBLIGATIONS
Amendment 604 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – introductory part
The Digital Services Act should introduce clear due diligence transparency and information obligations; those obligations should not create any derogations or new exemptions to the current liability regime and the secondary liability set out under Articles 12, 13, and 14 of the E-Commerce Directive and should cover the aspects described below:
Amendment 616 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – indent 2
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – indent 2
- that measure should apply only to business-to-business relationships and should be without prejudice to the rights of users under the GDPR, as well as the right to internet anonymity or being an unidentified user; the new general information requirements should review and further enhance Articles 5, 6 and 10 of the E-Commerce Directive in order to align those measures with the information requirements established in recently adopted legislation, in particular the Unfair Contract Terms Directive5 , the Consumer Rights Directive and the Platform to Business Regulation. __________________ 5 Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, most recently amended by Directive (EU) 2019/2161 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2019 amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directives 98/6/EC, 2005/29/EC and 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the better enforcement and modernisation of Union consumer protection rules (OJ L 328, 18.12.2019, p. 7).
Amendment 625 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – indent 1
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – indent 1
- to expressly set out in their contract terms and general conditions that service providers will not knowingly store illegal content;
Amendment 633 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – indent 4
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – indent 4
- to ensure that the contract terms and general conditions comply with these and all information requirements established by Union lawUnion law, including any and all relevant information requirements, including those the Unfair Contract Terms Directive, the Consumer Rights Directive and the GDPR;
Amendment 637 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – indent 5
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – indent 5
- to specify clearly and unambiguously in their contract terms and general conditions the exactmain parameters of their AI systems and how they can affect the choice or behaviour of their usersdetermining ranking content, and the reasons and importance of those parameters as opposed to other parameters.
Amendment 639 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – indent 5 a (new)
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – indent 5 a (new)
- start all Terms and Conditions agreements and all End-User Licensing Agreements with a summary statement based on a framework and document template, to be created by the Commission.
Amendment 661 #
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
- establish comprehensive rules on non-discrimination, transparency on the data set, oversight and risk assessment of algorithms for AI- driven services by national regulator authorities in order to ensure a higher level of consumer protection where there are gaps in current legislation;
Amendment 672 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4 – indent 3 a (new)
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4 – indent 3 a (new)
- be on a case by case basis and not require a blanket investigation of all AI systems
Amendment 674 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4 – indent 3 b (new)
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4 – indent 3 b (new)
- allow authorities to check algorithms when they have justified reasons to believe that it has algorithmic bias,
Amendment 676 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4 – indent 3 c (new)
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4 – indent 3 c (new)
- be subject to clear confidentiality and protection of trade secret rules;
Amendment 678 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4 – indent 3 d (new)
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subheading 4 – indent 3 d (new)
- ensure that consumers are protected by the right to be informed and the right to an explanation of AI services, in addition to the right to switch off or limit an AI system using personalization where possible;
Amendment 687 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4
Annex I – part IV – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4
The compliance of the due diligence provisions should be reinforced with effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties, including the imposition of fines.
Amendment 710 #
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 national oversight of the content moderation procedures and tools related to the removal of illegal content online; such systems and procedures should be available for auditing and testing by independentnational authorities. of the country of origin;
Amendment 715 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 1 – indent 4 a (new)
Annex I – part V – paragraph 1 – indent 4 a (new)
- adapt the severity of the measures that need to be taken by service providers to the seriousness of the infringement;
Amendment 717 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 1 – indent 4 b (new)
Annex I – part V – paragraph 1 – indent 4 b (new)
- ensure that the access and removal of illegal content does not require the closure of access to overall sites and services which are otherwise legal and only affect the exact noticed content.
Amendment 725 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 – indent 2
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 – indent 2
- rank different types of providers, sectors and/or illegal content in order to appreciate the seriousness of the infringement;
Amendment 736 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 – indent 7
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 – indent 7
- require notices to be sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated so as to allow the service provider receiving them to take an informed and diligent decision as regards the effect to be given to the notice and specify the requirements necessary to ensure that notices are of a good quality, thereby enabling a swift removal of illegal content; such requirement should include the name and contact details of the notice provider, the link (URL) to the allegedly illegal content in question, the stated reason for the claim including an explanation of the reasons why the notice provider considers the content to be illegal, and if necessary, depending on the type of content, additional evidence for the claim;
Amendment 742 #
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 complaintsnotice provider to provide their contact details, without this being required, but while recording the IP address or other equivalent of the provider in order to prevent abuse;
Amendment 747 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 – indent 9
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 – indent 9
- consider, when a complaint is not anonymous, a declaration of good faith that the information provided is accurate;
Amendment 758 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 a (new)
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 a (new)
The Digital Service Act notice-and-action mechanism should be based on the work of the Commission as carried out in 2012 and 2013, including the public consultations of a potential self-standing Directive on procedures for notifying and acting on illegal content hosted by online intermediaries.
Amendment 759 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 b (new)
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 b (new)
The Digital Service Act notice-and-action mechanism should be binding only for illegal content. This, however, should not prevent online intermediaries being able to adopt a similar notice-and-action mechanism for other content.
Amendment 760 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 c (new)
Annex I – part V – paragraph 2 c (new)
The right to be notified before a decision is taken to remove a content and the right to issue a counter-notice by a user shall only be restricted or waived, where: (a) subject to a legal or regulatory obligation which requires online intermediation services to terminate the provision of the whole of its online intermediation services to a given user in a manner which does not allow it to respect that notice-and-action mechanism; (b) online intermediation services can demonstrate that the user concerned has repeatedly infringed the applicable terms and conditions, including by uploading multiple potential illegal contents.
Amendment 771 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – subheading 2 – indent 4 a (new)
Annex I – part V – subheading 2 – indent 4 a (new)
- an out-of-court dispute settlement mechanism should meet certain standards, notably in terms of procedural fairness, a presumption of innocence or lack of malicious intent by the content provider and that abuse is avoided.
Amendment 782 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 3 – indent 5
Annex I – part V – paragraph 3 – indent 5
- the description of the content moderation model applied by the hosting intermediary, as well as any algorithmic decision making which influences the content moderation process.
Amendment 794 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 5
Annex I – part V – paragraph 5
The Digital Services Act should address the lack of legal certainty regarding the concept of active vs passive hosts. The revised measures should clarodify if interventions by hosting providers having editorial functions and a certain “degree of control over the data,” through tagging, organising, promoting, optimising, presenting or otherwise curating specific content for profit- making purposes and which amounts to adoption of the third-party content as one’s own (as judged by average users or consumers) should lead to a loss of safe harbour provisions due to their active naturethe jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice on the matter.
Amendment 799 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 5 a (new)
Annex I – part V – paragraph 5 a (new)
The Digital Service Act should maintain its protections of non-active providers and other backend and infrastructure services which are not party to the contractual relations between online intermediaries and its business or private customers. Such backend services should not be held liable for actions which they did not have an active overarching decision making role and which merely implement decisions by the online intermediaries or its customers.
Amendment 800 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 5 b (new)
Annex I – part V – paragraph 5 b (new)
New proposals of obligations on content management and moderation, if deemed necessary beyond a notice-and-action mechanism, should be only possible within the framework of the suggested regulation on ex-ante measures for significant market players.
Amendment 805 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part V – paragraph 6 a (new)
Annex I – part V – paragraph 6 a (new)
The Digital Service Act, however, may allow for voluntary actions which would allow for online intermediaries to take social responsibility without losing the protections of article 14.
Amendment 824 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VI – paragraph 2 – indent 5
Annex I – part VI – paragraph 2 – indent 5
- once products have been identified as unsafe by the Union’s rapid alert systems or by consumer protection authorities, it should be compulsory to remove products from the marketplace within 24 hourstwo working days of receiving notification;
Amendment 835 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VI – paragraph 2 – indent 7 a (new)
Annex I – part VI – paragraph 2 – indent 7 a (new)
- explore the option that suppliers which are established in a third country have to designate a legal representative, established in the Union, who can be held accountable for the selling of products to European consumers which do not comply with Union rules of safety;
Amendment 838 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VI – paragraph 2 – indent 8
Annex I – part VI – paragraph 2 – indent 8
- address the liability for online marketplaces if the online marketplace has not informed the consumer that a third party is the actual supplier of the goods or services, thus making the marketplace contractually liable vis-à-vis the consumer; liability should also be considered in case the marketplace willingly provides misleading information, guarantees, or statements;
Amendment 861 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VII – paragraph 2 – indent 2
Annex I – part VII – paragraph 2 – indent 2
- empower regulatory authorities to issue orders prohibiting undertakings, which have been identified as “systemic platforms”, from the following practices, inter alia:such a mechanism should allow the national regulatory authority of the country of origin to impose remedies on these companies in order to address market failures, based on the conditions within the legal instrument and a closed list of positive and negative actions. This report should not prejudge of this list and the impact assessment should make a thorough analysis of the different issues observed on the market so far such as: - discrimination in intermediary services; - making the use of data for making market entry by third parties more difficult; and engaging in practices aimed at locking-in consumers; undertakings should be given the possibility to demonstrate that the behaviour in question is justified, yet they should bear the burden of proof for this;- lack of interoperability and appropriate tools, data, expertise, and resources deployed to allow consumers switch between digital platforms or internet ecosystems - obligations on content management and moderation, such as content recommendations and personalisation of a user interface.
Amendment 867 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VII – paragraph 2 – indent 2 a (new)
Annex I – part VII – paragraph 2 – indent 2 a (new)
- empower the Commission to impose further conditions and decisions in relation to the rules of competition, including on self-preferencing and overall vertical integration, while ensuring that both policy tools are completely independent;
Amendment 868 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VII – paragraph 2 – indent 2 b (new)
Annex I – part VII – paragraph 2 – indent 2 b (new)
- reserve to the Commission the power to decide if an information society service provider is a “systemic platform” based on the conditions of the mechanism;
Amendment 870 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VII – paragraph 2 – indent 3
Annex I – part VII – paragraph 2 – indent 3
Amendment 879 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VII – paragraph 2 – indent 6
Annex I – part VII – paragraph 2 – indent 6
Amendment 891 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VIII – paragraph 1
Annex I – part VIII – paragraph 1
The Digital Services Act should strengthen the internal market clause as the cornerstone of the Digital Single Market by complementing it with a new cooperation mechanism aimed at improving the cooperation and upon request and voluntary mutual assistance between Member States, in particular between the home country where the service provider is established and the host country where the provider is offering its services.
Amendment 896 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VIII – paragraph 2
Annex I – part VIII – paragraph 2
The supervision and enforcement the Digital Services Act should be improved by the creation of central regulatory authority who should be responsiblegiving additional powers to the national regulator of the country of origin for overseeing compliance with the DSA and improve external monitoring, verification of platform activities, and better enforcement.
Amendment 902 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VIII – paragraph 3
Annex I – part VIII – paragraph 3
Amendment 906 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VIII – paragraph 4
Annex I – part VIII – paragraph 4
The central regulator should coordinateCommission, through the Joint Research Centre, should offer their expertise and analysis upon request, including aid during investigations, to the work of the different authorities dealing with illegal content online, enforce compliance, fines, and be able to carry out auditing of intermediaries and platforms.
Amendment 916 #
2020/2018(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part VIII – paragraph 5
Annex I – part VIII – paragraph 5
The central regulator should report to the Union institutions anCommission could maintain a ‘Platform Scoreboard’ with relevant information on the performance of online platforms.
Amendment 4 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the right to fair trial is a fundamental right which also applies to enforcement of the law, enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which also applies through the entire criminal proceedings, including in law enforcement;
Amendment 20 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and related technologies will contribute to the reducing of crime rates, the use of statistical data analytics in crime analysis and prevention, and the operation of criminal justice systemcould be used for prevention of crimes;
Amendment 23 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that AI used by police and judicial authorities has to be generally categorised as high-risk, given that the role of these authorities is to defend the public interest; considers that the EU should take the lead in laying down basic rules on the development and use of AI by public institutions to ensure the same high level of consumer protection across the EU;
Amendment 24 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas these technologies can be used to create statistical anonymized databases that help authorities, academics and legislators to analyse figures and efficiently design policies to prevent criminality and to help offenders to successfully reintegrate into society;
Amendment 26 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
B b. whereas the legal framework of artificial intelligence and its application to criminal law should include legislative actions, where needed, starting with mandatory measures to prevent practices that would undoubtedly undermine fundamental rights and freedoms;
Amendment 32 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises the strong importance of considering the ethical and operational implications related tof the use of AI and related technologies within criminal justice systems, which entail significant risks such as discrimination and breach of privacy; considers that a clear regulatory framework is necessary to draw the limits and provide the necessary safeguards;
Amendment 34 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that AI should help to ease the administrative burden on public authorities, without ever fully replacing human decisions, and that AI systems should rely on human oversight;
Amendment 42 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers 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 always be open data;
Amendment 45 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines the importance of being able to access AI-produced or AI-assisted outputs for notification procedures and the role of AI and related technologies in criminal law enforcement and crime prevention; recalls, in this regard, the importance of questions related to governance, transparency and accountabilityabsence of biases, non- discrimination, human oversight, transparency and accountability of AI and related technologies;
Amendment 49 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises that data collection and the monitoring of individuals should be limited to criminal suspects and court approved surveillance;
Amendment 58 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the recommendations of the Commission’s High-Level Expert Group on AI for a proportionate use of biometric recognition technology and suggests that the application of such technology must be clearly warranted under existing laws and urges the Commission to assess how to effectively incorporate theseRecalls that, in accordance with the current EU data protection rules and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, AI can only be used for remote biometric identification purposes where such use is duly justified, proportionate and subject to adequate safeguards; suggests that, in line with the precautionary principle, the application of such technologies should be avoided where their impact on society and the rights and freedoms of individuals is uncertain; urges the Commission to propose relevant solutions to the existing problems following the results of a thorough impact assessment;
Amendment 64 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Strongly believes that decisions issued by AI or related technologies, especially in the areas of justice and law enforcement, that have a direct and significant impact on the rights and obligations of natural or legal persons, should be subject to strict human verification and due process;
Amendment 67 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Emphasises that where decision making is assisted by statistical calculations, such as at probation hearings, the decision makers need to be trained about the general biases statistical calculations carry and made aware about the specific biases of calculation in the particular situation;
Amendment 68 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Recalls the right of rectification established in Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation) and stresses the particular importance of accurate data sets, when these are used to assist administrative decisions; calls on the Commission to examine the benefits of ensuring transparency regarding the individual data included in the particular calculation and an accompanying procedure for rectification.
Amendment 72 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers it necessary to clarify whether law enforcement decisions can be delegated to AI and stresses the need to developthat AI and related technologies that can replace public authority decisions should be treated with the utmost precaution; stresses the need to develop strong ethical principles and codes of conduct for the design, deployment and use of AI and related technologies to help law enforcers and judicial authorities; refers to the ongoing work in the Committee on Legal Affairs.
Amendment 1 #
2020/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
- Having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making (OJL 123, 12.5.2016) and the Better Regulations Guidelines;
Amendment 16 #
2020/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the European Union's global leadership in AI calls for an effective intellectual property system which is fit for the digital age, enabling innovators to bring new products to the market;
Amendment 17 #
2020/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas strong safeguards are crucial to protect the European Union’s patent system against abuse to the detriment of innovative AI developers;
Amendment 141 #
2020/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Stresses the need for strong safeguards to protect European AI developers from abusive patent practices, such as those deployed by Patent Assertion Entities, which are financial vehicles, not producing or selling any products, but which increasingly buy up patents with the aim of litigating against innovative companies, including SMEs, in order to obtain high settlement fees; calls on the Commission to assess its current guidance related to the application and enforcement of intellectual property rights with regards to such abusive practices;
Amendment 3 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
Citation 4 a (new)
- having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making and the Better Regulations Guidelines,
Amendment 17 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas any future-orientated liability framework has to strike a balance between efficiently protecting potential victims of harm or damage and at the same time, providing enough leeway to make the development of new technologies, products or services possible; whereas ultimately, the goal of any liability framework should be to provide legal certainty for all parties, whether it be the producer, the deployer, the developer, the affected person or any other third party;
Amendment 23 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the notion of Artificial Intelligence(AI)-systems comprises a large group of different technologies, including simple statistics, machine learning and deep learning;
Amendment 27 #
2020/2014(INL)
E. whereas Artificial Intelligence (certain AI)-systems present significant legal challenges for the existing liability framework and could lead to situations, in which their opacity could make it extremely expensive or even impossible to identify who was in control of the risk associated with the AI-system or which code or input has ultimately caused the harmful operation;
Amendment 28 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. Whereas the diversity of AI applications and the diverse range of risks the technology poses complicates finding a single solution suitable for the entire spectrum of risks; whereas, in this respect, an approach should be adopted in which experiments, pilots and regulatory sandboxes are used to come up with proportional and evidence-based solutions that address specific situations and sectors where needed;
Amendment 36 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas the future regulatory framework needs to take into consideration all the interests at stake; whereas careful examination of the consequences of any new regulatory framework on all actors in an impact assessment should be a prerequisite for further legislative steps; whereas the crucial role of SMEs and start-ups especially in the European economy justifies a strictly proportionate approach to enable them to develop and innovate;
Amendment 38 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)
Recital G b (new)
Gb. whereas, on the other hand, the victims of damages caused by AI-systems need to have a right to redress and full compensation of the damages and the harms that they have suffered;
Amendment 59 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that there is no need for a complete revision of the well-functioning liability regimes but that the complexity, connectivity, opacity, vulnerability and autonomy of AI-systems, as well as the multitude of actors involved, nevertheless represent a significant challenge; considers that specific adjustments are necessary to avoid a situation in which persons who suffer harm or whose property is damaged end up without compensation;
Amendment 65 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that all physical or virtual activities, devices or processes that are driven by AI-systems may technically be the direct or indirect cause of harm or damage, yet are always the result of someone building, deploying or interfering with the systems; notes in this respect that it is not necessary to give legal personality to AI-systems; is of the opinion that the opacity and autonomy of AI-systems could make it in practice very difficult or even impossible to trace back specific harmful actions of the AI-systems to specific human input or to decisions in the design; recalls that, in accordance with widely- accepted liability concepts, one is nevertheless able to circumvent this obstacle by making the persons who create, maintain or control the risk associated with the AI-system, accountable;
Amendment 69 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that the Product Liability Directive (PLD) has proven to be an effective means of getting compensation for harm triggered by a defective product; hence, notes that it should also be used with regard to civil liability claims against the producer of a defective AI-system, when the AI-system qualifies as a product under that Directive; if lLegislative adjustments to the PLD are necessary, and they should be discussed during a review of that Directive; is of the opinion that, for the purpose of legal certainty throughout the Union, the ‘backend operator’ should fall under the same liability rules as the producer, manufacturer and developer;
Amendment 78 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers it, therefore, appropriate for this report to focus on civil liability claims against the deployeoperator of an AI- system; affirms that the deployeoperator’s liability is justified by the fact that he or she is controlling athe risks associated with the AI- system, comparable to an owner of a car or pet; considers that due to the AI-system’s complexity and connectivity, the deployer will be in many cases the first visible contact point for the affected person;
Amendment 81 #
Amendment 87 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Opines that liability rules involving the deployeoperator should in principle cover all operations of AI-systems, no matter where the operation takes place and whether it happens physically or virtually; remarks that operations in public spaces that expose many third persons to a risk constitute, however, cases that require further consideration; considers that the potential victims of harm or damage are often not aware of the operation and regularly do not have contractual liability claims against the deployeoperator; notes that when harm or damage materialises, such third persons would then only have a fault-liability claim, and they might find it difficult to prove the fault of the deployeoperator of the AI-system;
Amendment 90 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Considers it appropriate to define the deployeoperator as the person who dexercidses on the use of the AI-system, who exercises control over the risk and who benefits from its operation; considers that exercising control means any action of the deployer that affects the manner of the operation from start to finish or thata degree of control over a risk connected with the operation and functioning of the AI-system and benefits from its operation; considers that exercising control means any action of the operator that influences the operation of the AI-system and thus the extent to which it exposes third parties to its potential risks; considers that these actions could impact the operation from start to finish by determining the input, output or results, or changes specific functions or processes within the AI- system;
Amendment 94 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that there could be situations in which there is more than one deployeoperator, for example a backend and frontend operator; considers that in that event, all deployeoperators should be jointly and severally liable while having the right to recourse proportionally against each other, reflecting the level of control each party has over the materialized risk;
Amendment 104 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Recognises that the type of AI- system the deployeoperator is exercising control over is a determining factor; notes that an AI-system that entails a high risk potentially endangers the general public to a much higher degree; considers that, based on the legal challenges that AI-systems pose to the existing liability regimes, it seems reasonable to set up a strict liability regime for those high-risk AI-systems;
Amendment 108 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Believes that an AI-system presents a high risk when its autonomous operation involves a significant potential to cause harm to one or more persons, in a manner that is random and impossible to predict in advancgoes beyond what can reasonably be expected from its intended use; considers that the significance of the potential depends on the interplay between the severity of possible harm, the likelihood that the risk materializes and the manner in which the AI-system is being used;
Amendment 116 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recommends that all high-risk AI- systems be listed in an Annex to the proposed Regulation; recognises that, given the rapid technological changedevelopments and the required technical expertise, it should be up to the Commission to review that Annex every six months and if necessary, amend it through a delegated act; believes that the Commission should closely cooperate withbe informed by a newly formed standing committee similar to the existing Standing Committee on Precursors or the Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles, which include national experts of the Member States and stakeholders; considers that the balanced membership of the ‘High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence’ could serve as an example for the formation of the group of stakeholders;
Amendment 122 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Believes that in line with strict liability systems of the Member States, the proposed Regulation should only cover harm to the important legally protected rights such as life, health, physical integrity and, property and significant immaterial harm resulting in economic loss, and should set out the amounts and extent of compensation as well as the limitation period;
Amendment 128 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Determines that all activities, devices or processes driven by AI-systems that cause harm or damage but are not listed in the Annex to the proposed Regulation should remain subject to fault- based liability; believes that the affected person should nevertheless benefit from a presumption of fault of the deployeoperator;
Amendment 138 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Is of the opinion that, based on the significant potential to cause harm and by taking Directive 2009/103/EC7 into account, all deployeoperators of high-risk AI- systems listed in the Annex to the proposed Regulation should hold liability insurance; considers that such a mandatory insurance regime for high-risk AI-systems should cover the amounts and the extent of compensation laid down by the proposed Regulation; _________________ 7 OJ L 263, 7.10.2009, p. 11.
Amendment 140 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Believes that a European compensation mechanism, funded with public money, is not the right way to fill potential insurance gaps; considers that bearing the good experience with regulatory sandboxes in the fintech sector in mind, it should be up to the insurance market to adjust existing products or create new insurance cover for the numerous sectors and various different technologies, producta lack of data of the risks associated with AI-systems make it difficult for the insurance sector to come up with adapted or new insurance products; considers that leaving the development of a mandatory insurance entirely to the market is likely to result in a one size fits all approach with disproportionate high prices and the wrong incentives, stimulating operators to opt for the cheapest insurance rather than for the best coverage; considers that the Commission should work closely with the insurance sector to see how data and innovative models cand services that involve AI-systems; be used to create the insurances that offer adequate coverage for an affordable price.
Amendment 148 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – paragraph 1 – indent 2
Annex I – part A – paragraph 1 – indent 2
- New legal challenges posed by the deployment of Artificial Intelligence (AI)- systems have to be addressed by establishing maximal legal certainty for the producer, the deployeoperator, the affected person and any other third party.
Amendment 166 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 1
Annex I – part B – recital 1
(2) Especially at the beginning of the life cycle of new products and services, there is a certain degree of risk for the user as well as for third persons that something does not function properly. This process of trial-and-error is at the same time a key enabler of technical progress without which most of our technologies would not exist. So far, the accompanying risks of new products and services have been properly mitigated by strong product safety legislation and liability rulesthey need to continue to be properly implemented and reviewed where necessary.
Amendment 171 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 3
Annex I – part B – recital 3
(3) The rise of Artificial intelligence (AI) however presents a significant challenge for the existing liability frameworks. Using AI-systems in our daily life will lead to situations in which their opacity (“black box” element) and the multitude of actors who intervene in their life-cycle makes it extremely expensive or even impossible to identify who was in control of the risk of using the AI-system in question or which code or input has caused the harmful operation. This difficulty is even compounded by the connectivity between an AI-system and other AI-systems and non-AI-systems, by its dependency on external data, by its vulnerability to cybersecurity breaches as well as by the increasing autonomy of AI- systems triggered by machine-learning and deep- learning capabilities. Besides these complex features and potential vulnerabilities, AI-systems could also be used to cause severe harm, such as compromising our values and freedoms by tracking individuals against their will, by introducing Social Credit Systems or by constructing lethal autonomous weapon systems.
Amendment 177 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 4 a (new)
Annex I – part B – recital 4 a (new)
(4a) An adequate liability regime is also necessary to counterweight the breach of safety rules. However, the envisaged liability needs to take into consideration all interests at stake. A careful examination of the consequences of any new regulatory framework on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and start-ups is a prerequisite for further legislative steps. The crucial role that they play in the European economy justifies a strictly proportionate approach in order to enable them to develop and innovate. On the other hand, the victims of damages caused by AI-systems need to have a right to redress and full compensation of the damages and the harms that they have suffered.
Amendment 184 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 5
Annex I – part B – recital 5
(5) Any discussion about required changes in the existing legal framework should start with the clarification that AI- systems have neither legal personality nor human conscience, and that their sole task is to serve humanity. Many AI-systems are also not so different from other technologies, which are sometimes based on even more complex software. Ultimately, the large majority of AI- systems are used for handling trivial tasks without any risks for the society. There are however also AI-systems that are developed and deployed in a critical manner and are based on neuronal networks and deep-learning processes. Their opacity and autonomy could make it very difficult to trace back specific actions to specific human decisions in their design or in their operation. A deployen operator of such an AI-system might for instance argue that the physical or virtual activity, device or process causing the harm or damage was outside of his or her control because it was caused by an autonomous operation of his or her AI- system. The mere operation of an autonomous AI-system should at the same time not be a sufficient ground for admitting the liability claim. As a result, there might be liability cases in which a person who suffers harm or damage caused by an AI-system cannot prove the fault of the producer, of an interfering third party or of the deployeoperator and ends up without compensation.
Amendment 188 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 6
Annex I – part B – recital 6
(6) Nevertheless, it should always be clear that whoever creates, maintains, controls or interferes with the AI-system, should be accountable for the harm or damage that the activity, device or process causes. This follows from general and widely accepted liability concepts of justice according to which the person that creates a risk for the public is accountable if that risk materializes. Consequently, the rise of AI-systems does not pose a need for a complete revision of liability rules throughout the Union. Specific adjustments of the existing legislation and very fewwell- assessed and targeted new provisions would be sufficient to accommodate the AI-related challenges.
Amendment 193 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 7
Annex I – part B – recital 7
(7) Council Directive 85/374/EEC3 (the Product Liability Directive) has proven to be an effective means of getting compensation for damage triggered by a defective product. Hence, it should also be used with regard to civil liability claims of a party who suffers harm or damage against the producer of a defective AI- system. In line with the better regulation principles of the Union, any necessary legislative adjustments should be discussed during athe review of that Directive. The existing fault-based liability law of the Member States also offers in most cases a sufficient level of protection for persons that suffer harm or damages caused by an interfering third person, as that interference regularly constitutes a fault-based action. Consequently, this Regulation should focus on claims against the deployeoperator of an AI- system. _________________ 3 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 196 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 8
Annex I – part B – recital 8
(8) The liability of the deployeoperator under this Regulation is based on the fact that he or she exercises a degree of controls over a risk byconnected to the operatingon of an AI- system. C, which is comparable to that of an owner of a car or pet, the deployer is able to exercise a certain level of control over the risk that the item poses. Exercising control thereby should be understood as meaning any action of the deployer that affects the manner of the operation from start to finish or thatoperator that influences the operation of the AI-system and thus the extent to which it exposes third parties to its potential risks. These actions could impact the operation from start to finish by determining the input, output or results, or changes specific functions or processes within the AI-system.;
Amendment 198 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 8 a (new)
Annex I – part B – recital 8 a (new)
(8a) The more sophisticated and more autonomous a system is, defining and influencing the algorithms, for example by continuous updates, could have a greater impact than just starting the system. As there is often more than one person who could, in a meaningful way, be considered as ‘operating’ the technology, both the backend provider and the frontend operator can be qualified as the ‘operator’ of the AI- system, depending on the degree of the exercised control.
Amendment 199 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 8 b (new)
Annex I – part B – recital 8 b (new)
(8b) Although in general, the frontend operator appears as the person who ‘primarily’ decides on the use of the AI- system, the backend provider, who on a continuous basis, defines the features of the technology and provides data and essential backend support service, could, for example, also have a high degree of control over the operational risks.
Amendment 200 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 8 c (new)
Annex I – part B – recital 8 c (new)
(8c) When there is more than one operator, the strict liability should lie with the one who exercises the highest degree of control over the risks posed by the harmful operation.
Amendment 203 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 9
Annex I – part B – recital 9
(9) If a user, namely the person that utilises the AI-system, is involved in the harmful event, he or she should only be liable under this Regulation if the user also qualifies as a deployer. This Regulation should not considern operator. For the purpose of legal certainty throughout the Union, if the backend operator, who is the person continuously defining the features of the relevant technology and providing essential and ongoing backend support, to be a deployer and thus, its provisionsroducer or the manufacturer within the meaning of Article 3 of the Product Liability Directive, that Directive should not apply to him or her. ForIf the purpose of legal certainty throughout the Union, the backend operator should fall under the same liability rules as the producer, manufacturer and developerre is only one operator, who is also the producer, this Regulation should prevail.
Amendment 207 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 10
Annex I – part B – recital 10
(10) This Regulation should cover in principle all AI-systems, no matter where they are operating and whether the operations take place physically or virtually. The majority of liability claims under this Regulation should however address cases of third party liability, where an AI-system operates in a public space and exposes many third persons to a risk. In that situation, the affected persons will often not be aware of the operating AI- system and will not have any contractual or legal relationship towards the deployeoperator. Consequently, the operation of the AI- system puts them into a situation in which, in the event of harm or damage being caused, they only have fault-based liability claims against the deployeoperator of the AI- system, while facing severe difficulties to prove fault on the part of the deployeoperator.
Amendment 211 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 11
Annex I – part B – recital 11
(11) The type of AI-system the deployeoperator is exercising control over is a determining factor. An AI-system that entails a high risk potentially endangers the public to a much higher degree and in a manner that is random and impossible to predict in advancgoes beyond what can reasonably be expected from its intended use. This means that at the start of the autonomous operation of the AI-system, the majority of the potentially affected persons are unknown and not identifiable (e.g. persons on a public square or in a neighbouring house), compared to the operation of an AI-system that involves specific persons, who have regularly consented to its deployment before (e.g. surgery in a hospital or sales demonstration in a small shop). Determining how significant the potential to cause harm or damage by a high-risk AI-system ishould dependent on the interplay between the manner in which the AI-system is being used, the severity of the potential harm or damage and the likelihood that the risk materialises. The degree of severity should be determined based on the extent of the potential harm resulting from the operation, the number of affected persons, the total value for the potential damage as well as the harm to society as a whole. The likelihood should be determined based on the role of the algorithmic calculations in the decision-making process, the complexity of the decision and the reversibility of the effects. Ultimately, the manner of usage should depend, among other things, on the sector in which the AI- system operates, if it could have legal or factual effects on important legally protected rights of the affected person, and whether the effects can reasonably be avoided.
Amendment 217 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 12
Annex I – part B – recital 12
(12) All AI-systems with a high risk should be listed in an Annex to this Regulation. Given the rapid technical and market developments as well as the technical expertise which is required for an adequate review of AI-systems, the power to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission to amend this Regulation in respect of the types of AI-systems that pose a high risk and the critical sectors where they are used. Based on the definitions and provisions laid down in this Regulation, the Commission should review the Annex every six months and, if necessary, amend it by means of delegated acts. To give businesses enough planning and investment security, changes to the critical sectors should only be made every 12twelve months. DevelopeOperators are called upon to notify the Commission if they are currently working on a new technology, product or service that falls under one of the existing critical sectors provided for in the Annex and which later could qualify for a high risk AI-system.
Amendment 223 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 14
Annex I – part B – recital 14
(14) In line with strict liability systems of the Member States, tThis Regulation should cover only harm or damage to life, health, physical integrity and, property. For the same reason, it and significant immaterial damage. For immaterial damage to be considered significant, the person must have suffered noticeable disadvantage and it had to be an objectively comprehensible impairment of personal interests with a substantial economic loss. The Regulation should also determine the amount and extent of compensation, as well as the limitation period for bringing forward liability claims. In contrast to the Product Liability Directive, this Regulation should set out a significantly lower ceiling for compensation, as it only refers to the damage of a single person resulting from a single operation of an AI-system, while the former refers to a number of products or even a product line with the same defect.
Amendment 229 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 15
Annex I – part B – recital 15
(15) All physical or virtual activities, devices or processes driven by AI-systems that are not listed as a high-risk AI-system in the Annex to this Regulation should remain subject to fault-based liability. The national laws of the Member States, including any relevant jurisprudence, with regard to the amount and extent of compensation as well as the limitation period should continue to apply. A person who suffers harm or damage caused by an AI-system should however benefit from the presumption of fault of the deployeoperator.
Amendment 232 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 16
Annex I – part B – recital 16
(16) The diligence which can be expected from a deployen operator should be commensurate with (i) the nature of the AI system, (ii) the legally protected right potentially affected, (iii) the potential harm or damage the AI-system could cause and (iv) the likelihood of such damage. Thereby, it should be taken into account that the deployeoperator might have limited knowledge of the algorithms and data used in the AI-system. It should be presumed that the deployeoperator has observed due care in selecting a suitable AI-system, if the deployeoperator has selected an AI-system which has been certified under [the voluntary certification scheme envisaged on p. 24 of COM(2020) 65 final]. It should be presumed that the deployeoperator has observed due care during the operation of the AI- system, if the deployeoperator can prove to have actually and regularly monitored the AI- system during its operation and to have notified the manufacturer about potential irregularities during the operation. It should be presumed that the deployeoperator has observed due care as regards maintaining the operational reliability, if the deployeoperator installed all available updates provided by the producer of the AI-system.
Amendment 233 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 17
Annex I – part B – recital 17
(17) In order to enable the deployeoperator to prove that he or she was not at fault, or the affected person to prove the existence of fault, the producers should have the duty to collaborate with the deployerboth parties concerned. European as well as non-European producers should furthermore have the obligation to designate an AI-liability- representative within the Union as a contact point for replying to all requests from deployeoperators, taking similar provisions set out in Article 37 GDPR (data protection officers), Articles 3(41) and 13(4) of Regulation 2018/858 of the European Parliament and of the Council5 and Articles 4(2) and 5 of Regulation 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and of the Council6 (manufacturer's representative) into account. _________________ 5 Regulation (EU) 2018/858 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on the approval and market surveillance of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles, amending Regulations (EC) No 715/2007 and (EC) No 595/2009 and repealing Directive 2007/46/EC (OJ L 151, 14.6.2018, p. 1). 6Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on market surveillance and compliance of products and amending Directive 2004/42/EC and Regulations (EC) No 765/2008 and (EU) No 305/2011 (OJ L 169, 25.6.2019, p. 1).
Amendment 238 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 18
Annex I – part B – recital 18
(18) The legislator has to consider the liability risks connected to AI-systems during their whole lifecycle, from development to usage to end of life. The inclusion of AI-systems in a product or service represents a financial risk for businesses and consequently will have a heavy impact on the ability and options for small and medium-sized enterprises (SME)s as well as for start-ups in relation to insuring and financing their projects based on new technologies. The purpose of liability is, therefore, not only to safeguard important legally protected rights of individuals but also a factor which determines whether businesses, especially SMEs and start-ups, are able to raise capital, innovate and ultimately offer new products and services, as well as whether the customers are willing to use such products and services despite the potential risks and legal claims being brought against them.
Amendment 247 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 20
Annex I – part B – recital 20
(20) Despite missing historical claim data, tBecause historical claim data is missing, it should be investigated how and under which conditions liability is insurable. There are already insurance products that are developed area-by-area and cover- by-cover as technology develops. Many insurers specialise in certain market segments (e.g. SMEs) or in providing cover for certain product types (e.g. electrical goods), which means that there will usually be an insurance product available for the insured. If a new type of insurance is needed, the insurance market will develop and offer a fitting solution and thus, willHowever, a “one size fits all” solution is difficult to envisage and the insurance market will need time to adapt. The Commission should work closely with the insurance market to develop innovative insurance products that could close the insurance gap. In exceptional cases, in which the compensation significantly exceeds the maximum amounts set out in this Regulation, Member States should be encouraged to set up a special compensation fund for a limited period of time that addresses the specific needs of those cases.
Amendment 252 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 21
Annex I – part B – recital 21
(21) It is of utmost importance that any future changes to this text go hand in hand with athe necessary review of the PLD. The introduction of a new liability regime for the deployeoperator of AI-systems requires that the provisions of this Regulation and the review of the PLD should be closely coordinated in terms of substance as well as approach so that they together constitute a consistent liability framework for AI- systems, balancing the interests of producer, deployeoperator and the affected person, as regards the liability risk. Adapting and streamlining the definitions of AI-system, deployeoperator, producer, developer, defect, product and service throughout all pieces of legislation is therefore necessary and should be envisaged in parallel.
Amendment 257 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 1 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Regulation sets out rules for the civil liability claims of natural and legal persons against the deployeoperator of AI-systems.
Amendment 260 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 2 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation applies on the territory of the Union where a physical or virtual activity, device or process driven by an AI-system has caused harm or damage to the life, health, physical integrity or the property ofand property of a natural or legal person or has caused significant immaterial damage to a natural or legal person.
Amendment 265 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 2 – paragraph 2
Annex I – part B – Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. Any agreement between a deployen operator of an AI-system and a natural or legal person who suffers harm or damage because of the AI-system, which circumvents or limits the rights and obligations set out in this Regulation, whether concluded before or after the harm or damage has been caused, shall be deemed null and void.
Amendment 269 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 2 – paragraph 3
Annex I – part B – Article 2 – paragraph 3
3. This Regulation is without prejudice to any additional liability claims resulting from contractual relationships between the deployeoperator and the natural or legal person who suffered harm or damage because of the AI-system.
Amendment 272 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 3 – point a
Annex I – part B – Article 3 – point a
(a) ‘AI-system’ means a system that displays intelligent behaviour by analysing certain inputheir environment and taking action, with some degree of autonomy, to achieve specific goals. AI-systems can be purely software- based, acting in the virtual world, or can be embedded in hardware devices;
Amendment 277 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 3 – point c
Annex I – part B – Article 3 – point c
(c) ‘high risk’ means a significant potential in an autonomously operating AI- system to cause harm or damage to one or more persons in a manner that is random and impossible to predict in advancgoes beyond what can reasonably be expected from its intended use; the significance of the potential depends on the interplay between the severity of possible harm or damage, the likelihood that the risk materializes and the manner in which the AI-system is being used;
Amendment 282 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 3 – point d
Annex I – part B – Article 3 – point d
(d) ‘deployeoperator’ means the person who decides on the use of the AI-system, exercises control over the associated risk and benefits from its operation;
Amendment 284 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 3 – point d a (new)
Annex I – part B – Article 3 – point d a (new)
(da) 'control' means influence on the use and operation of the AI-system from start to finish and thus the extent to which it exposes third parties to its potential risks;
Amendment 287 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 3 – point e
Annex I – part B – Article 3 – point e
(e) ‘affected person’ means any person who suffers harm or damage caused by a physical or virtual activity, device or process driven by an AI-system, and who is not its deployeoperator;
Amendment 290 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 3 – point f
Annex I – part B – Article 3 – point f
(f) ‘harm or damage’ means an adverse impact affecting the life, health, physical integrity or, property of a natural or legal person, with the exception of non-or causing significant immaterial harm;damage.
Amendment 294 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 3 – point g
Annex I – part B – Article 3 – point g
(g) ‘producer’ means the developer or the backend operator of an AI-system, or the producer as defined in Article 3 of Council Directive 85/374/EEC7 . _________________ 7 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 302 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 4 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. The deployeoperator of a high-risk AI- system shall be strictly liable for any harm or damage that was caused by a physical or virtual activity, device or process driven by that AI-system.
Amendment 322 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 4 – paragraph 3
Annex I – part B – Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The deployeoperator of a high-risk AI- system shall not be able to exonerate himself or herself by arguing that he or she acted with due diligence or that the harm or damage was caused by an autonomous activity, device or process driven by his or her AI-system. The deployeoperator shall not be held liable if the harm or damage was caused by force majeure.
Amendment 329 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 4 – paragraph 4
Annex I – part B – Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. The deployeoperator of a high-risk AI- system shall ensure they have liability insurance cover that is adequate in relation to the amounts and extent of compensation provided for in Article 5 and 6 of this Regulation. If compulsory insurance regimes already in force pursuant to other Union or national law are considered to cover the operation of the AI-system, the obligation to take out insurance for the AI- system pursuant to this Regulation shall be deemed fulfilled, as long as the relevant existing compulsory insurance covers the amounts and the extent of compensation provided for in Articles 5 and 6 of this Regulation.
Amendment 339 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Annex I – part B – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. A deployeoperator of a high-risk AI- system that has been held liable for harm or damage under this Regulation shall compensate:
Amendment 345 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Annex I – part B – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) up to a maximum total amount of EUR tenwo million in the event of death or of harm caused to the health or physical integrity of one or several persons as the result of the samingle operation of the sama single high-risk AI- system;
Amendment 350 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Annex I – part B – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) up to a maximum total amount of EUR twoone million in the event of damage caused to property, including when several items of property of one or several persons were damaged as a result of the sama single operation of the sama single high-risk AI-system, or significant immaterial damage; where the affected person also holds a contractual liability claim against the deployeoperator, no compensation shall be paid under this Regulation if the total amount of the damage to property is of a value that falls below EUR 500.
Amendment 356 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Annex I – part B – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Amendment 359 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Annex I – part B – Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Within the amount set out in Article 5(1)(a), compensation to be paid by the deployeoperator held liable in the event of physical harm followed by the death of the affected person, shall be calculated based on the costs of medical treatment that the affected person underwent prior to his or her death, and of the pecuniary prejudice sustained prior to death caused by the cessation or reduction of the earning capacity or the increase in his or her needs for the duration of the harm prior to death. The deployeoperator held liable shall furthermore reimburse the funeral costs for the deceased affected person to the party who is responsible for defraying those expenses.
Amendment 361 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 6 – paragraph 1 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 6 – paragraph 1 – paragraph 1
If at the time of the incident that caused the harm leading to his or her death, the affected person was in a relationship with a third party and had a legal obligation to support that third party, the deployeoperator held liable shall indemnify the third party by paying maintenance to the extent to which the affected person would have been obliged to pay, for the period corresponding to an average life expectancy for a person of his or her age and general description. The deployeoperator shall also indemnify the third party if, at the time of the incident that caused the death, the third party had been conceived but had not yet been born.
Amendment 365 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 6 – paragraph 2
Annex I – part B – Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. Within the amount set out in Article 5(1)(b), compensation to be paid by the deployeoperator held liable in the event of harm to the health or the physical integrity of the affected person shall include the reimbursement of the costs of the related medical treatment as well as the payment for any pecuniary prejudice sustained by the affected person, as a result of the temporary suspension, reduction or permanent cessation of his or her earning capacity or the consequent, medically certified increase in his or her needs.
Amendment 369 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Annex I – part B – Article 7 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Civil liability claims, brought in accordance with Article 4(1), concerning damage to property or significant immaterial damage shall be subject to a special limitation period of:
Amendment 374 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b
Annex I – part B – Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) 30 years from the date on which the operation of the high-risk AI-system that subsequently caused the property or significant immaterial damage took place.
Amendment 382 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. The deployeoperator of an AI-system that is not defined as a high-risk AI-system, in accordance to Article 3(c)4 and, as a result is not listed in the Annex to this Regulation, shall be subject to fault-based liability for any harm or damage that was caused by a physical or virtual activity, device or process driven by the AI-system.
Amendment 385 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The deployeoperator shall not be liable if he or she can prove that the harm or damage was caused without his or her fault, relying on either of the following grounds’:
Amendment 389 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) due diligence was strictly observed by selecting a suitable AI-system for the right task and skills, putting the AI-system duly into operation, monitoring the activities and maintaining the operational reliability by regularly installing all available updates.
Amendment 393 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The deployeoperator shall not be able to escape liability by arguing that the harm or damage was caused by an autonomous activity, device or process driven by his or her AI-system. The deployeoperator shall not be liable if the harm or damage was caused by force majeure.
Amendment 396 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 3
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 3
3. Where the harm or damage was caused by a third party that interfered with the AI-system by modifying its functioning, the deployeoperator shall nonetheless be liable for the payment of compensation if such third party is untraceable or impecunious.
Amendment 399 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 4
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. At the request of the deployeroperator or the affected person, the producer of an AI- system shall have the duty of collaborating with the deployerm to the extent warranted by the significance of the claim in order to allow for the ideployer to prove that he or she acted without faultntification of the liabilities.
Amendment 404 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. If the harm or damage is caused both by a physical or virtual activity, device or process driven by an AI-system and by the actions of an affected person or of any person for whom the affected person is responsible, the deployeoperator’s extent of liability under this Regulation shall be reduced accordingly. The deployeoperator shall not be liable if the affected person or the person for whom he or she is responsible is solely or predominantly accountable for the harm or damage caused.
Amendment 407 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 2
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. A deployen operator held liable and the affected person may use the data generated by the AI-system to prove contributory negligence on the part of the affected person, without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 410 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 11 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 11 – paragraph 1
If there is more than one deployeoperator of an AI- system, they shall be jointly and severally liable. If any of the deployeoperators is also the producer of the AI-system, this Regulation shall prevail over the Product Liability Directive.
Amendment 412 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 12 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. The deployeoperator shall not be entitled to pursue a recourse action unless the affected person, who is entitled to receive compensation under this Regulation, has been paid in full.
Amendment 416 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 12 – paragraph 2
Annex I – part B – Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. In the event that the deployeoperator is held jointly and severally liable with other deployeoperators in respect of an affected person and has fully compensated that affected person, in accordance with Article 4(1) or 8(1), that deployeoperator may recover part of the compensation from the other deployers, in proportion to his or her liability. DeployeOperators, that are jointly and severally liable, shall be obliged in equal proportions in relation to one another, unless otherwise determined. If the contribution attributable to a jointly and severally liable deployer cannot be obtained from him or her, the shortfall shall be borne by the other deployeoperators. To the extent that a jointly and severally liable deployeoperator compensates the affected person and demands adjustment of advancements from the other liable deployeoperators, the claim of the affected person against the other deployersoperator shall be subrogated to him or her. The subrogation of claims shall not be asserted to the disadvantage of the original claim.
Amendment 419 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 12 – paragraph 3
Annex I – part B – Article 12 – paragraph 3
3. In the event that the deployeoperator of a defective AI-system fully indemnifies the affected person for harm or damages in accordance with Article 4(1) or 8(1), he or she may take action for redress against the producer of the defective AI-system according to Directive 85/374/EEC and to national provisions concerning liability for defective products.
Amendment 422 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 12 – paragraph 4
Annex I – part B – Article 12 – paragraph 4
4. In the event that the insurer of the deployeoperator indemnifies the affected person for harm or damage in accordance with Article 4(1) or 8(1), any civil liability claim of the affected person against another person for the same damage shall be subrogated to the insurer of the deployeoperator to the amount the insurer of the deployeoperator has compensated the affected person.
Amendment 425 #
2020/2014(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 14 – subparagraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 14 – subparagraph 1
By 1 January 202X [53 years after the date of application of this Regulation], and every three years thereafter, the Commission shall present to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee a detailed report reviewing this Regulation in the light of the further development of Artificial Intelligence.
Amendment 6 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 7 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Calls on the Commission to increase cooperation at the international level on AI, coordinating work on AI with the OECD and promoting our future EU model on AI on the international scene; believes that the G7 and G20 are also major fora where the EU can play a determining role, as a first step to reaching a global consensus in the UN;
Amendment 22 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that the principle of proportionality needs to be respected and that questions of causality and liability need to be clarified to determine the extent to which the State as an actor in public international law, but also in exercising its own authority, can actually transfer that authority to systems based on AI, which have a certain autonomy, without breaching obligations stemming from international law, such as due process;
Amendment 26 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges, therefore, the Member States to assess the risks related to AI- driven technologies before automating activities connected with the exercise of State authority, such as the proper administration of justice; calls on the Member States to consider the need to provide for safeguards, foreseen in Directive (EU) 2018/958, such as supervision by a qualified professional and rules on professional ethics;
Amendment 32 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Underlines that self-driving cars, ships and other means of transportation may ultimately operate transnationally and that this can raise new questions of interpretation and application of international law; urges the Commission to engage with international partners on this matter;
Amendment 33 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Considers that the development of AI also entails opportunities to improve global market surveillance and address product safety, counterfeiting and consumer protection in a much more effective way and on a large scale;
Amendment 36 #
2020/2013(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that Member States and the Commission should promote AI technologies that work for people; calls on the Member States, in close cooperation with the Commission, to develop AIopen- source applications aimed at automating and facilitating e-government services, for example in the area of tax administration; underlines that explainable algorithms, open data and public source-codes are important to ensure that businesses and consumers benefit from betterinnovative, non- discriminatory and reliable public services at a lower cost all over Europe in a compatible way.
Amendment 1 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)
Citation 2 a (new)
- having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making (OJ L 123, 12.5.2016) and the Better Regulation Guidelines,
Amendment 10 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies with the potential to directly impact all aspects of our societies, including basic social and economic principles and values,generate opportunities for business and citizens while directly impact all aspects of our societies are being developed very quickly;
Amendment 12 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies can make a huge contribution to reaching our common goal of improving the lives of citizens and fostering prosperity within the EU;
Amendment 13 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
A. whereas, in areas such as health, agriculture, energy, transport, climate and various industrial processes artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies can contribute to the development of better strategies and innovations;
Amendment 14 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
Ac. whereas the development of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies is also a condition to reach the sustainability goals of the European Green Deal in many different sectors; whereas digital technologies can boost the impact of policies in delivering environmental protection;
Amendment 18 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas a European operational framework is of key importance in avoiding the fragmentation of the Single Market, resulting from differing national legislations; whereas, an action at European level will help fostering much needed investment, data infrastructure, research and common ethical norms; whereas this framework should be established according to the better regulation principle;
Amendment 19 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas such a framework should include legislative actions, where needed, including mandatory measures to prevent practices that would undoubtedly undermine fundamental rights and freedoms as defined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
Amendment 21 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas a common European framework forshould ensure the development, the deployment and the use of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies within the Union shoultrustworthy, ethical and technically robust artificial intelligence, based on Union’s laws and values and guided boy the protect citizens from their potential risks and promote the trustworthiness of such technologies in the worldinciples of transparency and explainability, fairness, accountability and responsibility;
Amendment 32 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. Whereas the diversity of applications driven by artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies complicates finding a single solution suitable for the entire spectrum of risks; notes in this respect that an approach should be adopted in which experiments, pilots and regulatory sandboxes are used to come up with proportional and evidence-based solutions;
Amendment 33 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
Eb. Whereas the future regulatory framework needs to take into consideration all the interests at stake; whereas careful examination of the consequences of any new regulatory framework on all actors in an impact assessment should be a prerequisite for further legislative steps; whereas the crucial role of Small- and Medium sized enterprises (SMEs) and start-ups especially in the European economy justifies a strictly proportionate approach to enable them to develop and innovate;
Amendment 35 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas for the scope of that framework toshould be adequate, proportionate and thoroughly assessed; whereas while it should cover a wide range of technologies and their components, including algorithms, software and data used or produced by them, a targeted approach based on the concept of high risk is necessary to avoid hampering future innovations;
Amendment 39 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas that framework should encompass all situations requiring due consideration of the Union’s principles and values, namelymake sure that the development, the deployment and the use of the relevant technologies and their components are fully compliant with the Union’s principles and values;
Amendment 44 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas action at Union level is justified by the need for a homogenous application of common ethical principles when developing, deploying and using artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies; whereas clear rules are needed where major risks are at stake;
Amendment 47 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas the European Union needs to recognise, harness and promote the benefits of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies for the society, while democratically deciding on the limitations to be laid down and safeguards to be provided to ensure the development, deployment and use of ethically embedded technologies that respect the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
Amendment 52 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas each Member State should destablishignate a national supervisory authority responsible for ensuring, assessing and monitoring complianceassessing the compliance of high-risk technologies with the ethical framework, and for enabling discussion and exchange of points of view in close cooperation with the concerned stakeholders and the civil society;
Amendment 63 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas Parliament continues to call for the establishment of a European Agency tothe idea of entrusting an existing European body with the task of ensureing a harmonised approach across the Union and addresshould be assessed as regards the new opportunities and challenges, in particular those of a cross-border nature, arising from ongoing technological developments.
Amendment 67 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Believes that any legislative action, in particular, related to new technologies should be in line with the principles of necessity and proportionality; points out, in this respect, that the ethical framework considered in this report should be applicable to high-risk artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies;
Amendment 68 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1a. Considers that such an approach will allow companies to introduce innovative products into the market and create new opportunities while ensuring the protection of the European values;
Amendment 69 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 b (new)
Paragraph -1 b (new)
-1b. Considers that artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies should be considered« high risk technologies » when they are used in sectors, where given the characteristics of the activities typically undertaken, and are used in such a manner that significant risks can be expected to occur from the viewpoint of safety and fundamental rights and freedoms;
Amendment 70 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 c (new)
Paragraph -1 c (new)
-1c. Asks the Commission to establish an exhaustive list of the technologies fulfilling these criteria in the form of annex to the Regulation on ethical principles for the development, deployment and use of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies; considers that the Commission should review the exhaustive list, if necessary, every six months by means of a delegated act to add new high- risk technologies or delete existing ones if they do not fulfil the criteria anymore; recalls that any changes to the annex should be thoroughly assessed and justified;
Amendment 73 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Declares that the development, deployment and use of high-risk artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, including but not exclusively by human beings, should always respect human agency and oversight, as well as allow the retrieval of human control at any time;
Amendment 80 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 87 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers that this assessment should be developed in a way that limits the administrative burden for companies, and SMEs in particular, as much as possible by using existing tools; notes that the Data Protection Impact Assessment list as provided for in Regulation (EU) 2016/679 could be one of those tools;
Amendment 96 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Maintains that artificial intelligence, robotics and relatedhigh-risk technologies, including the software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies should be developed in a legal, secure, and technically rigorobust manner and in good faith;
Amendment 100 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines that transparency and explainability isare essential to ensuring thate citizens’ trust in these technologies, even if the degree of explainability is relative to the complexity of the technologies, and that it should be complemented by auditability and traceability; considers that the respect of these principles is a precondition to guarantee accountability;
Amendment 105 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers that citizens should be informed when interacting with a system using artificial intelligence in particular to personalise a product or service to its users, whether they can switch off or restrain the personalisation; considers, furthermore, that transparency measures should be accompanied, as far as this is technically possible, by clear and understandable explanations of the data used, of the algorithm, of its purpose, of its outcomes, and of its potential dangers;
Amendment 110 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls thatIs concerned by the risks of biases and discrimination in the development, deployment and use of high-risk artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, including the software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies,; recalls that, in all circumstances, they should respect human dignity and ensure equal treatment for all;
Amendment 117 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. AffirmConsiders that possible bias in and discrimination by software, and algorithms and data shcould be addressed by setting rules for theon data processes through which they are designed and used, as this approach would have the potential to turn software, algorithms and data into a considerable counterbalance to bias and discrimination, and a positive force for social changeing; points out also that the use of AI, robotics and related technologies has the potential to fight discrimination in certain situation;
Amendment 122 #
Amendment 123 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Considers that any natural or legal person should be able to seek redress of a decision issued by a high-risk artificial intelligence, robotics or related technology at his or her detriment;
Amendment 130 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Emphasises that socially responsible artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies should aim at safeguarding and promoteing fundamental values of our society such as democracy, diverse and independent media and objective and freely available information, health and economic prosperity, equality of opportunity, workers’ and social rights, quality education, cultural and linguistic diversity, gender balance, digital literacy, innovation and creativity;
Amendment 144 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. States that it is essential that artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies can be used by government and businesses to support the achievement of sustainable development, climate neutrality and circular economy goals; the development, deployment and use of these technologies should be environmentally friendly, and contribute to minimising any harm caused to the environment during their lifecycle and across their entire supply chain;
Amendment 150 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Considers that the objectives of social responsibility, gender balance, environmental protection and sustainability should be without prejudice to existing general and sectorial obligations within these fields; believes that the Commission should establish non-binding guidelines to the intention of developers, deployers and users on the methodology for the achievement of these objectives;
Amendment 161 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Points out that while the benefits of deploying artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies within the framework of public power decisions are unquestionable, severe misuses are also possible, such as mass surveillance, predictive policing and breaches of due process rights;
Amendment 162 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Considers that technologies which can replace decisions taken by public authorities should be treated with the utmost precaution, notably in the area of justice and law enforcement;
Amendment 163 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)
Paragraph 15 c (new)
15c. Believes that Member States should have recourse to such technologies only if there is thorough evidence of their trustworthiness and if human verification is possible or systematic in cases where fundamental liberties are at stake; underlines the importance for national authorities to undertake strict fundamental rights impact assessment for high-risk artificial intelligence systems deployed in these cases;
Amendment 164 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 d (new)
Paragraph 15 d (new)
15d. Is of the opinion that any decision taken by high-risk artificial intelligence, robotics or related technologies within the framework of prerogatives of public power should be subject to strict human verification and due process;
Amendment 165 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 e (new)
Paragraph 15 e (new)
15e. Believes that the technological advancement should not allow for the use of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies to autonomously distribute rights or to impose legal obligations on individuals;
Amendment 167 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses that appropriate governance of the development, deployment and use of high-risk artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, including by having measures in place focusing on accountability and addressing potential risks of bias and discrimination, increases citizens’ safety and trust in those technologies;
Amendment 178 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Underlines the need to ensure that personal data is protected adequately, especially data belonging to vulnerable groups, such as people with disabilities, patients, children, minorities and migrants, are protected adequately;
Amendment 181 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Considers that the use of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies by public authorities requires specific attention because of its potential impact on fundamental rights protection;
Amendment 182 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Notes that the development, deployment and use of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies by public authorities are often outsourced to private parties; considers that this should not compromise the protection of public values and fundamental rights in any way; considers that public procurement terms and conditions should reflect the ethical standards imposed on public authorities;
Amendment 208 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 217 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls on the Commission to follow- up on that request, especially in view of the added-value of having a body at Union level coordinating the mandates andcoordinate the actions of each national supervisory authority as referred to in the previous sub- section;
Amendment 220 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Calls on the Commission to assess whether a European body would be necessary to ensure a harmonised implementation of the European ethical framework for high-risk artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies;
Amendment 221 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)
Paragraph 23 b (new)
23b. Calls on the Commission to explore entrusting an existing EU body, such as ENISA, EDPS, or the European Ombudsman, to ensure the harmonised implementation of the European ethical framework for high-risk artificial intelligence, robots and related technologies;
Amendment 229 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Believes that such a body, as well as the certification referred to in the following paragraph, would not only benefit the development of Union industry and innovation in that context but also increase the awareness of our citizens regarding the opportunities and risks inherent to these technologies;
Amendment 236 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Suggests that the European Agency for Artificial Intelligence develops common criteria and an application process relating to the granting ofCalls on the Commission to explore the possibility to develop a European certificateion of ethical compliance following a, to be granted at the request by anyof developer, deployer or user seeking to certify the positive assessment of compliance carried out by the respective national supervisory authoritys of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, which comply with the European ethical framework;
Amendment 248 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Recalls that the opportunities and risks inherent to these technologies have a global dimension that requires a consistent approach at international level and thus calls on the Commission to work in bilateral and multilateral settings to advocate and ensur, as the software and data used for these systems are frequently imported in and exported out of the European Union; calls on the Commission to take the initiative to investigate which bilateral and multilateral treaties and agreements should be adjusted to ensure a consistent approach and promote ethical compliance globally;
Amendment 249 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Recalls that the opportunities and risks inherent to these technologies have a global dimension that requires a consistent approach at international level and thus calls on the Commission to work in bilateral and multilateral settings to advocate and ensurepromote the European model of ethical compliance.
Amendment 256 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Points out the added-value of a European Agencyregulatory framework for high- risk artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies as referred to above in this context as well.
Amendment 258 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Concludes, following the above reflections on aspects related to the ethical dimension of high-risk artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, that the ethical dimension should be framed as a series of principles resulting in a legal framework at Union level supervised by national competent authorities, coordinated and enhanced by a European Agency for Artificial Intelligence and duly respected and certified within the internal market;
Amendment 269 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Recommends that the European Commission, after consulting with all the relevant stakeholders, review existing Union law applicable to high-risk artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies in order to review it when necessary and address the rapidity of their development in line with the recommendations set out in the annex hereto;
Amendment 270 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31a. Believes that a periodical assessment of the European regulatory framework related to artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies will be essential to ensure that the applicable legislation is up to date with the rapidly growing technological progress;
Amendment 274 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Considers that the requested proposal would have financial implications if a new European Agency for Artificial Intelligence is set upn existing European body is entrusted with the above-mentioned functions in order to ensure the necessary technical means and human resources to fulfil its newly attributed tasks;
Amendment 276 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point I – indent 1
Annex I – part A – point I – indent 1
- to build trust in artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies by ensuring that when these technologies will beentail a high-risk for the protection of safety and fundamental rights and freedoms their developedment, deployedment and used will be done in an ethical manner;
Amendment 287 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point I – indent 3
Annex I – part A – point I – indent 3
- to support deployment of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies in the Union by providing the appropriate and proportionate regulatory framework;
Amendment 295 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point II – indent 2
Annex I – part A – point II – indent 2
Amendment 302 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point II – indent 5 a (new)
Annex I – part A – point II – indent 5 a (new)
- annex establishing a list of high- risk technologies which fall under the scope of this Regulation;
Amendment 306 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point III – indent 2
Annex I – part A – point III – indent 2
- riskcompliance assessment of high- risk artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies;
Amendment 310 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point III – indent 4 a (new)
Annex I – part A – point III – indent 4 a (new)
- right to redress;
Amendment 314 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point III – indent 7 a (new)
Annex I – part A – point III – indent 7 a (new)
- safeguards related to the use of high-risk artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies within the framework of public power decisions;
Amendment 318 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point IV – indent 1 a (new)
Annex I – part A – point IV – indent 1 a (new)
- regularly assessing and if necessary, reviewing the annex of the Regulation by means of a delegated act
Amendment 321 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point IV – indent 2 a (new)
Annex I – part A – point IV – indent 2 a (new)
- engaging discussions on global ethical norms at international level;
Amendment 322 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point IV – indent 2 b (new)
Annex I – part A – point IV – indent 2 b (new)
- establishing binding guidelines on the methodology of the compliance assessment to be followed by the national supervisory authorities;
Amendment 323 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point IV – indent 2 c (new)
Annex I – part A – point IV – indent 2 c (new)
- establishing non-binding guidelines directed to the developers, the deployers and the users;
Amendment 327 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point V
Annex I – part A – point V
Amendment 345 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point VI – indent 2
Annex I – part A – point VI – indent 2
Amendment 350 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point VI – indent 4
Annex I – part A – point VI – indent 4
Amendment 360 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point VII
Annex I – part A – point VII
VII. The key role of stakeholders should be to engage with the Commission, the European Agency for Artificial Intelligence and the “Supervisory Authority” in each Member State.
Amendment 365 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 1
Annex I – part B – recital 1
(1) The development, deployment and use of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, including the software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies, arshould be based on a desire to serve society. TheySome of these technologies can entail opportunities and risks, which should be addressed and regulated by a comprehensive legal framework of ethical principles to be complied with from the moment of the development and deployment of such technologies to their use.
Amendment 372 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 3
Annex I – part B – recital 3
(3) In this context, the current diversity of the rules and practices to be followed across the Union poses a significant risk to the protection of the well-being and prosperity of individuals and society alikeof fragmentation of the Single Market , as well as to the coherent exploration of the full potential that artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies have in promoting and preserving that well-being and prosperityinnovation. Differences in the degree of consideration of the ethical dimension inherent to these technologies can prevent them from being freely developed, deployed or used within the Union and such differences can constitute an obstacle to the pursuit ofa level playing field and to the pursuit of technological progress and economic activities at Union level, distort competition and impede authorities in the fulfilment of their obligations under Union law. In addition, the absence of a common framework of ethical principles for the development, deployment and use of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies results in legal uncertainty for all those involved, namely developers, deployers and users.
Amendment 373 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 4
Annex I – part B – recital 4
Amendment 378 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 6
Annex I – part B – recital 6
(6) A common understanding in the Union of notions such as artificial intelligence, robotics, related technologies, algorithms and biometric recognition is required in order to allow for a harmonized regulatory approach. However, the specific legal definitions need to be developed in the context of this Regulation without prejudice to other definitions used in other legal acts and international jurisdictions. They should be technologically neutral and also subject to review whenever necessary.
Amendment 389 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 8 a (new)
Annex I – part B – recital 8 a (new)
(8a) This Regulation should be strictly proportionate to its objective so as not to hamper innovation in the Union. In this respect, it should be based on a targeted risk-based approach focusing on specific sectors where major interests are at stake.
Amendment 390 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 8 b (new)
Annex I – part B – recital 8 b (new)
(8b) The scope of the Regulation should be limited to high-risk artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies used in sectors, where given the characteristics of the activities typically undertaken, significant risks can be expected to occur, and where their use is likely to create significant risk. A significant risk should be understood as directly endangering the protection of safety or fundamental rights and freedoms.
Amendment 391 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 8 c (new)
Annex I – part B – recital 8 c (new)
(8c) The sectors covered should be notably, but not exclusively, healthcare, transport, energy and finance. The high- risk technologies should be exclusively listed in the annex of this Regulation, which should be revised on a regular basis, keeping up with technological development.
Amendment 392 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 9
Annex I – part B – recital 9
(9) Any artificial intelligence, robotics and relatedHigh-risk technologies, including the software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies, which entails a high risk of breachingshould respect the principles of safety, transparency, accountability, non-bias or non- discrimination, social responsibility and gender balance, environmental friendliness andright to redress, sustainability, privacy and governance, should be considered high- risk from a compliance with ethical principles perspective where that is the conclusion of an impartial, regulated and external risk assessment by the national supervisory authority.
Amendment 396 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 9 a (new)
Annex I – part B – recital 9 a (new)
(9a) The Commission should prepare non-binding guidelines on the methodology for compliance with this Regulation intended to developers, deployers and users. In doing so, the Commission should consult relevant stakeholders.
Amendment 398 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 10
Annex I – part B – recital 10
(10) Notwithstanding the risk assessment carried out in relation to compliance with ethical principles, artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, including the software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies,High-risk technologies should always be assessed as to their risk on the basis of the objective criteria and in line withlaid down in this Regulation and without prejudice to the relevant sector-specific legislation applicable in different fields such as those of health, transport, employment, justice and home affairs, media, education and culture.
Amendment 401 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 10 a (new)
Annex I – part B – recital 10 a (new)
(10a) When a high-risk technology has been considered compliant with the principles laid out in this regulation, the software, algorithms and data which are used or produced by the technology should be presumed compliant with this regulation, unless the national supervisory authority decides to conduct an assessment at its own initiative or at the request of the developer, the deployer or the user.
Amendment 405 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 12
Annex I – part B – recital 12
(12) Developers, deployers and users of high-risk technologies are responsible for compliance with safety, transparency, and accountability principles to the extent of their involvement with the artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies concerned, including the software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies. Developers should ensure that the technologies concerned are designed and built in line with safety features, whereas deployers and users should deploy and use the concerned technologies in full observance of those features. To this end, developers of high- risk technologies should evaluate and anticipate the risks of misuse of their own technologies, in order to respond effectively if the problem arises.
Amendment 409 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 14
Annex I – part B – recital 14
Amendment 414 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 16
Annex I – part B – recital 16
(16) Society’s trust in artificial intelligence, robotics and related high-risk technologies, including the software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies, depends on the degree to which their assessment, auditability and traceability are enabled in the technologies concerned. Where the extent of their involvement so requires, developers should ensure that such technologies are designed and built in a manner that enables such an assessment, auditing and traceability. DWithin the limits of what is technically possible, developers, deployers and users should ensure that artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies are deployed and used in full respect of transparency requirements, and allowing auditing and traceability.
Amendment 417 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 16 a (new)
Annex I – part B – recital 16 a (new)
(16a) In order to ensure transparency and accountability, citizens should be informed when a system uses artificial intelligence, when AI systems personalise a product or service to its users, whether they can switch off or restrain the personalisation and when they are faced with an automated-decision making technology. Furthermore, transparency measures should be accompanied, as far as this is technically possible, by clear and understandable explanations of the data used, of the algorithm, of its purpose, of its outcomes, and of its potential dangers;
Amendment 418 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 17
Annex I – part B – recital 17
(17) Bias in and discrimination by software, algorithms and data is unlawful and should be addressed by regulating the processes through which they are designed and usdeployed.
Amendment 420 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 18
Annex I – part B – recital 18
(18) Software, algorithms and data used or produced by artificial intelligence, robotics and relatedhigh-risk technologies1a should be considered biased where, for example, they display suboptimal results in relation to any person or group of persons, on the basis of a prejudiced personal, social or partial perception and subsequent processing of data relating to their traits. __________________ 1aFrom this point, “artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies” should be replaced by “high-risk technologies” throughout the recitals.
Amendment 437 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 28
Annex I – part B – recital 28
(28) TWhere applicable, the development, deployment and use of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, including the software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies, should take into consideration their environmental footprint and should not cause harm to the environment during their lifecycle and across their entire supply chain. Accordingly, such technologies should be developed, deployed and used in an environmentally friendly manner that supports the achievement of climate neutrality and circular economy goals.
Amendment 438 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 29
Annex I – part B – recital 29
Amendment 440 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 30
Annex I – part B – recital 30
Amendment 443 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 31
Annex I – part B – recital 31
(31) TWhere applicable, these technologies should also be developed, deployed and used with a view to supporting the achievement of environmental goals such as reducing waste production, diminishing the carbon footprint, preventing climate change and avoiding environmental degradation, and their potential in that context should be maximized and explored through research and innovation projects. The Union and the Member States should therefore mobilise their resources for the purpose of supporting and investing in such projects.
Amendment 449 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 34
Annex I – part B – recital 34
(34) The ethical boundaries of the use of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, including software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies, should be duly considered when using remote recognition technologies, such as biometric recognition, to automatically identify individuals. When these technologies are used by public authorities during times of national emergency, such as during a national health crisis, the use should be proportionate and temporary. Clear criteria for that use should be defined in order to be able to determine whether, when and how it should take place, and such use should be mindful of its psychological and sociocultural impact with due regard for human dignity and the fundamental rights set out in the Charter.
Amendment 450 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 35
Annex I – part B – recital 35
Amendment 452 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 35 a (new)
Annex I – part B – recital 35 a (new)
(35a) Public authorities should conduct fundamental rights impact assessment before deploying high-risk technologies which replace public power decisions and which have a direct and significant impact on citizen’s rights and obligations. In addition, these technologies should allow for human verification and due process, especially in the areas of justice and law enforcement, where fundamental rights protected by the Charter, are at stake.
Amendment 453 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 36
Annex I – part B – recital 36
(36) AmongDevelopers, deployers and users should continue to observe the existing relevant governance standards are, for example, the ‘Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI’ drafted by the High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence set up by the European Commission, and other technical standards adopted by the European Committee for Standardization (CEN), the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization (CENELEC), and the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), at European level, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), at international level.
Amendment 460 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 38
Annex I – part B – recital 38
(38) The effective application of the ethical principles laid down in this Regulation will largely depend on Member States’ should appointment of an independent public authority to act as a supervisory authority. In particular, eEach national supervisory authority should be responsible for assessing and monitoring the compliance of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies considered a high-risk in light of the obligations set out inhigh-risk technologies with this Rregulation.
Amendment 465 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 39
Annex I – part B – recital 39
(39) Each national supervisory authority shall also carry the responsibility of regulating the governance of these technologies. They thereforewill have an important role to play in promoting the trust and safety of Union citizens, as well as in enabling a democratic, pluralistic and equitable society.
Amendment 473 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 42 a (new)
Annex I – part B – recital 42 a (new)
(42a) The Commission should establish binding guidelines to be followed by the national supervisory authorities when conducting their compliance assessment.
Amendment 475 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 44
Annex I – part B – recital 44
(44) The rapid development of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, including the software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies, as well as of the technical machine learning, reasoning processes and other technologies underlying that development are unpredictable. As such, it is both appropriate and necessary to establish a review mechanism in accordance with which, in addition to its reporting on the application of the Regulation, the Commission is to regularly submit a report concerning the possible modification of the scope of application of this Regulation. In addition, the Commission should review, if necessary, every six months the annex of this Regulation by means of delegated act.
Amendment 480 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – recital 46
Annex I – part B – recital 46
Amendment 484 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – before Article 1 – chapter title (new)
Annex I – part B – before Article 1 – chapter title (new)
Chapter I: General provisions
Amendment 488 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 2 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation applies to high- risk artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, hereafter “high-risk technologies”1a including software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies, developed, deployed or used in the Union. 2. Within the meaning of this Regulation are considered being high- risk technologies, technologies that: (a) are used in sectors, where given the characteristics of the activities typically undertaken, significant risks can be expected to occur from the viewpoint of protection of safety and fundamental rights and freedoms, and (b) are used in such a manner, that such risks can be expected to occur from the viewpoint of protection of safety and fundamental rights and freedoms 3. The high-risk technologies mentioned in Paragraph 2 shall be listed in an Annex to this Regulation. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 16(a), to amend the exhaustive list, by: (a) including new types of high-risk artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies; (b) deleting types of technologies that can no longer be considered to pose a high-risk; (c) changing the critical sectors for existing high-risk technologies. Any delegated act amending the Annex shall come into force six months after its adoption. When determining new critical sectors and/or high-risk technologies to be inserted by means of delegated acts in the Annex, the Commission shall take full account of the criteria set out in this Regulation, in particular those set out in paragraph 2 of this Article. __________________ 1aFrom this point “artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies” is replaced by “high-risk technologies” throughout the Regulation
Amendment 494 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Annex I – part B – Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) ‘artificial intelligence’ means softwarea systems that, inter alia, collect, process and interpret structured or unstructured data, identify patterns and establish models in order to reach conclusions or take displays intelligent behaviour by analysing their environment and taking actions, with some degree of autonomy, to achieve specific goals; AI- systems can be purely software-based, actionsng in the physical or virtual dimension basvirtual world, or can be embedded oin such conclusionhardware devices;
Amendment 520 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point p
Annex I – part B – Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point p
Amendment 528 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 5 – paragraph 3
Annex I – part B – Article 5 – paragraph 3
Amendment 530 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – after article 5 – chapter title (new)
Annex I – part B – after article 5 – chapter title (new)
Chapter II: Obligations for high-risk technologies
Amendment 533 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 6 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Any artificial intelligence, robotics and relatedHigh-risk technologies, including software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies, shall: (a) be developed, deployed and used in a human- centric manner with the aim of contributing to the existence of a democratic, pluralistic and equitable society by safeguarding human autonomy and decision-making and ensuring human agency.;
Amendment 534 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 6 – paragraph 2
Annex I – part B – Article 6 – paragraph 2
Amendment 537 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 6 – paragraph 3
Annex I – part B – Article 6 – paragraph 3
Amendment 540 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 7
Annex I – part B – Article 7
Amendment 550 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 554 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) developed, deployed and used in a resilient manner so that they ensure an adequate level of security, and one that prevents any technical vulnerabilities from being exploited for unfair or unlawful purposes;
Amendment 557 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) developed, deployed and used in a manner that ensures that there is trust that the performance is reliablare reliable performance as regards reaching the aims and carrying out the activities they have been conceived for, including by ensuring that all operations are reproducible;
Amendment 559 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point e
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) developed, deployed and used in a manner that ensures that the performance of the aims and activities of the particular technologies is accurate; if occasional inaccuracies cannot be avoided, the system shall indicate, to the extent possible, the likeliness of errors and inaccuracies to deployers and users through an appropriate disclaimer message;
Amendment 562 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point g
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) developed, deployed and used in a manner such that they are capable of warninginform users that they are interacting with artificial intelligence systems, duly and comprehensively disclosing their capabilities, accuracy and limitations to artificial intelligence developers, deployers and users of high- risk technologies;
Amendment 565 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 2
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. In accordance with Article 6(2b), thehigh-risk technologies mentioned in paragraph 1, including software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies shall be developed, deployed and used in transparent and traceable manner so that their elements, processes and phases are documented to the highest standards, and that it is possible for the national supervisory authorities referred to in Article 14 to assess the compliance of such technologies with the obligations set out in this Regulationapplicable standards. In particular, the developer, deployer or user of those technologies shall be responsible for, and be able to demonstrate, compliance with the safety features set out in paragraph 1.
Amendment 569 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 3
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 3
3. The developer, deployer or user of thehigh-risk technologies mentioned in paragraph 1 shall ensure that the measures taken to ensure compliance with the safety features set out in paragraph 1 can be audited by the national supervisory authorities referred to in Article 14.
Amendment 571 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 4
Annex I – part B – Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. Users shall be presumed to have complied with the obligations set out in this Article where their use of artificial, robotics and related technologies, including software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies, is carried out in good faith and in no way contravenes the ethical principles laid down in this Regulation.
Amendment 575 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 9 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. AnyHigh-risk technologies, including software, algorithm or data used or produced by artificial intelligence, robotics and relatedsuch technologies developed, deployed or used in the Union shall be such as to ensure respect for human dignity and equal treatment for all.
Amendment 578 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 9 – paragraph 2
Annex I – part B – Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. AnyHigh-risk technologies, including software, algorithm ors and data used or produced by artificial intelligence, robotics and relatedsuch technologies, developed, deployed or used in the Union shall be unbiased and, without prejudice to paragraph 3, shall not discriminate on grounds such as race, gender, sexual orientation, pregnancy, disability, physical or genetic features, age, national minority, ethnic or social origin, language, religion or belief, political views or civic participation, citizenship, civil or economic status, education, or criminal record.
Amendment 580 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. Any artificial intelligence, robotics and relatedHigh-risk technologies, ,including software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies, shall be developed, deployed and used in the Union in compliance with the relevant Union law, principles and values, in a manner that ensures optimal social, environmental and economic outcomes and that does not result in injury or harm of any kind to being caused to individuals or society..
Amendment 584 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Any artificial intelligence, robotics and relatedHigh-risk technologies, including software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies, developed, deployed or used in the Union shall be developed, deployed and used in a socially responsible manner. In particular, such a manner shall mean that such technologies are:
Amendment 585 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point a
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 587 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 590 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point c
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 593 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point d
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point d
Amendment 594 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point e
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point e
Amendment 599 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 3
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 3
Amendment 602 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 4
Annex I – part B – Article 10 – paragraph 4
Amendment 607 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 11 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. Any artificial intelligence, robotics and relatedHigh-risk technologies, including software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies, shall be developed, deployed or used in the Union in compliance with Union law, principles and values, in a manner that ensures optimal environmentally friendly outcomes and and commitments related to the protection of the environment and where applicable they shall pursue the objective of minimisesing their environmental footprint during their lifecycle and through their entire supply chain, in order to support the achievement of climate neutrality and circular economy goals.
Amendment 610 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 11 – paragraph 3
Annex I – part B – Article 11 – paragraph 3
Amendment 613 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 11 a (new)
Annex I – part B – Article 11 a (new)
Amendment 614 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 11 b (new)
Annex I – part B – Article 11 b (new)
Article 11b Implementation guidance The Commission shall prepare non- binding guidelines on the methodology for compliance with this Regulation intended to developers, deployers and users. In doing so, the Commission shall consult relevant stakeholders. The Commission shall publish the guidelines by the date of the entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 620 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B –After Article 12 – chapter title (new)
Annex I – part B –After Article 12 – chapter title (new)
Chapter III: Specific requirements
Amendment 621 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12a Public power decisions 1. Member States shall conduct an impact assessment on fundamental rights for high-risk technologies used within their prerogatives of public powers that have a significant and direct impact on the rights and obligations of natural or legal persons. 2. High-risk technologies that have a direct and significant impact on rights and obligations of natural and legal persons shall be subject to strict human verification, and due process.
Amendment 622 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 12 b (new)
Annex I – part B – Article 12 b (new)
Article 12b Right to redress 1. Any natural or legal person shall be able to seek redress for damages caused by a decision issued at her/his detriment by high-risk technologies.
Amendment 623 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B –After Article 12 b – chapter title (new)
Annex I – part B –After Article 12 b – chapter title (new)
Chapter IV: Institutional oversight
Amendment 628 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 13 – paragraph 2
Annex I – part B – Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Data used or produced by artificial intelligence, robotics and relatedhigh-risk technologies developed, deployed or used in the Union shall be managed by developers, deployers and users in accordance with the relevant standards referred to in paragraph 1national, European and international rules, as well as with relevant industry and business protocols. In particular, developers and deployers shall carry out, where feasible, quality checks of the external sources of data used by artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, and shall put oversight mechanisms in place regarding their collection, storage, processing and use.
Amendment 629 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 13 – paragraph 3
Annex I – part B – Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Without prejudice to portability rights and rights of persons whose usage of artificial intelligence, robotics and relatedhigh-risk technologies has generated data, the collection, storage, processing, sharing of and access to data used or produced by artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies developed, deployed or used in the Union shall comply with the relevant standards referred to in paragraph 1national, European and international rules, as well as with relevant industry and business protocols. In particular, developers and deployers shall ensure those protocols are applied during the development and deployment of artificial intelligence, robotics and relatedhigh-risk technologies, by clearly defining the requirements for processing and granting access to data used or produced by these technologies, as well as the purpose, scope and addressees of the processing and the granting of access to such data, all of which shall at all times be auditable and traceable.
Amendment 632 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 14 – paragraph 1
Annex I – part B – Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall designate an independent public authority to be responsible for monitoring the application of this Regulation (‘supervisory authority’). In accordance with Article 7(1) and (2), each national supervisory authority shall be responsible for assessing whether artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, including software, algorithms and data used or produced by such technologies, developed, deployed and used in the Union areand monitoring the compliance of high- risk technologies and, if so, for assessing and monitoring their compliance with the ethical principles set out in this Regulation.
Amendment 636 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 14 – paragraph 2
Annex I – part B – Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. Each national supervisory authority shall contribute to the consistent application of this Regulation throughout the Union. For that purpose, the supervisory authorities in each Member State shall cooperate with each other, the Commission and other relevant institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union, in particular as regards establishing the governance standards referred to in Article 13(1).
Amendment 642 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 14 – paragraph 4
Annex I – part B – Article 14 – paragraph 4
4. Each national supervisory authority shall provide professional and administrative guidance and support on the general implementation of the ethical principlesfor the implementation of the harmonised ethical framework set out in this Regulation, includingespecially to small and medium-sized enterprises or start-ups.
Amendment 643 #
2020/2012(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – Article 14 – paragraph 6
Annex I – part B – Article 14 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall take all measures necessary to ensure the implementation of the ethical principles set out in this Regulation. Member States shall support relevant stakeholders and civil society, at both Union and national level, in their efforts to ensure a timely, ethical and well- informed response to the new opportunities and challenges, in particular those of a cross-border nature, arising from technological developments relating to artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies.
Amendment 158 #
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, web browsers, 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 practices. They therefore should be included in the definition of core platform services and fall into the scope of this Regulation. Online intermediation services should be considered irrespective of the technology used to provide such services. In this sense, virtual or voice activated assistants and other connected devices fall within the scope of this Regulation whether their software is considered an operating system, an online intermediation service or a search engine. 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 180 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) A very high number of business users that depend on a core platform service to reach a very high number of monthly active end users allow the provider of that service to influence the operations of a substantial part of business users to its advantage and indicate in principle that the provider serves as an important gateway. The respective relevant levels for those numbers should be set representing a substantive percentage of the entire population of the Union when it comes to end users and of the entire population of businesses using platforms to determine the threshold for business users. Active end users as well as business users should be defined in a way to adequately represent the role and reach of the specific core platform service in question. In order to provide legal certainty for gatekeepers, elements of such definitions per core platform service should be set out in an annex to this Regulation, which should be subject to possible amendment by the Commission by means of delegated act to be able to keep it up to date in the light of technical or other developments.
Amendment 188 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Such an assessment can only be done in light of a market investigation, while taking into account the quantitative thresholds. In its assessment the Commission should pursue the objectives of preserving and fostering the level of innovation, the quality of digital products and services, the degree to which prices are fair and competitive, and the degree to which quality or choice for business users and for end users is or remains high. Elements that are specific to the providers of core platform services concerned, 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, can be taken into account. The potential negative and positive impacts of these elements for business users, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises, and consumers should be taken into consideration. In addition, a very high market capitalisation, a very high ratio of equity value over profit or a very high turnover derived from end users of a single core platform service can point to the tipping of the market or leveraging potential of such providers. Together with market capitalisation, high growth rates, or decelerating growth rates read together with profitability growth, are examples of dynamic parameters that are particularly relevant to identifying such providers of core platform services that are foreseen to become entrenched. The Commission should be able to take a decision by drawing adverse inferences from facts available where the provider significantly obstructs the investigation by failing to comply with the investigative measures taken by the Commission.
Amendment 203 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) The obligations laid down in this Regulation are limited to what is necessary and justified to address the unfairness of the identified practices by gatekeepers and to ensure contestability in relation to core platform services provided by gatekeepers. Therefore, the obligations should correspond to those practices that are considered unfair by taking into account the features of the digital sector and where experience gained, for example in the enforcement of the EU competition rules, shows that they have a particularly negative direct impact on the business users and end users. The obligations laid down in the Regulation should specifically take into account the nature of the core platform services provided and the presence of different business models. In addition, it is necessary to provide for the possibility of a regulatory dialogue with gatekeepers to tailor those obligations that are likely to require specific implementing measures in order to ensure their effectiveness and proportionality. The obligations should only be updated after a thorough investigation on the nature and impact of specific practices that may be newly identified, following an in-depth investigation, as unfair or limiting contestability in the same manner as the unfair practices laid down in this Regulation while potentially escaping the scope of the current set of obligations.
Amendment 207 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) The obligations laid down in this Regulation are necessary to address identified public policy concerns, there being no alternative and less restrictive measures that would effectively achieve the same result, having regard to the need to safeguard public order, protect privacy and fight fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices.
Amendment 228 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) To prevent further reinforcing their dependence on the core platform services of gatekeepers, the business users of these gatekeepers should be free in promoting and choosing the distribution channel they consider most appropriate to interact with any end users that these business users have already acquired through core platform services provided by the gatekeeper. Conversely, end users should also be free to choose offers of such business users and to enter into contracts with them either through core platform services of the gatekeeper, if applicable, or from a direct distribution channel of the business user or another indirect distribution channel such a business user may use. This should apply to the promotion of offers, any communications and conclusion of contracts between business users and end users. Moreover, the ability of end users to freely acquire content, subscriptions, features or other items outside the core platform services of the gatekeeper should not be undermined or restricted. In particular, it should be avoided that gatekeepers restrict end users from access to and use of such services via a software application running on their core platform service. For example, subscribers to online content purchased outside a software application download or purchased from a software application store should not be prevented from accessing such online content on a software application on the gatekeeper’s core platform service simply because it was purchased outside such software application or software application store.
Amendment 235 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39 a (new)
Recital 39 a (new)
(39 a) The national competition authorities should gather complaints from third parties on unfair behaviours by gatekeepers that fall within the scope of this Regulation and report relevant cases to the Commission. Based on clearly defined conditions and investigation priorities, the Commission should then examine the complaints and act accordingly by, for example, opening a formal market investigation.
Amendment 270 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48 a (new)
Recital 48 a (new)
(48 a) Gatekeepers can offer software applications or services which may be used on, or in conjunction with, a core platform service, such as operating systems or cloud computing services, offered by the same gatekeeper. If, in such circumstances, the gatekeeper prevents end users being able to use their software applications or services on, or in conjunction with, products or services of alternative providers under equal conditions as with the products or services of the gatekeeper, this could significantly undermine choice for end users and innovation by alternative providers. It should therefore be ensured that gatekeepers do not restrict to their advantage and to the detriment of alternative providers, end users and business users in choosing the products or services of alternative providers which they use in conjunction with the core platform service offered by the gatekeeper.
Amendment 313 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) This Regulation should aim to ensure contestability and fairness of the digital economy, with a view to promoting innovation, high quality of digital products and services, fair and competitive prices, as well as a high quality and choice for end users in the digital sector. 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 and proportionate 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 with the gatekeeper concerned, toIn view of that, further specification should be possible where specific modalities of the implementation of an obligation set out in Article 6 can be affected by differences in business models where the provision concerned applies to a broad range of core platform services. To this end, the gatekeeper should be granted the opportunity to engage in a regulatory dialogue whereby the Commission may further specify some of the measures that the gatekeeper concerned should adopt in order to effectively comply with the objectives of those obligations that are susceptible of being further specified. This regulatory dialogue should be limited to the questions around ensuring effective compliance with the obligation in line with the protection of safety, security and privacy. During such regulatory dialogue, the Commission should be able to consult with interested third parties in relation to the measures that the gatekeeper is expected to implement. The Commission will nevertheless retain discretion in deciding when further specification should be provided. This would ensure that the regulatory dialogue is not used to circumvent the present regulation. Furthermore, the regulatory dialogue is without prejudice to the powers of the Commission to adopt a decision pursuant to Articles 25, 26 or 27. Such decisions would be normally adopted when the gatekeeper acts in bad faith during the regulatory dialogue or in case of blatant non-compliance with an obligation. The possibility of a regulatory dialogue should facilitate compliance by gatekeepers and expedite the correct implementation of the Regulation.
Amendment 331 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 62
Recital 62
(62) In order to ensure the full and lasting achievement of the objectives of this Regulation, the Commission should be able to assess whether a provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper without meeting the quantitative thresholds laid down in this Regulation; whether systematic non- compliance by a gatekeeper warrants imposing additional remedies; and whether the list of obligations addressing unfair practices by gatekeepers should be reviewed and additional practices that are similarly unfair and limiting the contestability of digital markets should be identified; and whether the prior designation of gatekeepers or introduction of obligations has had a significant impact on business users, especially on small and medium-sized enterprises, or consumers. Such assessment should be based on market investigations to be run in an appropriate timeframe, by using clear procedures and deadlines, in order to support the ex ante effect of this Regulation on contestability and fairness in the digital sector, and to provide the requisite degree of legal certainty.
Amendment 336 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 63
Recital 63
(63) Following a market investigation, an undertaking providing a core platform service could be found to fulfil all of the overarching qualitative criteria for being identified as a gatekeeper. It should then, in principle, comply with all of the relevant obligations laid down by this Regulation which are appropriate and necessary to guarantee contestability. However, for gatekeepers that have been designated by the Commission as likely to enjoy an entrenched and durable position in the near future, the Commission should only impose those obligations that are necessary and appropriate to prevent that the gatekeeper concerned achieves an entrenched and durable position in its operations. With respect to such emerging gatekeepers, the Commission should take into account that this status is in principle of a temporary nature, and it should therefore be decided at a given moment whether such a provider of core platform services should be subjected to the full set of gatekeeper obligations because it has acquired an entrenched and durable position, or conditions for designation are ultimately not met and therefore all previously imposed obligations should be waived.
Amendment 340 #
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 case 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. The Commission should be able to impose interim measures at any time during proceedings to prevent serious or immediate damages for business users or end users.
Amendment 343 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65 a (new)
Recital 65 a (new)
(65 a) Interim measures can be an important tool to ensure that, while an investigation is ongoing, the infringement being investigated does not lead to serious and immediate damage for business users or end users of gatekeepers. In case of urgency, where a risk of serious and immediate damage for business users or end-users of gatekeepers could result from new practices that may undermine contestability of core platform services, the Commission should be empowered to impose interim measures by temporarily imposing obligations to the gatekeeper concerned. These interim measures should be limited to what is necessary and justified. They should apply pending the conclusion of the market investigation and the corresponding final decision of the Commission pursuant to Article 17.
Amendment 351 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 67 a (new)
Recital 67 a (new)
(67 a) The Commission shall, where appropriate, be entitled to require the commitments to be tested, for example, by using split-run tests and other randomised experiments, in order to optimise their effectiveness. The commitments should be reviewed after they have been in place for an appropriate period. Where the review of the commitments by the Commission shows that they have not led to effective compliance, the Commission should be entitled to require amendment or revocation thereof.
Amendment 361 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 72
Recital 72
(72) The Commission should be able to take the necessary actions to monitor the effective implementation and compliance with the obligations laid down in this Regulation. Such actions should include the ability of the Commission to appoint independent external experts, such as and auditors to assist the Commission in this process, including where applicable from competent independent authorities, such as data or consumer protection authorities.
Amendment 368 #
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. 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 informationand sensitive commercial information, which could affect the privacy of trade secrets, 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 372 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 78
Recital 78
(78) The Commission should periodically evaluate this Regulation and closely monitor its effects on the contestability and fairness of commercial relationships in the online platform economy, in particular with a view to determining the need for amendments in light of relevant technological or commercial developments. This evaluation should include the regular review of the list of core platform services and the obligations addressed to gatekeepers as well as enforcement of these, in view of ensuring that digital markets across the Union are contestable and fair. In order to obtain a broad view of developments in the sector, the evaluation should take into account the experiences of Member States and relevant stakeholders. The Commission may in this regard also consider the opinions and reports presented to it by the Observatory on the Online Platform Economy that was first established by Commission Decision C(2018)2393 of 26 April 2018, by Eurostat, and by the national statistics offices of the countries where the service providers operate. Following the evaluation, the Commission should take appropriate measures. The Commission should to maintain a high level of protection and respect for the common EU rights and values, particularly equality and non-discrimination, as an objective when conducting the assessments and reviews of the practices and obligations provided in this Regulation.
Amendment 379 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 79 a (new)
Recital 79 a (new)
(79 a) The Commission shall apply the provisions of this Regulation in close cooperation with the competent national competition authorities, acting within the framework of the European Competition Network, to ensure effective enforceability as well as coherent implementation of this Regulation and to facilitate the cooperation with national authorities.
Amendment 381 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 79 b (new)
Recital 79 b (new)
(79 b) Without prejudice to the budgetary procedure and through existing financial instruments, adequate human, financial and technical resources should be allocated to the Commission to ensure that it can effectively perform its duties and exercise its powers as necessary for the enforcement of this Regulation.
Amendment 390 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) related to electronic communications services as defined in point (4) of Article 2 of Directive (EU) 2018/1972 other than those related to number-independent interpersonal communication services as defined in point (4)(b7) of Article 2 of that Directive.
Amendment 391 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. This Regulation shall not apply to the data that is used to maintain or improve security of online transactions and prevent fraud.
Amendment 392 #
2020/0374(COD)
5. In order to ensure the frictionless and coherent application of this Regulation throughout the internal market and to guarantee a fully harmonized approach, the European Commission shall be the sole enforcer and decision maker on the correct application of the rules and obligations outlined in this Regulation. 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.
Amendment 399 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. In addition to Article 32a, national competition authorities shall notify the Commission at least four weeks before the opening of any formal proceedings against any provider of core platform services if there is any possible overlap with the scope of this Regulation in order to ensure close coordination and cooperation at Union and national level.
Amendment 411 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 7
Article 1 – paragraph 7
7. National authorities shall not take decisions which would run counter to a decision adopted by the Commission under this Regulation. The Commission and Member States shall work in close cooperation and coordination in their enforcement actions on the basis of the principles and rules established in Article 32a.
Amendment 422 #
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, except if those services are used by business users as underlying facilities for the purposes of developing and deploying their own solutions;
Amendment 433 #
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 437 #
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) virtual assistants;
Amendment 442 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
(3 a) ‘Virtual assistant’ means software that can perform tasks or services for end- users based on commands or questions;
Amendment 443 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)
(3 b) ‘Web browser’ means a client software program that runs against a Web server or other Internet server and enables a user to navigate the World Wide Web to access and display data, including standalone web browsers as well as web browsers integrated or embedded in software or similar;
Amendment 445 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
(6) ‘Online search engine’ means a digital service as defined in point 5 of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150, thus excluding the search functions on other online intermediation services;
Amendment 526 #
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 threewo 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 558 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point e a (new)
(e a) the degree of multi-homing among business users and active end users;
Amendment 572 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. When designating a gatekeeper, the Commission shall specify, under Article 7, which obligations are to be implemented by the gatekeeper, taking into account the business models of the gatekeeper concerned.
Amendment 574 #
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 withiand shall notify the Commission of the details of its compliance with those obligations as soon as possible, and in any case no later than six months after a core platform service has been included in the list pursuant to paragraph 7 of this Article.
Amendment 584 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Commission shall regularly, and at least every 2 years, review whether the designated gatekeepers continue to satisfy the requirements laid down in Article 3(1), or whether new providers of core platform services satisfy those requirements. The regular review shall also examine whether the list of affected core platform services of the gatekeeper needs to be adjusted and if any business users, especially small and medium-sized enterprises or consumers, have been negatively impacted by the designation of a core platform service as a gatekeeper.
Amendment 615 #
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 a direct business channel of the business user at prices or conditions that are different from those offered through the online intermediation services of the gatekeeper;
Amendment 623 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) allow business users to promote offers to or communicate with end users acquired via the core platform service, within or outside the core platform service, and to conclude contracts with these end users regardless of whether for that purpose they use the core platform services of the gatekeeper or not, and allow end users to access and use, through the core platform services of the gatekeeper, content, subscriptions, features or other items by using the software application of a business user, where these items have been acquired by the end users from the relevant business user without using the core platform services of the gatekeeper, unless the gatekeeper can demonstrate that such access bypasses the security measures of the gatekeeper's core platform service;
Amendment 673 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide individual advertisers and publishers to which it supplies advertising services, upon their request, with information concerningon the visibility and availability of advertisement portfolio as well as pricing conditions concerning the bids placed by advertisers and advertising intermediaries, 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 723 #
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, and delete the accompanying collected and stored data, 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 733 #
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 using, or interoperating with, operating systems of that gatekeeper and allow these software applications or software application stores 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 or undermine the protection of user safety and data protection, provided that such measures are duly justified and proportionate;
Amendment 746 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) refrain from treatingharming competition by embedding or treating, in an unjustified, abusive or harmful manner, more favourably in ranking services and products offered by the gatekeeper itself or by any third party belonging to the same undertaking compared to similar services or products of third party and apply fair and non-discriminatory conditions to such ranking;
Amendment 762 #
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, or using its virtual assistant;
Amendment 769 #
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. The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking justified, non-discriminatory and proportionate measures to ensure that third party ancillary services do not endanger user safety, data protection, or the functionality and integrity of the operating system or hardware;
Amendment 786 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide advertisers and publishers, or third parties authorised by advertisers and publishers, upon their request and free of charge, with access to the performance measuring tools of the gatekeeper and the information necessary for advertisers and publishers to carry out their own independent verification of the ad inventory, including aggregated data and performance data in a manner that would allow advertisers and publishers to run their own verification and measurement tools to assess performance of the core services provided for by the gatekeepers;
Amendment 805 #
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 orand non-aggregated 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 822 #
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) refrain from imposing on business users or end users software applications or services which are used on, or in conjunction with a core service platform of the gatekeeper, any licensing conditions or economic terms that have the effect of limiting, in a discriminatory manner relative to the gatekeeper’s own offerings, end users’ ability or economic incentive to use software applications or services on, or in conjunction with, products or services that compete with those of the gatekeeper for instance by attributing a preferential treatment to its own offerings which would bring them forward to the attention of the end users or business users.
Amendment 854 #
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 may act on its own initiative and may by decision specify the measures that the gatekeeper concerned shall implement. The Commission shall adopt such a decision wias soon as possible, and in any case no later thian six months from the opening of proceedings pursuant to Article 18.
Amendment 861 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. In order to effectively comply with the obligations laid down in Article 6, the gatekeeper shall be granted the opportunity to engage in a regulatory dialogue, whereby the Commission can further specify relevant measures that the gatekeeper concerned shall adopt in order to effectively comply with those obligations. When doing so, the Commission may decide to consult third parties whose views it considers necessary in relation to the measures that the gatekeeper is expected to implement. Further specification of obligations laid down in Article 6 shall be limited to issues relating to ensuring effective compliance with the obligation while protecting safety, security and privacy and where the modalities of implementation of an obligation can be affected by differences in business models. The Commission shall retain discretion in deciding whether to engage in such a dialogue.
Amendment 863 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Amendment 872 #
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 its preliminary findings wias soon as possible, and in any case no later thian 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.
Amendment 882 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 7
Article 7 – paragraph 7
Amendment 890 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission may, on a reasoned request by the gatekeeper, exceptionally suspend, in whole or in part, a specific obligation laid down in Articles 5 and 6 for a core platform service by decision adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4), where the gatekeeper demonstrates that compliance with that specific obligation would endanger, due to exceptional circumstances beyond the control of the gatekeeper, the economic viability of the operation of the gatekeeper in the Union, and only to the extent necessary to address such threat to its viability. The Commission shall aim to adopt the suspension decision without delay and at the latest 3 months following receipt of a complete reasoned request. The suspension decision shall be accompanied by a reasoned statement explaining the grounds for the suspension.
Amendment 899 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Where the suspension is granted pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission shall review its suspension decision every year. Following such a review the Commission shall either in whole or in part lift the suspension or decide that the conditions of paragraph 1 continue to be met.
Amendment 902 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
In assessing the request, the Commission shall take into account, in particular, the impact of the compliance with the specific obligation on the economic viability of the operation of the gatekeeper in the Union as well as on third parties, in particular smaller business users and consumers. The suspension may be made subject to conditions and obligations to be defined by the Commission in order to ensure a fair balance between these interests and the objectives of this Regulation. Such a request may be made and granted at any time pending the assessment of the Commission pursuant to paragraph 1.
Amendment 911 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Where the exemption is granted pursuant paragraph 1, the Commission shall review its exemption decision every year. Following such a review, the Commission shall either lift the exemption or decide that the conditions of paragraph 1 continue to be met.
Amendment 927 #
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 andor the gatekeeper is obtaining an advantage from business users that is disproportionate to the service provided by the gatekeeper to business users; or
Amendment 936 #
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 thea gatekeeper, including any undertaking to which the gatekeeper belongs, shall not engage in any behaviour regardless of whether this behaviour is of a contractual, commercial, technical or any other nature that would undermine these obligations.
Amendment 947 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. A gatekeeper shall not degrade the conditions or quality of any of the core platform services provided to business users or end users who avail themselves of the rights or choices laid down in Articles 5 and 6, or make the exercise of those rights or choices unduly difficult, including by offering choices to the end- user in a non-neutral manner, or by subverting user's autonomy, decision- making, or choice via the structure, function or manner of operation of a user interface or a part thereof.
Amendment 986 #
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 wias soon as possible, and in any case no later thian six 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 994 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. Where the provider of core platform services satisfies the thresholds set out in Article 3(2), but has presented significantly substantiated arguments in accordance with Article 3(4), the Commission shall endeavour to conclude the market investigation wias soon as possible, and in any case no later thian five months from the opening of the market investigation by a decision pursuant to paragraph 1. In that case the Commission shall endeavour to communicate its preliminary findings pursuant to paragraph 2 to the provider of core platform services wias soon as possible, and in any case no later thian three months from the opening of the investigation.
Amendment 1005 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission may conduct a market investigation for the purpose of examining whether a gatekeeper has engaged in systematic non-compliance. 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 relation to the characteristics under Article 3(1), the Commission may 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, where appropriate, be entitled to require the remedies to be tested to optimise their effectiveness. The Commission shall conclude its investigation by adopting a decision wias soon as possible, and in any case no later thian twelve months from the opening of the market investigation.
Amendment 1014 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1028 #
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 wias soon as possible, and in any case no later thian six 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 1044 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) The Commission shall be entitled to impose interim measures if there is a risk of serious and immediate damage for business users or end users of gatekeepers.
Amendment 1056 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 6
Article 19 – paragraph 6
6. At the request of the Commission, the governments and authorities of the Member Statcompetent national competition authorities shall provide the Commission with all necessary information to carry out the duties assigned to it by this Regulation.
Amendment 1057 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
The Commission mayand the competent national competition authorities, may, in accordance with Article 32a, interview any natural or legal person which consents to being interviewed for the purpose of collecting information, relating to the subject-matter of an investigation, pursuant to Articles 7, 16, 16, 17, 25 and 26, including in relation to the monitoring, implementing and enforcing of the rules laid down in this Regulation.
Amendment 1060 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission, upon a prior notice, may conduct on- site inspections at the premises of an undertaking or association of undertakings.
Amendment 1064 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 a (new)
Article 21 a (new)
Amendment 1067 #
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 irreparablmmediate damage for business users or end users of gatekeepers, 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 1069 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In the case of urgency, due to the risk of serious and immediate damage for business users or end users of gatekeepers, resulting from new practices implemented by one or more gatekeepers that could undermine contestability of core platform services or that could be unfair pursuant to Article 10(2), the Commission may impose interim measures on the concerned gatekeepers in order to avoid the materialization of such risk.
Amendment 1070 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. A decision referred to in paragraph 1 may only be adopted in the context of a market investigation pursuant to Article 17 and within 6 months of the opening of such an investigation. The interim measures shall apply for a specified period of time and, in any case, shall be replaced by any new obligations that may arise under the final decision resulting from the market investigation pursuant to Article 17.
Amendment 1074 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. If during proceedings under Articles 16 or 25 the gatekeeper concerned offers commitments for the relevant core platform services to ensure compliance with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6, the Commission may by decision adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4) make those commitments binding on that gatekeeper and declare that there are no further grounds for action. The Commission shall, where appropriate, be entitled to require the commitments to be tested to optimise their effectiveness.
Amendment 1089 #
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 explanations on how it plans to comply with the decisionimpose behavioural or structural remedies as necessary and proportionate to the infringement.
Amendment 1145 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall be assisted by the Digital Markets Advisory Committee. That Committee shall be a Committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. Each Member State shall appoint two representatives to the Committee. If the appointed representatives are unable to attend, other representatives may replace them. At least one of the representatives of a Member State shall be competent in matters of restrictive practices, abuses of dominant positions and other forms of unilateral conduct. Member States shall take all necessary measures to ensure the protection of confidential information by their representatives.
Amendment 1149 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 a (new)
Article 32 a (new)
Amendment 1154 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. When three or more Member States request the Commission to open an investigation pursuant to Articles 15, 16 and 17 or institute proceedings in respect of possible non-compliance pursuant to Article 25 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 wiat a gatekeeper is not complying with its obligations as laid down in Articles 5 and 6, that one or more services within the digital sector should be added to the list of core platform services pursuant to point (2) of Article 2 or that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that one or several types of practices are not effectively addressed by this Regulation and can limit the contestability of core platform services or can be unfair, the Commission shall as soon as possible, and in any case no later thian four months examine whether there are reasonable grounds to open such an investigation.
Amendment 1183 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission may adopt implementing acts concerning articles: 3, 6, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20, 22, 23, 25 and 30 with respect to:
Amendment 1192 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 2
Article 38 – paragraph 2
2. The evaluations shall establish whether inclusion of additional rules or deletion of the existing ones, including regarding the list of core platform services laid down in point 2 of Article 2, the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 and their enforcement, may be required to ensure that digital markets across the Union are contestable and fair. Following the evaluations, the Commission shall take appropriate measures, which may include legislative proposals.
Amendment 101 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Council Directive 2008/114/EC17 provides for a procedure for designating European critical infrastructures in the energy and transport sectors, the disruption or destruction of which would have significant cross-border impact on at least two Member States. That Directive focused exclusively on the protection of such infrastructures. However, the evaluation of Directive 2008/114/EC conducted in 201918 found that due to the increasingly interconnected and cross-border nature of operations using critical infrastructure, protective measures relating to individual assets alone are insufficient to prevent all disruptions from taking place. Therefore, it is necessary to shift the approach towards ensuring the resilience of critical entities, that is, their ability to mitigate, absorb, accommodate to and recover from incidents that have the potential to disrupt the operations of the critical entity and the functioning of the internal market. __________________ 17Council Directive 2008/114/EC of 8 December 2008 on the identification and designation of European critical infrastructures and the assessment of the need to improve their protection (OJ L 345, 23.12.2008, p.75). 18 SWD(2019) 308.
Amendment 105 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The entities involved in the provision of essential services are increasingly subject to diverging requirements imposed under the laws of the Member States. The fact that some Member States have less stringent security requirements on these entities not only riskcreates heterogeneous levels of resilience across Member States impacting negatively on the maintenance of vital societal functions or economic activities across the Union, it also leads to obstacles to a level playing field and the proper functioning of the internal market. Similar types of entities are considered as critical in some Member States but not in others, and those which are identified as critical are subject to divergent requirements in different Member States. This results in additional and unnecessary administrative burdens for companies operating across borders, notably for companies active in Member States with more stringent requirements.
Amendment 110 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Given the importance of cybersecurity for the resilience of critical entities and in the interest of consistency, a coherent approach between this Directive and Directive (EU) XX/YY of the European Parliament and of the Council20 [Proposed Directive on measures for a high common level of cybersecurity across the Union; (hereafter “NIS 2 Directive”)] is necessary wherever possible. In view of the higher frequency and particular characteristics of cyber risks, the NIS 2 Directive imposes comprehensive requirements on a large set of entities to ensure their cybersecurity. Given that cybersecurity is addressed sufficiently in the NIS 2 Directive, the matters covered by it should be excluded from the scope of this Directive, without prejudice to the particular regime for entities in the digital infrastructure sector. As a result, the supervision of entities identified as critical or equivalent to critical under this Directive, in matters that fall under the scope of the NIS2 Directive, will be a responsibility of the competent authorities designated under the NIS 2 Directive. __________________ 20[Reference to NIS 2 Directive, once adopted.]
Amendment 114 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) The Commission should provide detailed guidelines to support Member States in identifying critical entities for each national sector and subsector referred to in the Annex and to avoid the risk of a heterogeneous implementation of the Directive.
Amendment 124 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. This Directive lays down measures with a view to achieve a high level of resilience of critical entities within the Union in order to ensure an effective provision of essential services and to improve the functioning of the internal market. To that end, this Directive:
Amendment 129 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) “resilience” means the ability to prevent, resist, manage, mitigate, absorb, accommodate to and recover from an incident that disrupts or has the potential to disrupt the operations of a critical entity;
Amendment 135 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall adopt by [threewo years after entry into force of this Directive] a strategy for reinforcing the resilience of critical entities. This strategy shall set out strategic objectives and policy measures with a view to achieving and maintaining a high level of resilience on the part of those critical entities and covering at least the sectors referred to in the Annex.
Amendment 136 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) strategic objectives and priorities for the purposes of enhancing the overall resilience of critical entities taking into account cross-border and cross-sectoral interdependencies and the connections in the supply chains;
Amendment 137 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) a description of measures necessary to enhance the overall resilience of critical entities, including a national risk assessment, the identification of critical entities and of entities equivalent to critical entities, and the measures to support critical entities taken in accordance with this Chapter including measures to enhance cooperation between the public and private entities;
Amendment 138 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
(da) a policy framework addressing specific needs of SMEs in complying with obligations set by this Directive in relation to guidance and support in improving their resilience to non-cybersecurity threats and incentivising the adoption of necessary measures;
Amendment 142 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) any risks arising from the dependencies between the sectors referred to in the Annex, including from other Member States and third countries, and the impact that a disruption in one sector may have on other sectors and the internal market;
Amendment 143 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
For the purposes of point (c) of the first subparagraph, Member States shall closely cooperate with the Commission and the competent authorities of other Member States and third countries, as appropriate.
Amendment 145 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 5
Article 4 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission mayshall, in cooperation with the Member States, develop a voluntary common reporting template for the purposes of complying with paragraph 4.
Amendment 148 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The Commission shall provide detailed guidelines to support Member States in identifying critical entities for each sector, subsector and types of entities referred to in the Annex.
Amendment 150 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
When establishing the list of critical entities under this Directive, Member States shall develop a coherent approach in relation to the NIS 2 Directive, taking into account its scope. Member States shall ensure that essential entities falling in Annex I of the NIS 2 Directive, but that are not identified as critical entities under this Directive, enhance, where appropriate, the resilience of their essential services to non-cybersecurity attacks, threats or incidents.
Amendment 152 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 6
Article 5 – paragraph 6
6. For the purposes of Chapter IV, Member States shall ensure that critical entities, following the notification referred in paragraph 3, provide information to their competent authorities designated pursuant to Article 8 of this Directive on whether they provide essential services to or in more than one third ofthree Member States. Where that is so, the Member State concerned shall notify, without undue delay, to the Commission the identity of those critical entities.
Amendment 155 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) the geographic area that could be affected by an incident, including any cross-border and cross-sector impacts;
Amendment 157 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) the geographical coverage of the services provided by the critical entities in each sector, including information on any cross-border impacts;
Amendment 160 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall support critical entities in enhancing their resilience. That support may include developing guidelines and guidance materials and methodologies, supporting the organisation of exercises to test their resilience and providing periodic training to personnel of critical entities.
Amendment 167 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) raise awareness about the measures referred to in points (a) to (e) among relevant personnel also through training.
Amendment 175 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
If the incident has, or may have, a significant impact on critical entities or the continuity of the provision of essential services in more than three Member States, critical entities of particular European significance shall additionally notify such incidents to the Commission. The Commission shall inform the Critical Entities Resilience Group of any such notifications without undue delay. The Commission and the Critical Entities Resilience Group shall, in accordance with Union law, treat the information in a way that respects its confidentiality and protects the security and commercial interest of the critical entity concerned.
Amendment 180 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) the impact on the functioning of the internal market
Amendment 183 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The competent authority shall inform the public of the incident where it determines that it would be in the public interest to do so. The competent authority shall ensure that critical entities inform users of their services that could be affected by the incident and where relevant, of any possible safety measures or remedies.
Amendment 185 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. An entity shall be considered a critical entity of particular European significance when it has been identified as a critical entity and it provides essential services to or in more than one third ofthree Member States and has been notified as such to the Commission pursuant to Article 5(1) and (6), respectively.
Amendment 191 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The Critical Entities Resilience Group shall be composed of representatives of the Member States and the Commission. Where relevant for the performance of its tasks, the Critical Entities Resilience Group may invite representatives of interested parties and stakeholders to participate in its work.
Amendment 192 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) supporting the Commission in assisting Member States in reinforcing their capacity to contribute to ensuring the resilience of critical entities in accordance with this Directive and promoting its uniform implementation in the Member States;
Amendment 193 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) evaluating the national strategies on the resilience of critical entities referred to in Article 3, the Member States preparedness and identifying best practices in respect of those strategies;
Amendment 194 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
(ba) exchanging information on political priorities and key challenges relating to the resilience of critical entities;
Amendment 195 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) facilitating the exchange of information and best practices with regard to the identification of critical entities by the Member States in accordance with Article 5, including in relation to cross- border dependencies and regarding risks and incidents;
Amendment 196 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point h a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point h a (new)
(ha) promoting and supporting coordinated risk assessments and joint actions among critical entities;
Amendment 198 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 4
Article 16 – paragraph 4
4. By [124 months after entry into force of this Directive] and every two years thereafter, the Critical Entities Resilience Group shall establish a work programme in respect of actions to be undertaken to implement its objectives and tasks, which shall be consistent with the requirements and objectives of this Directive.
Amendment 199 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 7
Article 16 – paragraph 7
7. The Commission shall provide to the Critical Entities Resilience Group a summary report of the information provided by the Member States pursuant to Articles 3(3) and 4(4) by [three years and six months after entry into force of this Directive] and subsequently where necessary and at least every four years. The Commission shall regularly publish a summary report of the activities of the Critical Entities Resilience Group.
Amendment 200 #
2020/0365(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 6
Article 21 – paragraph 6
6. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 11(4) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or by the Council within a period of twohree months 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 twohree months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
Amendment 100 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4 a) As Party to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD), provisions of the Convention are integral part of the Union legal order and binding upon the Union and its Member States. The UN CRPD requires its Parties to take appropriate measures to ensure that persons with disabilities have access, on an equal basis with others, to information and communications technologies and systems, and other facilities and services open or provided to the public, both in urban and in rural areas. General Comment No2 to the UN CRPD further states that “The strict application of universal design to all new goods, products, facilities, technologies and services should ensure full, equal and unrestricted access for all potential consumers, including persons with disabilities, in a way that takes full account of their inherent dignity and diversity.”Given the ever-growing importance of digital services and platforms in private and public life, in line with the obligations enshrined in the UN CRPD, the EU must ensure a regulatory framework for digital services which protects rights of all recipients of services, including persons with disabilities.
Amendment 101 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5 a) Given the cross-border nature of the services at stake, EU action to harmonise accessibility requirements for intermediary services across the internal market is vital to avoid market fragmentation and ensure that equal right to access and choice of those services by all consumers and other recipients of services, including by persons with disabilities, is protected throughout the Union. Lack of harmonised accessibility requirements for digital services and platforms will also 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 intermediary services, including their user interfaces, must be consistent with existing Union accessibility legislation, such as the European Accessibility Act and the Web Accessibility Directive, so that no one is left behind as result of digital innovation. This aim is in line with the Union of Equality: Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030 and the Union’s commitment to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals.
Amendment 102 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 b (new)
Recital 5 b (new)
(5 b) The notions of ‘access’ or ‘accessibility’ are often referred to with the meaning of affordability (financial access), availability, or in relation to access to data, use of network, etc. It is important to distinguish these from ‘accessibility for persons with disabilities’ which means that services, technologies and products are perceivable, operable, understandable and robust for persons with disabilities.
Amendment 105 #
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, among others, 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. To assist Member States and providers, the Commission should provide guidelines as to how to interpret the interaction between different Union acts and how to prevent any duplication of requirements on providers or potential conflicts in the interpretation of similar requirements. _________________ 28Directive 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 126 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12 a) Material disseminated for educational, journalistic, artistic or research purposes or for the purposes of preventing or countering illegal content including the content which represents an expression of polemic or controversial views in the course of public debate should not be considered as illegal content. Similarly, material, such as an eye-witness video of a potential crime, should not be considered as illegal, merely because it depicts an illegal act. An assessment should determine the true purpose of that dissemination and whether material is disseminated to the public for those purposes.
Amendment 132 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13 a) Additionally in order to avoid imposing obligations simultaneously on two providers for the same content, a hosting services should be defined as an online platform when it has a direct relationship with the recipient of the service. A hosting provider who is acting as the infrastructure for an online platform should not be considered as an online platform based on this relationship, where it implements the decisions of the online platform and its user indirectly.
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, where set down in Union acts and, in particular, does not affect orders by national authorities in accordance with national legislation that implements European acts, in accordance with the conditions established in this Regulation and other European lex specialis. 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. Equally, nothing in this Regulation should prevent providers from enacting end-to-end encrypting of their services.
Amendment 174 #
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 effective processing of those orders.
Amendment 182 #
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 to provide information in question relate to specific items of illegal content and information as defined in Union or national law, respectively, 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. Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, however, continues to apply to any other orders related to non-specific individual items of illegal or legal content or information, general orders related to geoblocking of whole websites, webpages, or domains and any other matter which could be seen as restricting the freedom to provide their service across border.
Amendment 191 #
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 recipients of the service and the avoidance of unfair or arbitrary outcomes. At the same time, recipients should enter into such agreements willingly without any misleading or coercive tactics and therefore a ban on dark patterns should be introduced.
Amendment 193 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38 a (new)
Recital 38 a (new)
(38 a) While an additional requirement should apply to very large online platforms, all providers should do a general self-assessment of potential risks related to their services, especially in relations with minors and should take voluntary mitigation measures where appropriate. In order to ensure that the provider undertakes these actions, Digital Services Coordinators may ask for proof.
Amendment 194 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) As Party to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD), provisions of the Convention are integral part of the Union legal order and binding upon the Union and its Member States. The UN CRPD requires its Parties to take appropriate measures to ensure that persons with disabilities have access, on an equal basis with others, to information and communications technologies and systems, and other facilities and services open or provided to the public, both in urban and in rural areas. General Comment No2 to the UN CRPD further states that “The strict application of universal design to all new goods, products, facilities, technologies and services should ensure full, equal and unrestricted access for all potential consumers, including persons with disabilities, in a way that takes full account of their inherent dignity and diversity.” Given the ever-growing importance of digital services and platforms in private and public life, in line with the obligations enshrined in the UN CRPD, the EU must ensure a regulatory framework for digital services which protects rights of all recipients of services, including persons with disabilities.
Amendment 199 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) Given the cross-border nature of the services at stake, Union action to harmonise accessibility requirements for intermediary services across the internal market is vital to avoid market fragmentation and ensure that equal right to access and choice of those services by all consumers and other recipients of services, including by persons with disabilities, is protected throughout the Union. Lack of harmonised accessibility requirements for digital services and platforms will also 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 intermediary services, including their user interfaces, must be consistent with existing Union accessibility legislation, such as the European Accessibility Act and the Web Accessibility Directive, so that no one is left behind as result of digital innovation. This aim is in line with the Union of Equality: Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030 and the Union’s commitment to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals.
Amendment 201 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 b (new)
Recital 5 b (new)
(5b) The notions of ‘access’ or ‘accessibility’ are often referred to with the meaning of affordability (financial access), availability, or in relation to access to data, use of network, etc. It is important to distinguish these from ‘accessibility for persons with disabilities’ which means that services, technologies and products are perceivable, operable, understandable and robust for persons with disabilities.
Amendment 202 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40 a (new)
Recital 40 a (new)
(40 a) Notices should be directed to the actor that has the technical and operational ability to act and the closest relationship to the recipient of the service that provided the information or content, such as to an online platform and not to the hosting service provider on which provides services to that online platform. Such hosting service providers should redirect such notices to the particular online platform and inform the notifying party of this fact.
Amendment 203 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40 b (new)
Recital 40 b (new)
(40 b) Hosting providers should seek to act only against the items of information notified. This may include acts such as disabling hyperlinking to the items of information. Where the removal or disabling of access to individual items of information is technically or operationally unachievable due to legal, contractual, or technological reasons, such as encrypted file and data storage and sharing services, hosting providers should inform the recipient of the service of the notification and seek action. If a recipient fails to act or delays action, or the provider has reason to believe has failed to act or otherwise acts in bad faith, the hosting provider may suspend their service in line with their terms and conditions.
Amendment 204 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) 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 providers of intermediary services irrespective of their place of establishment or residence, in so far as they provide and direct services at and in the Union, as evidenced by a substantial connection to the Union.
Amendment 206 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41 a (new)
Recital 41 a (new)
(41 a) Where a hosting service provider decides to remove or disable information provided by a recipient of the service, either because it is illegal or is not allowed under its terms and conditions, it should do so in a timely manner, taking into account the potential harm of the infraction and the technical abilities of the provider. Information that could have a negative effect on minors, women and vulnerable users such as those with protected characteristics under Article 21 of the Charter should be seen as a matter requiring urgency
Amendment 208 #
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. Such a statement, however, should not be required if it relates to spam, manifestly illegal content, removal of content similar or identical to content already removed from the same recipient, who has already received a statement or where a provider of hosting service does not have the information necessary to inform the recipient by a durable medium.
Amendment 214 #
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, among others, 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. To assist Member States and providers, the Commission should provide guidelines as to how to interpret the interaction between different Union acts and how to prevent any duplication of requirements on providers or potential conflicts in the interpretation of similar requirements. __________________ 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 219 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) For reasons of clarity, it should also be specified that this Regulation is without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2019/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council30 and Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council,31 , Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council32 and Regulation […/…] on temporary derogation from certain provisions of Directive 2002/58/EC33 as well as Union law on consumer protection, in particular Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 , Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council.35 Directive (EU) 2019/882 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and Directive 93/13/EEC of the European Parliament and of the Council36 , as amended by Directive (EU) 2019/2161 of the European Parliament and of the Council37 , and on the protection of personal data, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council.38 The protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data is solely governed by the rules of Union law on that subject, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC. This Regulation is also without prejudice to the rules of Union law on working conditions. __________________ 30Regulation (EU) 2019/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the marketing and use of explosives precursors, amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 1). 31 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). 32Directive 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), OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37. 33Regulation […/…] on temporary derogation from certain provisions of Directive 2002/58/EC. 34Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to- consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) 35Directive 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. 36Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts. 37Directive (EU) 2019/2161 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2019 amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directives 98/6/EC, 2005/29/EC and 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the better enforcement and modernisation of Union consumer protection rules 38Regulation (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 220 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) Recipients of the service 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 entering, in good faith, an 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 located in either the Member State of the recipient or the provider and 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 225 #
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 normally only be awarded to non-governmental entities, and not individualnatural persons, 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, however, can be public in nature for actions not related to intellectual property rights, 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, non- governmental organisations of industry and of right- holders could also 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 231 #
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 frequently 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 and effective safeguards against such misuse. Information should be considered to be manifestly illegal content and notices 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 232 #
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 an imminent threat to the life or safety of person, notably when it concerns vulnerable users, 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 upon request all relevant information available to it, including where relevant the content in question and an explanation of its suspicion and unless instructed otherwise, should remove or disable the content. Information obtained by a law enforcement or judicial authority of a Member State in accordance with this Article should not be used for any purpose other than those directly related to the individual serious criminal offence notified. 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 242 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) Additionally in order to avoid imposing obligations simultaneously on two providers for the same content, a hosting service should only be deemed an online platform when it has a direct relationship with the recipient of the service. A hosting provider who is acting as the infrastructure for an online platform should not be considered as an online platform based on this relationship, where it implements the decisions of the online platform and its user indirectly.
Amendment 243 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 b (new)
Recital 13 b (new)
(13b) For the purpose of this Regulation, a cloud computing service should not considered as an ‘online platform’ where allowing the dissemination of hyperlinks to a specific content is a minor and ancillary feature. Moreover a cloud computing service when serving as infrastructure, for example as the underlining infrastructural storage and computing services of an internet- based application or online platform, should not in itself be seen as disseminating to the public information stored or processed at the request of a recipient of an application or online platform which it hosts.
Amendment 247 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) Online advertisement plays an important role in the online environment, including in relation to the provision of the services of online platforms. However, online advertisement can contribute to significant risks, ranging from advertisement that is itself illegal content, to contributing to financial incentives for the publication or amplification of illegal or otherwise harmful content and activities online, or the discriminatory display of advertising with an impact on the equal treatment and opportunities of citizens. In addition to the requirements resulting from Article 6 of Directive 2000/31/EC, online platforms should therefore be required to ensure that the recipients of the service have certain individualised information necessary for them to understand when and on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed. In addition, recipients of the service should have an easy access to information on the main parameters used for determining that specific advertising is to be displayed to them, providing meaningful explanations of the logic used to that end, including when this is based on profiling. The requirements of this Regulation on the provision of information relating to advertisement is without prejudice to the application of the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular those regarding the right to object, automated individual decision- making, including profiling and specifically the need to obtain consent of the data subject prior to the processing of personal data for targeted advertising. Similarly, it is without prejudice to the provisions laid down in Directive 2002/58/EC in particular those regarding the storage of information in terminal equipment and the access to information stored therein.
Amendment 248 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) The concept of ‘dissemination to the public’, as used in this Regulation, should entail the making available of information to a potentially unlimited number of persons, that is, making the information easily accessible to users in general without further action by the recipient of the service providing the information being required, irrespective of whether those persons actually access the information in question. The mere possibility to create groups of users of a given service should not, in itself, be understood to mean that the information disseminated in that manner is not disseminated to the public. However, the concept should exclude dissemination of information within closed groups consisting of a finite number of pre- determined persons. Interpersonal communication services, as defined in Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council,39 such as emails or private messaging services, fall outsideing within the scope of this Regulation should not be seen as disseminating to the public. Information should be considered disseminated to the public within the meaning of this Regulation only where that occurs upon the direct request by the recipient of the service that provided the information. Where multiple providers are involved in the dissemination of an information to the public, the obligations related to that disseminated should lay with the outward facing provider closest in relations to the accessibility by the end user recipient of the final service __________________ 39Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 establishing the European Electronic Communications Code (Recast), OJ L 321, 17.12.2018, p. 36
Amendment 258 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) Three categories of systemic risks should be assessed in-depth. A first category concerns the risks associated with the misuse of their service through the dissemination of 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, the right to private life, the right to non-discrimination, the right to gender equality 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 or the misuse of the platforms' terms and conditions, including content moderation policies, when enforced, often through automatic means. A third category of risks concerns the intentional and, oftentimes, coordinated manipulation of the platform’s service, with a foreseeable impact on health, fundamental rights, 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 conditions.
Amendment 260 #
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 risks identified in the risk 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 conditionprevent the manipulation and exploitation of the service, including by the amplification of content which is counter to their terms and conditions, adapting their decision-making processes, or adapting their terms and conditions and content moderation policies and how those policies are enforced, while being fully transparent to the users. 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, including by displaying related public service advertisements instead of other commercial advertisements. Very large online platforms may reinforce their internal processes or supervision of any of their activities, in particular as regards the detection of systemic risks. 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 effects on the fundamental rights of the recipients of the service.
Amendment 262 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The exemptions from liability established in this Regulation should not apply where, instead of confining itself to providing the services neutrally, by a merely technical and automatic processing of the information provided by the recipient of the service, the provider of intermediary services plays an active role of such a kind as to give it knowledge of, or control over, that information. The mere ranking or displaying in an order, or the use of a recommender system should not, however, be deemed as having control over an information. Those exemptions should accordingly not be available in respect of liability relating to information provided not by the recipient of the service but by the provider of intermediary service itself, including where the information has been developed under the editorial responsibility of that provider.
Amendment 269 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) A provider should be able to benefit from the exemptions from liability for ‘mere conduit’ and for ‘caching’ services when it is in no way involved with the information transmitted. This requires, among other things, that the provider does not modify the information that it transmits. However, this requirement should not be understood to cover manipulations of a technical nature which take place in the course of the transmission, as such manipulations do not alter the integrity of the information transmitted. It also should not be understood to cover the ranking or sorting of information to make it accessible to a user or actions required to ensure the security of the transmissions.
Amendment 273 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In order to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting services, the provider should, upon obtaining actual knowledge or awareness of illegal content, act expeditiously to remove or to disable access to that content. The removal or disabling of access should be undertaken in the observance of the principle of freedom of expression. The provider can obtain such actual knowledge or awareness through, in particular, its own-initiative investigations or notices submitted to it by individuals or entities in accordance with this Regulation in so far as those notices are sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated to allow a diligent economic operator to reasonably identify, assess and where appropriate act against the allegedly illegal content. As long as providers act upon obtaining actual knowledge, providers should maintain the exemptions from liability referred to in article 3, 4, and 5, even when under taking voluntary own-initiative investigations or actions in line with Article 27.
Amendment 280 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 63
Recital 63
(63) Advertising systems used by very large online platforms pose particular risks and require further public and regulatory supervision on account of their scale and ability to target and reach recipients of the service based on their behaviour within and outside that platform’s online interface. Very large online platforms should ensure public access to repositories of advertisements displayed on their online interfaces 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 health, public security, civil discourse, political participation and equality. Repositories should include the content of advertisements and related data on the advertiser and the delivery of the advertisement, in particular where targeted advertising is concerned. In addition, very large online platforms should label any known deep fake videos, audio or other files.
Amendment 283 #
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 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 researchers on the evolution and severity of online systemic risks 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, which mean the conditions set out in this Regulation. 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 and any other parties concerned, including the recipients of the service.
Amendment 285 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) In order to ensure the effective protection of consumers when engaging in intermediated commercial transactions online, certain providers of hosting services, namely, online marketplaces which are online platforms that allow consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders on the online platform itself, should not be able to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting service providers established in this Regulation, in so far as those online platformmarketplaces present the relevant information relating to the transactions at issue in such a way that it leads consumers to believe that the information was provided by those online platforms themselves or by recipients of the service acting under their authority or control, and that those online platforms thus have knowledge of or control over the information, even if that may in reality not be the case. This may include the storage, packing and shipment of a good from a warehouse under the control of the online marketplace. In that regard, is should be determined objectively, on the basis of all relevant circumstances, whether the presentation could lead to such a belief on the side of an average and reasonably well- informed consumer.
Amendment 309 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Since 2000, new technologies have emerged that improve the availability, efficiency, speed, reliability, capacity and security of systems for the transmission and storage of data online, leading to an increasingly complex online ecosystem. In this regard, it should be recalled that providers of services establishing and facilitating the underlying logical architecture and proper functioning of the internet, including technical auxiliary functions, can also benefit from the exemptions from liability set out in this Regulation, to the extent that their services qualify as ‘mere conduits’, ‘caching’ or hosting services. Such services include, as the case may be and among others, wireless local area networks, domain name system (DNS) services, top–level domain name registries, certificate authorities that issue digital certificates, Virtual Private Networks, or content delivery networks, that enable or improve the functions of other providers of intermediary services. Likewise, services used for communications purposes, and the technical means of their delivery, have also evolved considerably, giving rise to online services such as Voice over IP, messaging services and web-based e-mail services, where the communication is delivered via an internet access service. Those services, too, can benefit from the exemptions from liability, to the extent that they qualify as ‘mere conduit’, ‘caching’ or hosting service.
Amendment 311 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27 a (new)
Recital 27 a (new)
(27a) A single webpage or website may include elements that qualify differently between ‘mere conduit’, ‘caching’ or hosting services and the rules for exemptions from liability should apply to each accordingly. For example, a search engine may act solely as a ‘caching’ service as to information included in the results of an inquiry. Elements displayed alongside those results, such as online advertisements, would however still meet the standard of a hosting service.
Amendment 312 #
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, where set down in Union acts and, in particular, does not affect orders by national authorities in accordance with national legislation that implements Union acts, in accordance with the conditions established in this Regulation and other Union law regarded as lex specialis. 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. Equally, nothing in this Regulation should prevent providers from enacting end-to-end encrypting of their services.
Amendment 314 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 76
Recital 76
(76) In the absence of a general requirement for providers of intermediary services to ensure a physical presence within the territory of one of the Member States, there is a need to ensure clarity under which Member State's jurisdiction those providers fall for the purposes of enforcing the rules laid down in Chapters III and IV and Article 8 and 9 by the national competent authorities. A provider should be under the jurisdiction of the Member State where its main establishment is located, that is, where the provider has its head office or registered office within which the principal financial functions and operational control are exercised. In respect of providers that do not have an establishment in the Union but that offer services in the Union and therefore fall within the scope of this Regulation, the Member State where those providers appointed their legal representative should have jurisdiction, considering the function of legal representatives under this Regulation. In the interest of the effective application of this Regulation, all Member States should, however, have jurisdiction in respect of providers that failed to designate a legal representative, provided that the principle of ne bis in idem is respected. To that aim, each Member State that exercises jurisdiction in respect of such providers should, without undue delay, inform all other Member States of the measures they have taken in the exercise of that jurisdiction.
Amendment 317 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 78
Recital 78
(78) Member States should set out in their national law, in accordance with Union law and in particular this Regulation and the Charter, the detailed conditions and limits for the exercise of the investigatory and enforcement powers of their Digital Services Coordinators, and other competent authorities where relevant, under this Regulation. In order to ensure coherence between the Member States, the Commission should adopt guidance on the procedures and rules related to the powers of Digital Services Coordinators.
Amendment 322 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 88
Recital 88
(88) In order to ensure a consistent application of this Regulation, it is necessary to set up an independent advisory group at Union level and with legal personality, which should support the Commission and help coordinate the actions of Digital Services Coordinators. That European Board for Digital Services should consist of the Digital Services Coordinators, without prejudice to the possibility for Digital Services Coordinators to invite in its meetings or appoint ad hoc delegates from other competent authorities entrusted with specific tasks under this Regulation, where that is required pursuant to their national allocation of tasks and competences. In case of multiple participants from one Member State, the voting right should remain limited to one representative per Member Statethe Member State´s Digital Services Coordinator.
Amendment 324 #
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 effective processing of those orders.
Amendment 336 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 97 a (new)
Recital 97 a (new)
(97 a) The Commission should ensure that it is independent and impartial in its decision making in regards to both Digital Services Coordinators and providers of services under this Regulation.
Amendment 338 #
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 question relate to specific items of illegal content and information as defined in Union or national law, respectively, 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. Article 3 of Directive 200/31/EC, however, continues to apply to any other orders related to non-specific individual items of illegal or legal content or information, general orders related to geoblocking of whole websites, webpages, or domains and any other matter which could be seen as restricting the freedom to provide their service across border.
Amendment 341 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 99
Recital 99
(99) In particular, the Commission, where it can show grounds for believing that a very large online platform is not compliant with this Regulation, should have access to any relevant documents, data and information necessary to open and conduct investigations and to monitor the compliance with the relevant obligations laid down in this Regulation, irrespective of who possesses the documents, data or information in question, and regardless of their form or format, their storage medium, or the precise place where they are stored. The Commission should be able to directly require that the very large online platform concerned or relevant third parties, or than individuals, provide any relevant evidence, data and information related to those concerns. In addition, the Commission should be able to request any relevant information from any public authority, body or agency within the Member State, or from any natural person or legal person for the purpose of this Regulation. The Commission should be empowered to require access to, and explanations relating to, data-bases and algorithms of relevant persons, and to interview, with their consent, any persons who may be in possession of useful information and to record the statements made. The Commission should also be empowered to undertake such inspections as are necessary to enforce the relevant provisions of this Regulation. Those investigatory powers aim to complement the Commission’s possibility to ask Digital Services Coordinators and other Member States’ authorities for assistance, for instance by providing information or in the exercise of those powers.
Amendment 344 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 104
Recital 104
(104) In order to fulfil the objectives of this Regulation, 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 criteria for identification of very large online platforms and of technical specifications for access requests. It is also equally important that, when standardisation bodies are unable to agree the standards needed to implement this Regulation fully, the Commission chooses to adopt delegated acts. It is of particular importance that the Commission carries out appropriate consultations and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016. 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.
Amendment 348 #
2020/0361(COD)
1. This Regulation lays down harmonised rules on the provision of intermediary services in the internal marketorder to improve the functioning of the internal market whilst ensuring the rights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular the freedom of expression and information in an open and democratic society. In particular, it establishes:
Amendment 351 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) In that regard, it is important that the due diligence obligations are adapted to the type and nature of the intermediary service concerned. This Regulation therefore sets out basic obligations applicable to all providers of intermediary services, as well as additional obligations for providers of hosting services and, more specifically, online platforms and very large online platforms. To the extent that providers of intermediary services may fall within those different categories in view of the nature of their services and their size, they should comply with all of the corresponding obligations of this Regulation in relations to those services. Services that do not fall within those different categories should not be effected, even when provided by the same provider or under the same ownership structure. Those harmonised due diligence obligations, which should be reasonable and non-arbitrary, are needed to achieve the identified public policy concerns, such as safeguarding the legitimate interests of the recipients of the service, addressing illegal practices and protecting fundamental rights online.
Amendment 351 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) set out uniform harmonised rules for a safe, predictable, accessible and trusted online environment, where fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter are effectively protected.
Amendment 354 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35 a (new)
Recital 35 a (new)
(35a) Similarly, in order to ensure that the obligations are only applied to those providers of intermediary services where the benefit would outweigh the burden on the provider, the Commission should be empowered to issue a waiver to the requirements of Chapter III, in whole or in parts, to those providers of intermediary services that are non-for- profit or equivalent and serve a manifestly positive role in the public interest, or are SMEs without any systemic risk related to illegal content. The providers should present justified reasons for why they should be issued a waiver. The Commission should examine such an application and has the authority to issue or revoke a waiver at any time. The Commission should maintain a public list of all waiver issued and their conditions containing a description on why the provider is justified a waiver.
Amendment 355 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) In order to facilitate smooth and efficient communications relating to matters covered by this Regulation, providers of intermediary services should be required to establish a single point of contact and to publish relevant information relating to their point of contact, including the languages to be used in such communications. The point of contact can also be used by trusted flaggers and by professional entities which are under a specific relationship with the provider of intermediary services. This contact point maybe the same contact point as required under other Union acts. In contrast to the legal representative, the point of contact should serve operational purposes and should not necessarily have to have a physical location .
Amendment 355 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. This Regulation shall respect the fundamental rights recognised by the Charter of Fundamental rights of the European Union and the fundamental rights constituting general principles of Union law. Accordingly, this Regulation may only be interpreted and applied in accordance with those fundamental rights, including the freedom of expression and information, as well as the freedom and pluralism of the media. When exercising the powers set out in this Regulation, all public authorities involved shall aim to achieve, in situations where the relevant fundamental rights conflict, a fair balance between the rights concerned, in accordance with the principle of proportionality.
Amendment 358 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point b
(b) Directive 2010/13/ECU as amended by Directive 2018/1808/EU;
Amendment 360 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point c
(c) Union law on copyright and related rights, in particular Directive (EU) 2019/790 on Copyright and Related Rights in Digital Single Market;
Amendment 363 #
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 recipients of the service and the avoidance of unfair or arbitrary outcomes. At the same time, recipients should enter into such agreements willingly without any misleading or coercive tactics and therefore a ban on dark patterns should be introduced.
Amendment 363 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point h
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point h
(h) Union law on consumer protection and product safety, including Regulation (EU) 2017/2394, Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 and Regulation XXX (General Product Safety Regulation);
Amendment 364 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point i a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point i a (new)
(i a) Directive (EU) 2019/882
Amendment 366 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. The Commission shall by [within one year of the adoption of this Regulation] publish guidelines with regard to the relations between this Regulation and legislative acts listed in Article 1(5). These guidelines shall clarify any potential conflicts between the conditions and obligations listed in those legislative acts and which act prevails where actions, in line with this Regulation, fulfil the obligations of another legislative act and which regulatory authority is competent.
Amendment 368 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38 a (new)
Recital 38 a (new)
(38a) While an additional requirement should apply to very large online platform, all providers should do a general self-assessment of potential risk related to their services, especially in relations with minors and should take voluntary mitigation measures where appropriate. In order to ensure that the provider undertakes these actions, Digital Services Coordinators may ask for proof.
Amendment 369 #
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 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 which do not also qualify as very large online platforms. In any public versions of such reports, providers of intermediary services should remove any information that may prejudice ongoing activities for the prevention, detection, or removal of illegal content or content counter to a hosting provider’s terms and conditions. __________________ 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).
Amendment 382 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) ‘illegal content’ means any information,, which, in itself or by its reference to an activity, including the sale of products or provision of services is not in compliance with Union law or the law of a Member State, irrespective of the precise subject matter or nature of that law; is not in compliance with Union law or the law of a Member State, irrespective of the precise subject matter or nature of that law or due to its connection to or promotion of an illegal activity, including the sale of products, substances, animals or plants, or provision of services, directly leads to the dissemination to the public of such an illegal content. Material disseminated for educational, journalistic, artistic or research purposes or for the purposes of preventing or countering illegal content including the content which represents an expression of polemic or controversial views in the course of public debate shall not be considered as illegal content. An assessment shall determine the true purpose of that dissemination and whether material is disseminated to the public for those purposes.
Amendment 383 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40 a (new)
Recital 40 a (new)
(40a) Nevertheless, notices should be directed to the actor that has the technical and operational ability to act and the closest relationship to the recipient of the service that provided the information or content, such as to an online platform and not to the hosting service provider on which provides services to that online platform. Such hosting service providers should redirect such notices to the particular online platform and inform the notifying party of this fact.
Amendment 384 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40 b (new)
Recital 40 b (new)
(40b) Moreover, hosting providers should seek to act only against the items of information notified. This may include acts such as disabling hyperlinking to the items of information. Where the removal or disabling of access to individual items of information is technically or operationally unachievable due to legal, contractual, or technological reasons, such as encrypted file and data storage and sharing services, hosting providers should inform the recipient of the service of the notification and seek action. If a recipient fails to act or delays action, or the provider has reason to believe has failed to act or otherwise acts in bad faith, the hosting provider may suspend their service in line with their terms and conditions.
Amendment 387 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41 a (new)
Recital 41 a (new)
(41a) Where a hosting service provider decides to remove or disable information provided by a recipient of the service, either because it is illegal or is not allowed under its terms and conditions, it should do so in a timely manner, taking into account the potential harm the infraction and the technical abilities of the provider. Information that could have a negative effect on minors, women and vulnerable users such as those with protected characteristics under Article 21 of the Charter should be seen as a matter requiring urgency.
Amendment 388 #
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 have been proven to be efficient, proportionate and reliable, 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. Such an statement, however, should not be required if it relates to spam, manifestly illegal content, removal of content similar or identical to content already removed from the same recipient who has already received a statement or where a provider of hosting service does not have the information necessary to inform the recipient by a durable medium.
Amendment 398 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42 a (new)
Recital 42 a (new)
(42a) Due to the international nature of many providers of hosting services, many have already implemented similar requirements under the laws of third- party countries. In order to prevent a doubling of requirements and the removal of existing systems for recipients, the Commission should be empowered to declare these mechanisms as ensuring an adequate level of protection and fulfilling the requirements in Article 14 and Article 15.
Amendment 404 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) Recipients of the service 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 entering, in good faith, an 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 located in either the Member State of the recipient or the provider and 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 406 #
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) ‘dark pattern’ means a user interface designed or manipulated with the substantial effect of subverting or impairing user autonomy, decision- making or choice.
Amendment 408 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q b (new)
(q b) ‘deep fake’ means a generated or manipulated image, audio or video content that appreciably resembles existing persons,objects, places or other entities or events and falsely appears to a person to be authentic or truthful;
Amendment 409 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q b (new)
(q b) 'minor' means a child below the age of 16, as established in Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 410 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q c (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q c (new)
(q c) ‘persons with disabilities’ means persons with disabilities within the meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive (EU) 2019/882
Amendment 412 #
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 normally only be awarded to non-governmental 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, however, can be public in nature for actions not related to intellectual property rights, 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, non- governmental 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 422 #
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 frequently 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 and effective safeguards against such misuse. Information should be considered to be manifestly illegal content and notices 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 426 #
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 an imminent threat to the life or safety of person, notably when it concerns vulnerable users, 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 upon request all relevant information available to it, including where relevant the content in question and an explanation of its suspicion and unless instructed otherwise, should remove or disable the content. 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 435 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) In order to contribute to a safe, trustworthy and transparent online environment for consumers, as well as for other interested parties such as competing traders and holders of intellectual property rights, and to deter traders from selling products or services in violation of the applicable rules, online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with tradermarketplaces should ensure that such traders are traceable. The trader should therefore be required to provide certain essential information to the online platform, including for purposes of promoting messages on or offering products. That requirement should also be applicable to traders that promote messages on products or services on behalf of brands, based on underlying agreements. Those online platformmarketplaces should store all information in a secure manner for a reasonable period of time that does not exceed what is necessary and no longer than six months after the end of a relationship with the trader, so that it can be accessed, in accordance with the applicable law, including on the protection of personal data, by public authorities and private parties with a legitimate direct interest, including through the orders to provide information referred to in this Regulation.
Amendment 440 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
No general obligation to monitor the information which providers of intermediary services transmit or store, nor actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity shall be imposed on those providers. This Regulation shall not prevent providers from offering end- to-end encrypted services. The provision of such services shall not constitute a reason for liability or for becoming ineligible for the exemptions from liability.
Amendment 447 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. If the provider cannot comply with the removal order because it contains manifest errors or does not contain sufficient information for its execution, it shall, without undue delay, inform the authority that has issued the order.
Amendment 448 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50 a (new)
Recital 50 a (new)
(50a) The online interface of online marketplace should allow traders to provide the information referred to in Article 22a of this Regulation and any other information where needed and necessary to allow for the unequivocal identification of the product or the service, including labelling requirements, in compliance with legislation on product safety and product compliance. Providers of online marketplaces, when they become aware that a product or services is illegal, should inform recipients who have acquired the product or services through their marketplace of this fact and any possible redress.
Amendment 453 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 a (new)
- the identification of the issuing authority and the means to verify the authentication of the order;
Amendment 456 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) Online advertisement plays an important role in the online environment, including in relation to the provision of the services of online platforms. However, online advertisement can contribute to significant risks, ranging from advertisement that is itself illegal content, to contributing to financial incentives for the publication or amplification of illegal or otherwise harmful content and activities online, or the discriminatory display of advertising with an impact on the equal treatment and opportunities of citizens. In addition to the requirements resulting from Article 6 of Directive 2000/31/EC, online platforms should therefore be required to ensure that the recipients of the service have certain individualised information necessary for them to understand when and on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed. In addition, recipients of the service should have an easy access to information on the main parameters used for determining that specific advertising is to be displayed to them, providing meaningful explanations of the logic used to that end, including when this is based on profiling. The requirements of this Regulation on the provision of information relating to advertisement is without prejudice to the application of the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular those regarding the right to object, automated individual decision- making, including profiling and specifically the need to obtain consent of the data subject prior to the processing of personal data for targeted advertising. Similarly, it is without prejudice to the provisions laid down in Directive 2002/58/EC in particular those regarding the storage of information in terminal equipment and the access to information stored therein.
Amendment 459 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the territorial scope of the order, on the basis of the applicable rules of Union and national law, including the Charter, and, where relevant, general principles of international law, does not exceed what is strictly necessary to achieve its objective and in any case does not exceed the territory of the Member State of the order;
Amendment 464 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the order is drafted in the language declared by the provider and is sent to the point of contact, appointed by the provider, in accordance with Article 10, or in the official language of the Member State that issues the order against the specific item of illegal content. In such case, the point of contact may request the competent authority to provide translation into the language declared by the provider.
Amendment 467 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) the order is issued only where no other effective means are available to bring about the cessation or the prohibition of the infringement
Amendment 468 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
(c b) where more than one provider of intermediary services is responsible for hosting the specific item, the order is issued to the most appropriate provider that has the technical and operational ability to act against the specific item.
Amendment 469 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 69, after consulting the Board, to lay down a specific template and form for such orders.
Amendment 470 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) Very large online platforms may cause societal risks, different in scope and impact from those caused by smaller platforms. Once the number of recipients of a platform reaches a significant share of the Union population, the systemic risks the platform poses have a disproportionately negative impact in the Union. Such significant reach should be considered to exist where the number of recipients exceeds an operational threshold set at 45 million, that is, a number equivalent to 10% of the Union population. The determination of this operational threshold, therefore, should only take into those recipients which are physical persons residing in the Union or physical persons acting on behalf of a legal person established in the Union. Automated bots, fake accounts, indirect hyperlinking, FTP or other indirect downloading of content should not be included in the determination of this threshold being exceed. The operational threshold should be kept up to date through amendments enacted by delegated acts, where necessary. Such very large online platforms should therefore bear the highest standard of due diligence obligations, proportionate to their societal impact and means.
Amendment 470 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Member States shall ensure that providers have a right to appeal and object to implementing the order and shall facilitate the use and access to that right.
Amendment 471 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. When an order to act against a specific individual item of illegal content is issued by a relevant national judicial or administrative authority, Member States shall ensure that the relevant national judicial or administrative authority duly informs the Digital Services Coordinator from the Member State of the judicial or administrative authority.
Amendment 474 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Where upon receiving the copy of the order, at least three Digital Services Coordinators consider that the order violates Union or national law that is in conformity with Union law, including the Charter, they can object the enforcement of the order to the Board, based on a reasoned statement. Following recommendation of the Board, the Commission may decide whether the order is to be enforced.
Amendment 477 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) Three categories of systemic risks should be assessed in-depth. A first category concerns the risks associated with the misuse of their service through the dissemination of 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, 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 or misuse the way platforms' terms and conditions, including content moderation policies, are enforced, often through automatic means. A third category of risks concerns the intentional and, oftentimes, coordinated manipulation of the platform’s service, with a foreseeable impact on health, fundamental rights, 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 conditions.
Amendment 478 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. The conditions and requirements laid down in this article shall be without prejudice to requirements under national criminal procedural law and administrative law in conformity with Union law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights. While acting in accordance with such laws, authorities shall not go beyond what is necessary in order to attain the objectives followed therein.
Amendment 482 #
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 risks identified in the risk 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 conditionprevent the manipulation and exploitation of the service, including by the amplification of content which is counter to their terms and conditions, adapting their decision-making processes, or adapting their terms and conditions and content moderation policies and how those policies are enforced, while being fully transparent to the users. 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, including by displaying related public service advertisements instead of other commercial advertisements. Very large online platforms may reinforce their internal processes or supervision of any of their activities, in particular as regards the detection of systemic risks. 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 effects on the fundamental rights of the recipients of the service.
Amendment 488 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of intermediary services shall, upon receipt of an order to provide a specific item of information about one or more specific individual recipients of the service, received from and 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 without undue delay the authority of issuing the order of its receipt and the effect given to the order.
Amendment 489 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. If the provider cannot comply with the information order because it contains manifest errors or does not contain sufficient information for its execution, it shall, without undue delay, inform the authority that issued the information order
Amendment 495 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent -1 (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent -1 (new)
-1 the identification of the issuing authority and the means to verify the authentication of the order;
Amendment 499 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 63
Recital 63
(63) Advertising systems used by very large online platforms pose particular risks and require further public and regulatory supervision on account of their scale and ability to target and reach recipients of the service based on their behaviour within and outside that platform’s online interface. Very large online platforms should ensure public access to repositories of advertisements displayed on their online interfaces 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 health, public security, civil discourse, political participation and equality. Repositories should include the content of advertisements and related data on the advertiser and the delivery of the advertisement, in particular where targeted advertising is concerned. In addition, very large online platforms should label any known deep fake videos, audio or other files.
Amendment 504 #
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 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 researchers on the evolution and severity of online systemic risks 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, which mean the conditions set down in this Regulation. 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 and any other parties concerned, including the recipients of the service.
Amendment 505 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the order is drafted in the language declared by the provider and is sent to the point of contact appointed by that provider, in accordance with Article 10, or in the official language of the Member State that issues the order against the specific item of illegal content. In such case, the point of contact may request the competent authority to provide translation into the language declared by the provider;
Amendment 506 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) the order is issued only where no other effective means are available to receive the same specific item of information
Amendment 507 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 69, after consulting the Board, to lay down a specific template and form for such orders. It shall ensure that form means the standards set down in the Annex of [XXX the regulation on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters].
Amendment 508 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Amendment 511 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66
Recital 66
(66) To facilitate the effective and consistent application of the obligations in this Regulation that may require implementation through technological means, it is important to promote voluntary industry standards covering certain technical procedures, where the industry can help develop standardised means to comply with this Regulation, such as allowing the submission of notices, including through application programming interfaces, or about the interoperability of advertisement repositories. Such standards could in particular be useful for relatively small providers of intermediary services. The standards could distinguish between different types of illegal content or different types of intermediary services, as appropriate. However, where no voluntary industry standard is agreed and the Commission finds that the application of this Regulation by providers is significantly divergent, the Commission should be empowered to adopt delegated acts where needed until a voluntary industry standard is agreed.
Amendment 512 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Article 9 – paragraph 4
4. The conditions and requirements laid down in this article shall be without prejudice to requirements under national criminal procedural law and administrative law in conformity with Union law.
Amendment 519 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article -10 (new)
Article -10 (new)
Amendment 521 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article -10 a (new)
Article -10 a (new)
Article -10 a Conflict between Union Acts 1. Where any obligation set down in this Regulation can be viewed as equivalent with or superseded by an obligation within another Union act, in which a provider of intermediary services is also a subject, a provider of intermediary services may apply to the Commission for a waiver from such requirements or a declaration that it should be deemed as having complied with this Regulation, in whole or in parts. The provider shall present justified reasons for their request. 2. The Commission shall examine such an application and, after consulting the Board, may issue a waiver or declaration in whole or in parts to the requirements of this Regulation. 3. Upon the request of the Board or on its own initiative, the Commission may review a waiver or declaration issued and revoke the waiver or declaration in whole or in parts. 4. The Commission shall maintain a list of all waivers and declarations issued and their conditions and shall publish this list to the public.
Amendment 523 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Providers of intermediary services may establish the same single point of contact for this Regulation and another single point of contact as required under other Union law. When doing so, the provider shall inform the Commission of this decision.
Amendment 528 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 69
Recital 69
(69) The rules on codes of conduct under this Regulation could serve as a basis for already established self-regulatory efforts at Union level, including the Product Safety Pledge, the Memorandum of Understanding against counterfeit goods, the Code of Conduct against illegal hate speech as well as the Code of practice on disinformation. In particular for the latter, since the Commission willhas issued guidance for strengthening the Code of practice on disinformation as announced in the European Democracy Action Plan in May 2021.
Amendment 541 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 76
Recital 76
(76) In the absence of a general requirement for providers of intermediary services to ensure a physical presence within the territory of one of the Member States, there is a need to ensure clarity under which Member State's jurisdiction those providers fall for the purposes of enforcing the rules laid down in Chapters III and IV and Article 8 and 9 by the national competent authorities. A provider should be under the jurisdiction of the Member State where its main establishment is located, that is, where the provider has its head office or registered office within which the principal financial functions and operational control are exercised. In respect of providers that do not have an establishment in the Union but that offer services in the Union and therefore fall within the scope of this Regulation, the Member State where those providers appointed their legal representative should have jurisdiction, considering the function of legal representatives under this Regulation. In the interest of the effective application of this Regulation, all Member States should, however, have jurisdiction in respect of providers that failed to designate a legal representative, provided that the principle of ne bis in idem is respected. To that aim, each Member State that exercises jurisdiction in respect of such providers should, without undue delay, inform all other Member States of the measures they have taken in the exercise of that jurisdiction.
Amendment 542 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 78
Recital 78
(78) Member States should set out in their national law, in accordance with Union law and in particular this Regulation and the Charter, the detailed conditions and limits for the exercise of the investigatory and enforcement powers of their Digital Services Coordinators, and other competent authorities where relevant, under this Regulation. In order to ensure coherence between the Member States, the Commission should adopt guidance on the procedures and rules related to the powers of Digital Services Coordinators.
Amendment 546 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Providers of intermediary services shall, when complying with the requirements of this Article, not be required to disclose algorithms or any information that, with reasonable certainty, would result in the enabling of deception of consumers or consumer harm through the manipulation of their services. This Article shall be without prejudice to Directive (EU) 2016/943.
Amendment 551 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Providers of intermediary services shall refrain from any dark patterns or other techniques to encourage the acceptance of terms and conditions, including giving consent to sharing personal and non-personal data.
Amendment 554 #
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 not require recipients of the service other than traders to make their legal identity public in order to use the service.
Amendment 556 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 d (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. For providers other than very large online platforms, nothing in this Regulation shall prevent a provider of intermediary services from terminating the contractual relationship with its recipients without clause, in the situations provided for in the terms and conditions. Providers of a very large online platform shall issue a statement for the termination to the recipient, and the recipient shall have access to the internal complaint mechanism under Article 17 and the out- of-court mechanism under Article 18.
Amendment 557 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 88
Recital 88
(88) In order to ensure a consistent application of this Regulation, it is necessary to set up an independent advisory group at Union level and with legal personality, which should support the Commission and help coordinate the actions of Digital Services Coordinators. That European Board for Digital Services should consist of the Digital Services Coordinators, without prejudice to the possibility for Digital Services Coordinators to invite in its meetings or appoint ad hoc delegates from other competent authorities entrusted with specific tasks under this Regulation, where that is required pursuant to their national allocation of tasks and competences. In case of multiple participants from one Member State, the voting right should remain limited to one representative per Member Statethe Member State´s Digital Services Coordinator.
Amendment 558 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12 a (new)
Amendment 559 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12 a (new)
Amendment 560 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 b (new)
Article 12 b (new)
Amendment 563 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the number of orders received from Member States’ authorities, categorised by the type of illegal content concerned, including orders issued in accordance with Articles 8 and 9, and the average time needed to inform taking the action specified in thoshe authority issuing the order of its receipt and the effect given to the orders;
Amendment 578 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 97 a (new)
Recital 97 a (new)
(97a) The Commission should ensure that it is independent and impartial in its decision making in regards to both Digital Services Coordinators and providers of services under this Regulation.
Amendment 579 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where made available to the public, the annual transparency reports referred to in paragraph 1 shall not include information that may prejudice ongoing activities for the prevention, detection, or removal of illegal content or content counter to a hosting provider's terms and conditions.
Amendment 585 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 99
Recital 99
(99) In particular, the Commission, where it can show grounds for believing that a very large online platform is not compliant with this Regulation, should have access to any relevant documents, data and information necessary to open and conduct investigations and to monitor the compliance with the relevant obligations laid down in this Regulation, irrespective of who possesses the documents, data or information in question, and regardless of their form or format, their storage medium, or the precise place where they are stored. The Commission should be able to directly require that the very large online platform concerned or relevant third parties, or than individuals, provide any relevant evidence, data and information related to those concerns. In addition, the Commission should be able to request any relevant information from any public authority, body or agency within the Member State, or from any natural person or legal person for the purpose of this Regulation. The Commission should be empowered to require access to, and explanations relating to, data-bases and algorithms of relevant persons, and to interview, with their consent, any persons who may be in possession of useful information and to record the statements made. The Commission should also be empowered to undertake such inspections as are necessary to enforce the relevant provisions of this Regulation. Those investigatory powers aim to complement the Commission’s possibility to ask Digital Services Coordinators and other Member States’ authorities for assistance, for instance by providing information or in the exercise of those powers.
Amendment 592 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 102
Recital 102
(102) In the interest of effectiveness and efficiency, in addition to the general evaluation of the Regulation, to be performed within five years of entry into force, after the initial start-up phase and on the basis of the first three years of application of this Regulation, the Commission should also perform an evaluation of the activities of the Board and on its structure. In addition, the Commission should carry out an assessment of any impact of the costs to European service providers of any similar requirements, including those of Article 11, introduced by third-party states and any new barriers to non-EU market access after the adoption of this Regulation. The Commission should also access the impact on the ability of European businesses and consumers to access and buy products and services from outside the Union.
Amendment 594 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 104
Recital 104
(104) In order to fulfil the objectives of this Regulation, 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 criteria for identification of very large online platforms and of technical specifications for access requests. It is also equally important that when standardisation bodies are unable to agree the standards needed to implement this Regulation fully, that the Commission to choice to adopt delegated acts. It is of particular importance that the Commission carries out appropriate consultations and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016. 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.
Amendment 595 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 105 a (new)
Recital 105 a (new)
(105a) This Regulation serves a horizontal framework to ensure the further strengthening and deepening the Digital Single Market and the internal market and therefore seeks to lay down rules and obligations which, unless specified, seek to be applicable to all providers without regards to individual models of operation. Individual models of operation are often addressed in different Union law regarded as lex specialis. In the case of any potential conflict between this Regulation and those Union acts, the principle of Lex specialis derogat legi generali should apply.
Amendment 608 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) set out uniform harmonised rules for a safe, predictable, accessible and trusted online environment, where fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter are effectively protected.
Amendment 622 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3
Article 1 – paragraph 3
3. This Regulation shall apply to intermediary services directed at and provided to recipients of the service that have their place of establishment or residence in the Union, irrespective of the place of establishment of the providers of those services.
Amendment 625 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point b
(b) Directive 2010/13/ECU as amended by Directive 2018/1808/EU;
Amendment 631 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point c
(c) Union law on copyright and related rights, in particular Directive (EU) 2019/790 on Copyright and Related Rights in Digital Single Market;
Amendment 634 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point h
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point h
(h) Union law on consumer protection and product safety, including Regulation (EU) 2017/2394, Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 and Regulation XXX (General Product Safety Regulation);
Amendment 638 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point i a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point i a (new)
(ia) Directive (EU) 2019/882
Amendment 642 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. The Commission shall by [within one year of the adoption of this Regulation] publish guidelines with regards to the relations between this Regulation and those legislative acts listed in Article 1(5). These guidelines shall clarify any potential conflicts between the conditions and obligations enlisted in these legislative acts and which act prevails where actions, in line with this Regulation, fulfil the obligations of another legislative act and which regulatory authority is competent.
Amendment 647 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) ‘recipient of the service’ means any natural or legal person who uses the relevant intermediary servic, for professional reasons or otherwise, uses the relevant intermediary service in particular for the purposes of seeking information or making it accessible;
Amendment 650 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) ‘consumer’ means any natural person who is acting for purposes which are outside his or her trade, business, craft, or profession;
Amendment 654 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) decisions whether or not to remove or disable access to or restrict visibility of the information;
Amendment 662 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) decisions whether or not to restrict the ability to monetize content provided by the recipients;
Amendment 664 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 2
— the targeproactive directing of activities towards one or more Member States.
Amendment 667 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) ‘trader’ means any natural person, or any legal person irrespective of whether privately or publicly owned, who is acting, including through any person acting in his or her name or on his or her behalf, for purposes relating to his or her trade, business, craft or profession, irrespective of the legality of those actions;
Amendment 671 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
(f) ‘intermediary service’ means one of the following information society services:
Amendment 673 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – indent 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f – indent 1
— a ‘mere conduit’ service that consists of the transmission in a communication network of information provided by a recipient of the service, or the provision of access to a communication network, including technical auxiliary functional services;
Amendment 682 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The first subparagraph is without prejudice to the right of the recipient or individuals or entities that have submitted notices, concerned to redress against the decision before a court in accordance with the applicable law.
Amendment 692 #
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 695 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) ‘online platform’ means a provider of a hosting service which, at the request of a recipient of the service, with which it has a direct relationship stores and disseminates to the public information, unless that activity is a minor and purely ancillary feature of another service and, for objective and technical reasons cannot be used without that other service, and the integration of the feature into the other service is not a means to circumvent the applicability of this Regulation. For the purpose of this Regulation, cloud computing service shall not be considered to be an online platform in cases where allowing the dissemination of hyperlinks to a specific content constitutes a minor and ancillary feature.
Amendment 705 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
(ha) ‘cloud computing service’ means a digital service that enables access to a scalable and elastic pool of shareable computing resources;
Amendment 714 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
(ia) ‘online marketplace’ means an online platform which allows consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders on its platform;
Amendment 716 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
(ka) ‘trusted flagger’ means an entity that has been nominated by a Digital Services Coordinator based on specific conditions to be authorised to issue priority notifications as to illegal content found on a platform.
Amendment 718 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point n
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point n
(n) ‘advertisement’ means information designed to promote the message of a legal or natural person, irrespective of whether the person is incorporated or unincorporated and irrespective of whether the information is designed to achieve commercial or non-commercial purposes, and displayed by an online platform on its online interface normally against remuneration specifically for promoting that informationmessage;
Amendment 719 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 724 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point p
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point p
(p) ‘content moderation’ means the activities, either through automated or manual means, undertaken by providers of intermediary services aimed at detecting, identifying and addressing illegal content or information incompatible with their terms and conditions, provided by recipients of the service, including measures taken that affect the availability, visibility, monetisation and accessibility of that illegal content or that information, such as demotion, disabling of access to, delisting, demonetisation or removal thereof, or the recipients’ ability to provide that information, such as the termination or suspension of a recipient’s account;
Amendment 726 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) it has a transparent funding structure, including publishing the sources and amounts of all revenue annually
Amendment 727 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
(cb) it is not already a trusted flagger in another Member State.
Amendment 728 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c c (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c c (new)
Amendment 738 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new)
(qa) ‘dark pattern’ means a user interface designed or manipulated with the substantial effect of subverting or impairing user autonomy, decision- making or choice.
Amendment 742 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q b (new)
(qb) ‘persons with disabilities’ means persons with disabilities within the meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive (EU) 2019/882
Amendment 744 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 a (new)
Article 19 a (new)
Amendment 745 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q c (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q c (new)
(qc) ‘deep fake’ means a generated or manipulated image, audio or video content that appreciably resembles existing persons, objects, places or other entities or events and falsely appears to a person to be authentic or truthful.
Amendment 752 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Amendment 753 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the provider does not modify the finformational content;
Amendment 761 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Suspensions referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 may be declared permanent where (a) compelling reasons of law or public policy, including ongoing criminal investigations, justify avoiding or postponing notice to the recipient; (b) the items removed were components of high-volume campaigns to deceive users or manipulate platform content moderation efforts; or (c) the items removed were related to content covered by [Directive 2011/93/EU updated reference] or [Directive (EU) 2017/541 XXX New Ref to TCO Regulation].
Amendment 770 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Paragraph 1 shall not apply with respect to liability under consumer protection law of online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with tradermarketplaces, where such an online platformmarketplace presents the specific item of information or otherwise enables the specific transaction at issue in a way that would lead an average and reasonably well-informed consumer to believe that the information, or the product or service that is the object of the transaction, is provided either by the online platform itself or by a recipient of the service who is acting under its authority or control.
Amendment 773 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Unless instructed otherwise by the informed authority, the provider shall remove or disable the content. It shall store all content and related data for at least six months.
Amendment 774 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Information obtained by a law enforcement or judicial authority of a Member State in accordance with paragraph 1 shall not be used for any purpose other than those directly related to the individual serious criminal offence notified.
Amendment 775 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. The Commission shall adopt an implementing act setting down a template for notifications under paragraph 1.
Amendment 776 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 d (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Where a notification of suspicions of criminal offences includes information which may be seen as potential electronic information in criminal proceedings, Regulation XXX [E-evidence] shall apply.
Amendment 783 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the bankpayment account details of the trader, where the trader is a natural person;
Amendment 784 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the name, address, telephone number and electronic mail address of the economic operator, within the meaning ofestablished in the Union and carrying out the tasks in accordance with Article 3(13) and Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and the Council51 or [Article XX of the General Product Safety Regulation], or any relevant act of Union law; _________________ 51Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on market surveillance and compliance of products and amending Directive 2004/42/EC and Regulations (EC) No 765/2008 and (EU) No 305/2011 (OJ L 169, 25.6.2019, p. 1).
Amendment 793 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
No general obligation to monitor the information which providers of intermediary services transmit or store, nor actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity shall be imposed on those providers. This Regulation shall not prevent providers from offering end- to-end encrypted services. The provision of such services shall not constitute a reason for liability or for becoming ineligible for the exemptions from liability.
Amendment 806 #
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 individual item of illegal content, received from and 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 809 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. If the provider cannot comply with the removal order because it contains manifest errors or does not contain sufficient information for its execution, it shall, without undue delay, inform the authority that has issued the order.
Amendment 819 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 a (new)
— the identification of the issuing authority and the means to verify the authentication of the order;
Amendment 820 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 23 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Where published to the general public, the annual transparency reports referred to in paragraph 1 shall not include information that may prejudice ongoing activities for the prevention, detection, or removal of illegal content or content counter to a hosting provider’s terms and conditions.
Amendment 824 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Online platforms that directly and indirectly display advertising on their online interfaces shall ensure that the recipients of the service can identify, for each specific advertisement displayed to each individual recipient, in a clear, meaningful, salient, uniform and unambiguous manner and in real time:
Amendment 828 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the territorial scope of the order, on the basis of the applicable rules of Union and national law, including the Charter, and, where relevant, general principles of international law, does not exceed what is strictly necessary to achieve its objective and in any case does not exceed the territory of the Member State of the order;
Amendment 828 #
2020/0361(COD)
(c) clear, meaningful and uniform information about the main parameters used to determine the recipient to whom the advertisement is displayed. and the logic involved;
Amendment 829 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) whether the advertisement was selected using an automated mechanism. such as ad exchange mechanisms, and if so, the identity of the natural or legal person responsible for the system;
Amendment 836 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the order is drafted in the language declared by the provider and is sent to the point of contact, appointed by the provider, in accordance with Article 10, or in the official language of the Member State that issues the order against the specific item of illegal content. In such case, the point of contact may request the competent authority to provide translation into the language declared by the provider.
Amendment 840 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) the order is issued only where no other effective means are available to bring about the cessation or the prohibition of the infringement
Amendment 841 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
(cb) where more than one provider of intermediary services is responsible for hosting the specific item, the order is issued to the most appropriate provider that has the technical and operational ability to act against the specific item.
Amendment 842 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 69, after consulting the Board, to lay down a specific template and form for such orders.
Amendment 843 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Member States shall ensure that providers have a right to appeal and object to implementing the order and shall facilitate the use and access to that right.
Amendment 844 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. When an order to act against a specific individual item of illegal content is issued by a relevant national judicial or administrative authority, Member States shall ensure that the relevant national judicial or administrative authority duly informs the Digital Services Coordinator from the Member State of the judicial or administrative authority.
Amendment 846 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Where upon receiving the copy of the order, at least three Digital Services Coordinators consider that the order violates Union or national law that is in conformity with Union law, including the Charter, they can object the enforcement of the order to the Board, based on a reasoned statement. Following recommendation of the Board, the Commission may decide whether the order is to be enforced.
Amendment 849 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. The conditions and requirements laid down in this article shall be without prejudice to requirements under national criminal procedural law and administrative law in conformity with Union law, including the Charter on Fundamental Rights. While acting in accordance with such laws, authorities shall not go beyond what is necessary in order to attain the objectives followed therein.
Amendment 856 #
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,on an ongoing basis, the probability and severity of any significant systemic risks stemming from the functioning and use made of their services in the Union. This risk assessment shall be specific to their services and shall include the following systemic risks:
Amendment 862 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of intermediary services shall, upon receipt of an order to provide a specific item of information about one or more specific individual recipients of the service, received from and 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 without undue delay the authority of issuing the order of its receipt and the effect given to the order.
Amendment 864 #
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 any of the fundamental rights listed in the Charter, in particular on the fundamental rights to respect for private and family life, freedom of expression and information, the prohibition of discrimination, the right to gender equality and the rights of the child, as enshrined in Articles 7, 11, 21, 23 and 24 of the Charter respectively;
Amendment 865 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. If the provider cannot comply with the information order because it contains manifest errors or does not contain sufficient information for its execution, it shall, without undue delay, inform the authority that issued the information order
Amendment 869 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) intentional manipulation of their service and amplification of content that is in breach of their terms and conditions, including by means of inauthentic use, such as ‘deep fakes’ or automated exploitation of the service, with an actual or foreseeable negative effect on the protection of public health, minors, democratic values, media freedom and freedom of expression of journalists, as well as their ability to verify facts, civic discourse, or actual or foreseeable effects related to electoral processes and public security.
Amendment 870 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent -1 (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent -1 (new)
— the identification of the issuing authority and the means to verify the authentication of the order;
Amendment 879 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the order is drafted in the language declared by the provider and is sent to the point of contact appointed by that provider, in accordance with Article 10, or in the official language of the Member State that issues the order against the specific item of illegal content. In such case, the point of contact may request the competent authority to provide translation into the language declared by the provider;
Amendment 882 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) the order is issued only where no other effective means are available to receive the same specific item of information
Amendment 882 #
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 risks identified pursuant to Article 26. Such measures mayshall include, where applicable:
Amendment 884 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 69, after consulting the Board, to lay down a specific template and form for such orders. It shall ensure that the form meats the standards set down in the Annex of [XXX the regulation on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters].
Amendment 885 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. When an order to provide a specific item of information about one or more specific individual recipients of the service is issued by a relevant national judicial or administrative authority, Member States shall ensure that the relevant national judicial or administrative authority duly informs the Digital Services Coordinator from the Member State of the judicial or administrative authority.
Amendment 885 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) adapting content moderation or recommender systems, their decision- making processes, design, the features or functioning of their services, or their terms and conditions;
Amendment 887 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Article 9 – paragraph 4
4. The conditions and requirements laid down in this article shall be without prejudice to requirements under national criminal procedural law and administrative law in conformity with Union law.
Amendment 891 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter III – title
Chapter III – title
Due diligence oObligations for a transparent, accessible and safe online environment
Amendment 894 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9a Waiver 1. Providers of intermediary services may apply to the Commission for a waiver from the requirements of Chapter III, proved that they are: (a) non-for-profit or equivalent and serve a manifestly positive role in the public interest; (b) micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC; or (c) a medium enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC without any systemic risk related to illegal content. The Providers shall present justified reasons for their request. 2. The Commission shall examination such an application and, after consulting the Board, may issue a waiver in whole or in parts to the requirements of this Chapter. 3. Upon the request of the Board or the provider, or on its own initiative, the Commission may review a waiver issued and revoke the waiver in whole or in parts. 4. The Commission shall maintain a list of all waivers issued and their conditions and shall publish this list to the public. (This amendment should be placed between the Chapter Title and the Section title)
Amendment 896 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9a Conflict between Union Acts 1. Where any obligation set down in this Regulation can be viewed as equivalent with or superseded by an obligation within another Union act, in which a provider of intermediary services is also a subject, a provider of intermediary services may apply to the Commission for a waiver from such requirements or a declaration that it should be deemed as having complied with this Regulation, in whole or in parts. The provider shall present justified reasons for their request. 2. The Commission shall examine such an application and, after consulting the Board, may issue a waiver or declaration in whole or in parts to the requirements of this Regulation. 3. Upon the request of the Board or on its own initiative, the Commission may review a waiver or declaration issued and revoke the waiver or declaration in whole or in parts. 4. The Commission shall maintain a list of all waiver and declaration issued and their conditions and shall publish this list to the public.
Amendment 899 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. The Board shall evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of mitigating measures undertaken by very large online platforms listed in Article 27(1) and where necessary, may issue recommendations.
Amendment 900 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Board, in cooperation with the Commission, shall publish comprehensive reports, once a year, which. The reports of the Board shall be broken down per Member State in which the systemic risks occur and in the Union as a whole. The reports shall be published in all the official languages of the Member States of the Union. The reports shall include the following:
Amendment 905 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Providers of intermediary services may establish the same single point of contact for this Regulation and another single point of contact as required under other Union law. When doing so, the provider shall inform the Commission of this decision.
Amendment 921 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to providers of intermediary services that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC other than those which are either a very larger online platform or a marketplace.
Amendment 929 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1
Article 29 – paragraph 1
1. Very large online platforms that use recommender systems shall set out in their terms and conditions and on a designated web page that can be directly reached from the very large online platforms’ online interface, in a clear, accessible and easily comprehensible manner for the general public, the main parameters used in their recommender systems, the optimisation goals of their recommender systems as well as any options for the recipients of the service to modify or influence those main parameters that they may have made available, including at least one option which is not based on profiling, within the meaning of Article 4 (4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 931 #
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 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 by the provider of the intermediary service for the purpose of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making and human review. It shall be set out in clear and unambiguous language and shall be publicly available in an easily accessible, machine-readable format.
Amendment 939 #
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, objective and proportionatenon- arbitrary manner in applying and enforcing the restrictions referred to in paragraph 1, 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, where applicable, any community or other standards created by recipients of the service.
Amendment 952 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) the natural or legal person or group who paid for the advertisement;
Amendment 957 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The very large online platform shall design and organise its online interface in such a way that recipients of the service can easily and efficiently exercise their rights under applicable Union law in relation to the processing of their personal data for each specific advertisement displayed to the data subject on the platform, in particular: (a) To withdraw consent or to object to processing (b) To obtain access to the personal data concerning the data subject (c) To obtain rectification of inaccurate personal data concerning the data subject (d) To obtain erasure of personal data without undue delay (e) Where a recipient exercises any of these rights, the online platform must inform any parties to whom the personal data concerned in points (a)-(d) have been enclosed in accordance with Article 19 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 960 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Very large online platforms shall be prohibited from profiling or targeting minors with personalised advertising, in compliance with the industry-standards laid down in Article 34 and Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 962 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Very large online platforms shall take adequate measures to detect inauthentic videos (‘deep fakes’). When detecting such videos, they should label them as inauthentic in a way that is clearly visible for the internet user.
Amendment 963 #
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 not require recipients of the service other than traders to make their legal identity public in order to use the service.
Amendment 963 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 d (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Very large online platforms shall offer users the opportunity to check if their username and password have been compromised in a data leak, such as through the pwned open source database.
Amendment 964 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 d (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. For providers other than very large online platforms, nothing in this Regulation shall prevent a provider of intermediary services provider concerned from terminating the contractual relationship with its recipients without clause, in the situations provided for in the terms and conditions. Providers of a very large online platform shall issue a statement for the termination to the recipient, and the recipient shall have access to the internal complaint mechanism under Article 17 and the out- of-court mechanism under Article 18.
Amendment 966 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12a General Risk Assessment and Mitigation Measures 1. Providers of intermediary services shall identify, analyse and assess, at least once and at each significant revision of a service thereafter, the potential misuse or other risks stemming from the functioning and use made of their services in the Union. Such a general risk assessment shall be specific to their services and shall include at least risks related to the dissemination of illegal content through their services and any contents that might have a negative effect on potential recipients of the service, especially minors and gender equality. 2. Providers of intermediary services which identify potential risks shall, wherever possible, attempt to put in place reasonable, proportionate and effective mitigation measures in line with their terms and conditions. 3. Where the identified risk relates to minors, without regard to if the child is acting with respect to the terms and conditions, mitigation measures shall include, taking into account the industry standards referred to in Article 34, where needed and applicable: (a) adapting content moderation or recommender systems, their decision- making processes, the features or functioning of their services, or their terms and conditions to ensure those prioritise the best interests of the child; (b) adapting or removing system design features that expose or promote to children to content, contact, conduct and contract risks; (c) ensuring the highest levels of privacy, safety, and security by design and default for children including any profiling or use of data for commercial purposes; (d) if a service is targeted at children, provide child-friendly mechanisms for remedy and redress, including easy access to expert advice and support. 4. Providers of intermediary services shall, upon request, explain to the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State of establishment, how it undertook this risk assessment and what voluntary mitigation measures it undertook.
Amendment 972 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 b (new)
Article 12 b (new)
Amendment 981 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the number of orders received from Member States’ authorities, categorised by the type of illegal content concerned, including orders issued in accordance with Articles 8 and 9, and the average time needed to inform taking the action specified in thoshe authority issuing the order of its receipt and the effect given to the orders;
Amendment 983 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the number of notices submitted in accordance with Article 14, categorised by the type of alleged illegal content concerned, the number of notices submitted by trusted flaggers, any action taken pursuant to the notices by differentiating whether the action was taken on the basis of the law or the terms and conditions of the provider, and the average time needed for taking the action; Providers of intermediary services may add additional information as to the reasons for the average time for taking the action.
Amendment 1003 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 33 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The reports shall include content moderation broken down per Member State in which the services are offered and in the Union as a whole and shall be published in the official languages of the Member States of the Union.
Amendment 1005 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to providers of intermediary services that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC and which are not very large online platforms in accordance with Article 25.
Amendment 1010 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Where made available to the public, the annual transparency reports referred to in paragraph 1 shall not include information that may prejudice ongoing activities for the prevention, detection, or removal of illegal content or content counter to a hosting provider’s terms and conditions.
Amendment 1010 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 34 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Commission shall support and promote the development and implementation of standards set by relevant European and international standardisation bodies, subject to transparent, multi-stakeholder and inclusive processes in line with Regulation (EU) 1025/2012, for the protection and promotion of the rights of the child, observance of which, once adopted will be mandatory for very large online platforms, at least for the following: (a) Age assurance and age verification; (b) Child impact assessments; (c) Child-centred and age-appropriate design; (d) Child-centred and age-appropriate terms and conditions.
Amendment 1023 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of hosting services shall put mechanisms in place to allow any individual or non-governmental entity to notify them of the presence on their service of specific items of information that the individual or entity considers to be illegal content. Those mechanisms shall be easy to access, user- friendly, and allow for the submission of notices exclusively by electronic means and may include: (a) a clearly identifiable banner or single reporting button, allowing the users of those services to notify quickly and easily the providers of hosting services; (b) providing information to the users on what is considered illegal content under Union and national law; (c) providing information to the users on available national public tools to signal illegal content to the competent authorities in Member States were the service is directed.
Amendment 1042 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 a (new)
Article 36 a (new)
Amendment 1052 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) a statement confirming the good faith belief of the individual or entity submitting the notice that the information and allegations contained therein are accurate and complete to the best available knowledge.
Amendment 1057 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. NAdequately substantiated notices that include the elements referred to in paragraph 2 shall be considered to give rise to actual knowledge or awareness for the purposes of Arn obligation to investigate the notice in an effective and timely manner. If a provider is unable to determine if a noticle 5 in respect of the specific item of information concernedis valid, a provider may ask the Digital Service Coordinator or other national administrative bodies for an opinion before removing or disabling the content.
Amendment 1075 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6
Article 14 – paragraph 6
6. Providers of hosting services shall process any notices that they receive under the mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1, and take their decisions in respect of the information to which the notices relate, in a timely, diligent, non-discriminatory and objective manner. Where they use automated means for that processing or decision-making, they shall include information on such use in the notification referred to in paragraph 4.
Amendment 1088 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 4
Article 45 – paragraph 4
4. The Digital Services Coordinator of establishment shall, without undue delay and in any event not later than two months following receipt of the request or recommendation, communicate to the Digital Services Coordinator that sent the request, or the Board, its assessment of the suspected infringement, or that of any other competent authority pursuant to national law where relevant, and an explanation of anythe result of the investigatory or enforcement measures taken or envisaged in relation thereto to ensure compliance with this Regulation. The Digital Services Coordinator shall at least conduct a preliminary assessment of the issue raised.
Amendment 1093 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. Where a provider of hosting services decides to remove or, disable access to or otherwise restrict the visibility of specific items of information provided by the recipients of the service or to suspend or terminate monetary payments related to those items, irrespective of the means used for detecting, identifying or, removing or disabling access to or reducing the visibility of that information and of the reason for its decision, it shall inform the recipient on a durable medium, at the latest at the time of the removal or disabling of access or the restriction of visibility or the suspension or termination of monetization, of the decision and provide a clear and specific statement of reasons for that decision.
Amendment 1104 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) whether the decision entails either the removal of, or the disabling of access to, the restriction of the visibility of, or the demonetisation of, the information and, where relevant, the territorial scope of the disabling of access; or the restriction;
Amendment 1119 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. Providers of hosting services shall publish at least annually the decisions and the statements of reasons, referred to in paragraph 1 in a publicly accessible database managed by the Commission. That information shall not contain personal data.
Amendment 1121 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Paragraph1 shall not apply where: - a provider of hosting service does not have the information necessary to inform the recipient by a durable medium; - a provider of hosting service has already informed the recipient of the removal or disabling of the same or similar items of information from the same recipient; - content is manifestly illegal; - content is deceptive, high-volume commercial content; or - requested by a judicial or law enforcement authority to not inform the recipient due to an ongoing criminal investigations until the criminal investigations is closed.
Amendment 1131 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15a Alternative mechanisms based on an adequacy decision 1. Where a platform has an existing alternative notice and action mechanisms as set down by the law of a third country or in accordance with other Union law, upon a request by a provider, the Commission may issue a decision that declare these mechanisms as ensuring an adequate level of protection and fulfilling the requirements in Article 14 and Article 15. Before issues any such decision, the Commission shall consult the Board and the general public at least one month before the decision is adopted.
Amendment 1141 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
This Section shall not apply to online platforms that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC and which are not very large online platforms in accordance with Article 25.
Amendment 1154 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) decisions to remove or, disable access to or restrict the visibility of the information;
Amendment 1169 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) decisions to restrict the ability to monetize content provided by the recipients.
Amendment 1195 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5
Article 17 – paragraph 5
5. Online platforms shall ensure that the decisions, that would negatively affect them and that are referred to in paragraph 4, are not solely taken on the basis of automated means.
Amendment 1201 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Recipients of the service addressed by the decisions referred to in Article 17(1), shall be entitled to select any out-of-court dispute settlement body that has been certified in accordance with paragraph 2 and established in the Member State of the provider or the Member State of the recipient, in order to resolve disputes relating to those decisions, including complaints that could not be resolved by means of the internal complaint-handling system referred to in that Article. Online platforms shall engage, in good faith, with the body selected with a view to resolving the dispute and shall be bound by the decision taken by the body.
Amendment 1207 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Where a recipient seeks a resolved to multiple complaints, either party may request that the out-of-court dispute settlement body treats and resolves these complaints in a single dispute decision.
Amendment 1225 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) the dispute settlement is easily accessible, including for persons with disabilities, through electronic communication technology;
Amendment 1234 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d
(d) it is capable of settling dispute in a swift, efficient, accessible for persons with disabilities and cost-effective manner and in at least one official language of the Union;
Amendment 1248 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
If the body decides the dispute in favour of the recipient of the service, the online platform shall reimburse the recipient for any fees and other reasonable expenses that the recipient has paid or is to pay in relation to the dispute settlement. If the body decides the dispute in favour of the online platform, and the body does not find the recipient acted in bad faith in the dispute, the recipient shall not be required to reimburse any fees or other expenses that the online platform paid or is to pay in relation to the dispute settlement.
Amendment 1255 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. This Article shall only take effect on providers other than very large online platforms from [24 months after the date of entry into force of this Regulation].
Amendment 1274 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) it represents collective interests and is independent from any online platform, law enforcement, or other government or relevant commercial entity;
Amendment 1285 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) it has a transparent funding structure, including publishing the sources and amounts of all revenue annually
Amendment 1286 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
(cb) it is not already a trusted flagger in another Member State.
Amendment 1287 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c c (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c c (new)
(cc) it publishes, at least once a year, clear, easily comprehensible and detailed reports on any notices submitted in accordance with Article 14 during the relevant period. The report shall list notices categorised by the identity of the hosting service provider, the type of alleged illegal or terms and conditions violating content concerned, and what action was taken by the provider. In addition, the report shall identify relationships between the trusted flagger and any online platform, law enforcement, or other government or relevant commercial entity, and explain the means by which the trusted flagger maintains its independence.
Amendment 1288 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
By way of derogation from point (b), a public entity may be awarded with the status of trusted flagger for non- intellectual property right related actions.
Amendment 1289 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 1303 #
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 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. During this period of investigation by the Digital Services Coordinator, the trusted flagger shall be treated as a non-trusted flagger when using the mechanisms referred to in Article 14, where not suspended under Article 20.
Amendment 1309 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 6
Article 19 – paragraph 6
6. The Digital Services Coordinator that awarded the status of trusted flagger to an entity shall revoke that status if it determines, following an investigation either on its own initiative or on the basis information received byfrom third parties, including the information provided by an online platform pursuant to paragraph 5, that the entity no longer meets the conditions set out in paragraph 2. Before revoking that status, the Digital Services Coordinator shall afford the entity an opportunity to react to the findings of its investigation and its intention to revoke the entity’s status as trusted flagger
Amendment 1317 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 a (new)
Article 19 a (new)
Amendment 1322 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Online platforms shall suspend, for a reasonable period of time and where proportionate after having issued a prior warning, the provision of their services to recipients of the service that frequently provide manifestly illegal content.
Amendment 1338 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d
(d) the intention of the recipient, individual, entity or complainant., including whether submissions were made in bad faith;
Amendment 1340 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
(da) whether a notice was submitted by an individual user or by an entity or persons with specific expertise related to the content in question;
Amendment 1344 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d b (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 3 – point d b (new)
(db) the manner of how notices have been submitted, including by automated means.
Amendment 1345 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Suspensions referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 may be declared permanent where (a) compelling reasons of law or public policy, including ongoing criminal investigations, justify avoiding or postponing notice to the recipient; (b) the items removed were components of high-volume campaigns to deceive users or manipulate platform content moderation efforts; or (c) the items removed were related to content covered by [Directive 2011/93/EU updated reference] or [Directive (EU) 2017/541 or Regulation (EU) 2021/784 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Amendment 1348 #
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, their policy in respect of the misuse referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 in their terms and conditions, including as regardexamples as the facts and circumstances that they take into account when assessing whether certain behaviour constitutes misuse and the duration of the suspension.
Amendment 1355 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. Where an online platform becomes aware of anyexact information giving rise to a suspicion that a serious criminal offence involving an imminent threat to the life or safety of persons has taken place, is taking place or is likelyplanned to take place, it shall promptly inform the law enforcement or judicial authorities of the Member State or Member States concerned of its suspicion and provide al, upon their request, any additional relevant information available.
Amendment 1363 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Unless instructed otherwise by the informed authority, the provider shall remove or disable the content. It shall store all content and related data for at least six months.
Amendment 1364 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Information obtained by a law enforcement or judicial authority of a Member State in accordance with paragraph 1 shall not be used for any purpose other than those directly related to the individual serious criminal offence notified.
Amendment 1365 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. The Commission shall adopt an implementing act setting down a template for notifications under paragraph 1.
Amendment 1366 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 d (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Where a notification of suspicions of criminal offences includes information which may be seen as potential electronic information in criminal proceedings, Regulation XXX [E-evidence] shall apply.
Amendment 1368 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – title
Article 22 – title
Traceability of traders on online Marketplaces
Amendment 1375 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Where an online platform allows consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders, itProviders of online marketplaces shall ensure that traders can only use itstheir services to promote messages on or to offer products or services to consumers located in the Union if, prior to the use of itstheir services for those purposes, the online platformmarketplace has obtained the following information from traders, where applicable:
Amendment 1385 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the bankpayment account details of the trader, where the trader is a natural person;
Amendment 1389 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the name, address, telephone number and electronic mail address of the economic operator, within the meaning of established in the Union and carrying out the tasks in accordance with Article 3(13) and Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and the Council51 or [Article XX of the General Product Safety Regulation] or any relevant act of Union law; __________________ 51Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on market surveillance and compliance of products and amending Directive 2004/42/EC and Regulations (EC) No 765/2008 and (EU) No 305/2011 (OJ L 169, 25.6.2019, p. 1).
Amendment 1400 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Providers of online marketplaces shall require traders to provide the information referred to in points (a) and (e) immediately upon initial registration for its services. Traders shall be required to provide any supplementary material relating to the information requirements set out in Article 22(1) within a reasonable period, no later than before offering of products and services to consumer.
Amendment 1406 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 2
2. The online platformproviders of online marketplaces shall, upon receiving that information, make reasonablebest efforts to assess whether the information referred to in points (a), (d) and (e) of paragraph 1 is reliablaccurate through the use of any freely accessible official online database or online interface made available by an authorised administrator or a Member States or the Union or through direct requests to the trader to provide supporting documents from reliable sources.
Amendment 1416 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Where the online platform obtainsproviders of online marketplaces obtains sufficient indications that any item of information referred to in paragraph 1 obtained from the trader concerned is inaccurate or incomplete, that platformmarketplace shall request the trader to correct the information in so far as necessary to ensure that all information is accurate and complete, without delay or within the time period set by Union and national law.
Amendment 1419 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Where the trader fails to correct or complete that information, the online platformmarketplace shall suspend the provision of its service to the trader in relations to the offering of products or services to consumers located in the Union until the request is fully complied with.
Amendment 1425 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The providers of online marketplaces shall ensure that traders are given the ability to discuss any information viewed as inaccurate or incomplete directly with a trader before any suspension of services. This may take the form of the internal complaint- handling system under Article 17.
Amendment 1427 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. If an online marketplace rejects an application for services or suspends services to a trader, the trader shall have recourse to the systems under Article 17 and Article 43 of this Regulation.
Amendment 1429 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 c (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Traders shall be solely liable for the accuracy of the information provided and shall inform without delay the online marketplace of any changes to the information provided.
Amendment 1432 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 4
Article 22 – paragraph 4
4. The online platformmarketplace shall store the information obtained pursuant to paragraph 1 and 2 in a secure manner for the duration of their contractual relationship with the trader concerned. They shall subsequently delete the information no later than six months after the final conclusion of a distance contract.
Amendment 1448 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 7
Article 22 – paragraph 7
Amendment 1462 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 a (new)
Article 22 a (new)
Amendment 1466 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 b (new)
Article 22 b (new)
Article 22b Right to information 1. Where a provider of an online marketplace becomes aware, irrespective of the means used to, of the illegal nature of a product or service offered through its services, it shall inform, wherever possible, those recipients of the service that had acquired such product or contracted such service during the last six months about the illegality, the identity of the trader and any means of redress. 2. Where the provider of the online marketplace does not have the contact details of the recipients of the service referred to in paragraph 1, the provider shall make publicly available and easily accessible on their online interface the information concerning the illegal products or services removed, the identity of the trader and any means of redress.
Amendment 1480 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 23 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Where published to the general public, the annual transparency reports referred to in paragraph 1 shall not include information that may prejudice ongoing activities for the prevention, detection, or removal of illegal content or content counter to a hosting provider’s terms and conditions.
Amendment 1506 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Without prejudice to other Union acts, online platforms that display user- generated content that may include sponsored information or other information equivalent to advertising, which is normally provided against remuneration, shall including in their terms and conditions an obligation for the recipients of their service to inform other recipients of when they have received remuneration or any other goods in kind for their content. A failure to inform the platform or other recipients shall constitute a violation of the provider’s terms and conditions.
Amendment 1537 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Such a methodology shall ensure the following in relations to active recipients: (1) automated interactions, accounts or data scans by a non-human (“bots”) are not included; (2) that the mere viewing of a service without purchase, logging in or otherwise active identification of a recipient shall not be seen as an active recipient; (3) that the number shall be based on each service individually; (4) that recipients connected on multiple devices are counted only once; (5) that indirect use of service, via a third party or linking, shall not be counted; (6) where an online platform is hosted by another provider of intermediary services, that the active recipients are assigned solely to the online platform closest to the recipient; (7) the average number is maintained for a period of at least six months.
Amendment 1556 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the dissemination of illegal content and content that is in breach of their terms and conditions through their services;,
Amendment 1565 #
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 any of the fundamental rights listed in the Charter, in particular on the fundamental rights to respect for private and family life, freedom of expression and information, the prohibition of discrimination and the rights of the child, as enshrined in Articles 7, 11, 21 and 24 of the Charter respectively;
Amendment 1576 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) intentional manipulation of their service and amplification of content that is in breach of their terms and conditions, 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 security.
Amendment 1590 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2
Article 26 – paragraph 2
2. When conducting risk assessments, very large online platforms shall take into account, in particular, how and whether 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 illegal content and of information that is incompatible with their terms and conditions.
Amendment 1602 #
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 measureseasures to mitigate the probability and severity of any, tailored to address the specific systemic risks identified pursuant to Article 26. Such measures may include, where applicable:
Amendment 1612 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) adapting content moderation or recommender systems, their decision- making processes, design, the features or functioning of their services, or their terms and conditions;
Amendment 1613 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) targeted measures aimed at limiting the display of and targeting of advertisements in association with the service they provide or the alternative placement and display of public service advertisements or other related factual information;
Amendment 1625 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Very large online platforms shall, where appropriate, conduct their risk assessments referred in Article 26 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. Where no such involvement is taken, this shall be made clear in the transparency report referred to in Article 33.
Amendment 1641 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The reports of the Board shall include information both broken down per Member State in which the systemic risks occur and in the Union as a whole. The reports shall be published in all the official languages of the Member States of the Union.
Amendment 1649 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The requirement to put in place mitigation measures shall not require an obligation to impose general monitoring or active fact-finding obligations.
Amendment 1653 #
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 independent audits to assess compliance with the following:
Amendment 1664 #
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 organisations which have been selected by the Commission and:
Amendment 1677 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point f a (new)
Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point f a (new)
(fa) a description of specific elements that could not be audited, and an explanation of why these could not be audited;
Amendment 1679 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point f b (new)
Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point f b (new)
(fb) where the audit opinion could not reach a conclusion for specific elements within the scope of the audit, a statement of reasons for the failure to reach such conclusion.
Amendment 1685 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 28 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Where an audit report contains information that could be misused in order to harm the security and privacy of receptions of the platform, the very large online platform may request from the Commission that such information is removed or summarised in any public version of the audit report. The Commission shall consider any such requests and may grant such a request if deemed merited.
Amendment 1691 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1
Article 29 – paragraph 1
1. Very large online platforms that use recommender systems shall set out in their terms and conditions and on a designated web page that can be directly reached and easily found from the very large online platforms’ online interface, in a clear, accessible and easily comprehensible manner for the general public, the main parameters used in their recommender systems, the optimisation goals of their recommender systems as well as any options for the recipients of the service to modify or influence those main parameters that they may have made available, including at least one option which is not based on profiling, within the meaning of Article 4 (4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 1710 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – title
Article 30 – title
Additional transparency for online advertising transparencyand "deep fakes" audiovisual media
Amendment 1711 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – title
Article 30 – title
Additional online advertising transparency and protection
Amendment 1725 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) the natural or legal person or group who paid for the advertisement;
Amendment 1738 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Very large online platforms shall be prohibited from profiling children under the age of 16 for commercial practices, including personalized advertising, in compliance with industry- standards laid down in Article 34 and Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 1740 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Board shall, after consulting with trusted flaggers and vetted researchers, publish guidelines on the structure and organisation of repositories created pursuant to paragraph 1.
Amendment 1743 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Where a very large online platform becomes aware that a piece of content is a deep fake, the provider shall label the content in a way that informs that the content is inauthentic and that is clearly visible for the recipient of the services.
Amendment 1745 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. The very large online platform shall design and organise its online interface in such a way that recipients of the service can easily and efficiently exercise their rights under applicable Union law in relation to the processing of their data for each specific advertisement displayed to the data subject on the platform, in particular: (a) to withdraw consent or to object to processing; (b) to obtain access to the data concerning the data subject; (c) to obtain rectification of inaccurate data concerning the data subject; (d) to obtain erasure of data without undue delay. Where a recipient exercises any of these rights, the online platform must inform any parties to whom the personal data concerned in points (a) to (d) have been enclosed.
Amendment 1748 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 d (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Where a recipient exercises any of the rights referred to points (a), (c) or(d) in paragraph 2c, the online platform must without undue delay cease displaying advertisements using the personal data concerned or using parameters which were set using this data.
Amendment 1749 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 e (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 2 e (new)
2e. Very large online platforms that display advertising on their online interfaces shall ensure that advertisers: (a) can request and obtain information on where their advertisements have been placed; (b) can request and obtain information on which broker treated their data;
Amendment 1761 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 4
Article 31 – paragraph 4
4. In order to be vetted, researchers shall: (1) be affiliated with academic institutions, be independent from commercial interests, within the Union and the institutions certifies that the researcher is a researcher in good standing (2) be independent from commercial interests, including any very large online platforms (3) be independent from any government, administrative or other state bodies, outside the academic institution of affiliation if public, (4) have undergone an independent background and security investigation, subject to the national legislation of the Member State of residence. (5) be a resident of the Union; (6) have proven records of expertise in the fields related to the risks investigated or related research methodologies, and (7) shall commit and be in a capacity to preserve the specific data security and confidentiality requirements corresponding to each request.
Amendment 1768 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Where a very large online platform or a Digital Services Coordinator has grounds to believe that a researcher is acting outside the purpose of paragraph 2 or no longer respects the conditions of paragraph 4, access to data shall be withdrawn and the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment shall decide if and when access shall be restored and under what conditions.
Amendment 1787 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Digital Service Coordinators and the Commission shall, once a year, report the following information: (a) the number of requests made to them as referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2; (b) the number of such requests that have been declined or withdrawn by the Digital Service Coordinator or the Commission and the reasons for which they have been declined or withdrawn, including following a request to the Digital Service Coordinator or the Commission from a very large online platform to amend a request as referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2.
Amendment 1799 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Such reports shall include content moderation information separated and presented for each Member State in which the services are offered and for the Union as a whole. The reports shall be published in at least one of the official languages of the Member States of the Union in which services are offered.
Amendment 1827 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(fa) accessibility of elements and functions of online platforms and digital services for persons with disabilities aiming at consistency and coherence with existing harmonised accessibility requirements when these elements and functions are not already covered by existing harmonised European standards
Amendment 1835 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 34 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Commission shall support and promote the development and implementation of industry standards set by relevant European and international standardisation bodies for the protection and promotion of the rights of the child, observance of which, once adopted will be mandatory for very large online platforms, at least for the following: (a) age assurance and age verification; (b) child impact assessments; (c) child-centred and age-appropriate design; (d) child-centred and age-appropriate terms and conditions.
Amendment 1840 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 34 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 1856 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. Where significant systemic risk within the meaning of Article 26(1) emerge and concern several very large online platforms, the Commission mayshall 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 1874 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 5
Article 35 – paragraph 5
5. The Board shall 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. In case of systematic and repetitive failure to comply with the Codes of Conduct, the Board shall as a measure of last resort take a decision to temporary suspend or definitely exclude platforms that do not meet their commitments as a signatory to the Codes of Conduct.
Amendment 1882 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1
Article 36 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall encourage and facilitate the drawing up of 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 infor all actors in the online advertising value chain, beyond the requirements of Articles 24 and 30.
Amendment 1889 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 3
Article 36 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall encourage the development of the codes of conduct within one year following the date of application of this Regulation and their application no later than six months after that date. The Commission shall evaluate the application of those codes three years after the application of this Regulation.
Amendment 1892 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 36 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The Commission shall encourage all the actors in the online advertising eco-system to endorse and comply with the commitments stated in the codes of conduct.
Amendment 1893 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 a (new)
Article 36 a (new)
Article 36a Codes of conduct for the protection of minors 1. The Commission shall encourage and facilitate the drawing up of codes of conduct at Union level between online platforms and other relevant services providers and organisations representing minors, parents and civil society organisations or relevant authorities to further contribute to the protection of minors on online. 2. The Commission shall aim to ensure that the codes of conduct pursue an effective protection of minors online, which respects their right as enshrined in Article 24 of the Charter and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and detailed in the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child General comment No. 25 as regards the digital environment. The Commission shall aim to ensure that the codes of conduct address at least: (a) age verification and age assurance models, taking into account the industry standards referred to in article 34. (b) child-centred and age-appropriate design, taking into account the industry standards referred to in Article 34. 3. The Commission shall encourage the development of the codes of conduct within one year following the date of application of the Regulation and their application no later than six months after that date.
Amendment 1935 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 40 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Paragraph 3 shall not apply to providers of intermediary services that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC and which are not very large online platforms. Such enterprises shall be deemed to be under the jurisdiction of the Member State where their point of contact resides or is established. Where no point of contract is established or resides in a Member State, paragraph 3 shall apply.
Amendment 1963 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 a (new)
Article 42 a (new)
Amendment 2030 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1
Article 47 – paragraph 1
1. An independent advisory group of Digital Services Coordinators on the supervision of providers of intermediary services named ‘European Board for Digital Services’ (the ‘Board’) is established and shall have legal personality.
Amendment 2049 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1
Article 48 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall be composed of the Digital Services Coordinators, who shall be represented by high-level officials. Where provided for by national law, other competent authorities entrusted with specific operational responsibilities for the application and enforcement of this Regulation alongside the Digital Services Coordinator shallmay participate in the Board. Other national authorities may be invited to the meetings, where the issues discussed are of relevance for them. Member State has more than one representative present, solely the final word of the Digital Services Coordinator shall be taken as the position of the Member State in question.
Amendment 2054 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 48 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Where a Member State has more than one representative present, solely the Digital Services Coordinator shall be able to vote.
Amendment 2067 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 48 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. The Board shall, where appropriate, consult interested parties and give them the opportunity to comment within a reasonable period. The Board shall make the results of the consultation procedure publicly available.
Amendment 2070 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 6
Article 48 – paragraph 6
6. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a two-thirds majority of its members, following the consent of the Commission.
Amendment 2092 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 a (new)
Article 49 a (new)
Article 49a Reports 1. The Board shall draw up an annual report regarding its actions. The report shall be made public and be transmitted to the European Parliament, to the Council and to the Commission in all official languages of the Member States. 2. The annual report shall include, among other information, a review of the practical application of the opinions, guidelines, recommendations advice and any other measures taken under Article 49(1).
Amendment 2140 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 a (new)
Article 51 a (new)
Article 51a Requirements for the Commission 1. The Commission shall perform its tasks under this Regulation in an impartial, transparent and timely manner. The Commission shall ensure that its units given responsibility for this regulation have the adequate technical, financial and human resources to carry out their tasks. 2. When carrying out their tasks and exercising their powers in accordance with this Regulation, the Commission shall act with complete independence. They shall remain free from any external influence, whether direct or indirect, and shall neither seek nor take instructions from any other public authority or any private party.
Amendment 2145 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 2
Article 52 – paragraph 2
2. When sending a simple request for information to the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1), the Commission shall state the legal basis and the purpose of the request, specify what information is required and set the time period within which the information is to be provided, and the penalties provided for in Article 59 for supplying incorrect or misleading information. The purpose shall include reasoning on why and how the information is necessary, proportionality to the purpose and cannot be received by other means.
Amendment 2150 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 4
Article 52 – paragraph 4
4. The owners of the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1) or their representatives and, in the case of legal persons, companies or firms, or where they have no legal personality, the persons authorised to represent them by law or by their constitution shall supply the information requested on behalf of the very large online platform concerned or other person referred to in Article 52(1). Lawyers duly authorised to act may supply the information on behalf of their clients. The latter shall remain fully responsible if the information supplied is incomplete, incorrect or misleading.
Amendment 2223 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 4
Article 59 – paragraph 4
4. In fixing the amount of the fine, the Commission shall have regard to the nature, gravity, duration and recurrence of the infringement, any fines issued under Article 42 and need to avoid double sanctioning the same infringement and, for fines imposed pursuant to paragraph 2, the delay caused to the proceedings.
Amendment 2282 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 69 – paragraph 2
Article 69 – paragraph 2
2. The delegation of power referred to in Articles 23, 25, 31 and 314 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of expected adoption of the Regulation].
Amendment 2284 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 69 – paragraph 3
Article 69 – paragraph 3
3. The delegation of power referred to in Articles 23, 25, 31 and 314 may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision of revocation shall put an end to the delegation of power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following that of its publication 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.
Amendment 2292 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 73 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 73 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. By three years from the date of application of this Regulation at the latest, the Commission shall carry out an assessment of any impact of the costs to European service providers of any similar requirements, including those of Article 11, introduced by third-party states and any new barriers to non-EU market access after the adoption of this Regulation. The Commission shall also access the impact on the ability of European businesses and consumers to access and buy products and services from outside the Union.
Amendment 2293 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 74 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 74 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Chapter III, section 4 shall apply from [date - 3 months after its entry into force].
Amendment 2294 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 74 – paragraph 2
Article 74 – paragraph 2
2. ItThis Regulation, with the exception of Chapter III section 4, shall apply from [date - threwelve months after its entry into force].
Amendment 25 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) Building on lessons learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic, this Regulation should create a more robust mandate for coordination at Union level. The declaration by the WHO of a public health emergency, formally recognised at Union level, would bring about increased coordination and exceptionally allow for joint procurement procedures for the development, stockpiling, distribution and donation of medical countermeasures, to the most recommendable needs and where their purchase and supply cannot be ensured as efficiently by other means.
Amendment 26 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 b (new)
Recital 8 b (new)
(8b) The primary purpose of joint procurement should be to improve the preparedness and response to serious cross-border threats to health, and particularly to improve the security and capacity of supply of medical countermeasures in the participating countries throughout their existence, ensure equitable access to patients and provide increased visibility and predictability for actors involved.
Amendment 30 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) As serious cross-border threats to health are not limited to Union borders, joint procurement of medical countermeasures should be extended to include European Free Trade Association States and Union candidate countries, in accordance with the applicable Union legislation. The Joint Procurement Agreement, determining the practical arrangements governing the joint procurement procedure established under Article 5 of Decision No 1082/2013/EU, should also be adapted to include an exclusivity clause regarding negotiation and procurement for participating countries in a joint procurement procedure, to allow for better coordination within the EU and for security and capacity of supply of the medical countermeasure in question. The Commission should ensure coordination and information exchange between the entities organizing and participating in any action under different mechanisms established under this Regulation and other relevant Union structures related to procurement and, stockpiling and distribution of medical countermeasures, such as the strategic rescEU reserve under Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council16 . __________________ 16Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on a Union Civil Protection Mechanism (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 924).
Amendment 34 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) The Joint procurement should be carried in a transparent, timely and effective way to prevent market disruption and to ensure actors involved fulfil their contractual responsibilities. In this respect, it is crucial to define clear and transparent steps since the beginning of the procedure in terms of process, scope, tender specifications, timelines and formalities. A preliminary consultation phase involving participating actors should be guaranteed, as well as a clear and mutual communication throughout the whole procedure.
Amendment 45 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 c (new)
Recital 9 c (new)
(9c) During the existence of a cross- border health threat situation, manufacturing is often needed rapidly and with short notice. It is therefore crucial that the joint procurement lead times are aligned and coherent with manufacturers’ lead times to ensure clarity and expectations from both organizing and participating entities.
Amendment 47 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 d (new)
Recital 9 d (new)
(9d) In order for this regulation to fulfil its main objectives, mainly to ensure a rapid response in the case of serious cross-border health threats, a priority conditionality binding the undertaking of the joint procurement procedures should be provided for, in order to ensure that the delivery and scheduled commitments to the participating countries are respected under all circumstances.
Amendment 50 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 e (new)
Recital 9 e (new)
(9e) In addition, suitable regulatory flexibilities should be considered and allowed by Member States’ authorities in the framework of joint procurement procedures and including, where relevant, for marketing authorisations, to ensure faster and timely supply in the European Single Market.
Amendment 53 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 g (new)
Recital 9 g (new)
(9g) If used, in order for joint procurement to be sustainable, the Commission should ensure accessible, transparent, proportionate and non- discriminatory technical specifications, selection and award criteria by placing a significant and priority value and consideration on the highest safety and quality standards of the medical countermeasures, in accordance with the applicable legislation, and beyond the price and costs of those. Such criteria should also include the ability of the bidder to ensure security and capacity of supply in a cross-border health threat situation, as well as provide for adequate flexibility to allow for a wider selection of successful suppliers and the effective participation of small and medium-sized enterprises in the awarding process.
Amendment 110 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission and any Member States which so desire may engage in a joint procurement procedure conducted pursuant to Article 165(2) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council29 with a view to the advance purchase of medical countermeasures for the purpose of preparedness and response to serious cross-border threats to health only. __________________ 29Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ L 193, 30.7.2018, p. 1).
Amendment 113 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point -a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point -a (new)
(-a) the joint procurement shall be time-limited to the existence of a serious cross-border threat to health and be used for the purchase and supply of each medical countermeasure to the most recommendable needs, as long as it cannot be ensured as efficiently by other means;
Amendment 114 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point -a a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point -a a (new)
(-aa) the commitments and contractual obligations defined by the corresponding purchase agreement shall be respected by all parties involved;
Amendment 115 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point -a b (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point -a b (new)
(-ab) a priority conditionality binding the undertaking of the joint procurement procedures should be provided for, in order to ensure that the delivery and scheduled commitments to the participating countries are respected;
Amendment 124 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) the joint procurement shall be conducted in such a way so as to improve the security and capacity of supply of medical countermeasures against serious cross-border threats to health in the participating countries, ensure equitable access to the largest extent possible, and strengthen the purchasing power of participating countries;
Amendment 129 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) the joint procurement shall not affect the internal market, shall not constitute discrimination or a restriction of trade and shall not cause distortion of competition or concentration of demand; the joint procurement shall not risk impacting supply flows negatively by increasing the risk of shortages in the EU;
Amendment 131 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
(da) the joint procurement shall be carried in a transparent, timely and effective way defining clear steps since the start of the procedure in terms of process, scope, tender specifications, timelines and formalities;
Amendment 133 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d b (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d b (new)
(db) the joint procurement lead times shall be aligned with manufacturers lead times;
Amendment 134 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d c (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d c (new)
(dc) a preliminary consultation phase involving participating actors shall be guaranteed, as well as a clear mutual communication throughout the whole procedure;
Amendment 135 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d d (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d d (new)
(dd) Member States’ authorities shall apply regulatory flexibilities, where relevant and with due regard to EMA’s guidance, to ensure the timely supply of medical countermeasures through joint procurement procedures during the existence of a cross-border health threat;
Amendment 139 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Joint public procurement procedures shall include accessible, transparent, qualitative and non- discriminatory technical specifications and selection criteria, which shall be considered in the awarding process of the joint procurement bids and comply with the following conditions and order of priority: 1. They shall rely on the verification and compliance of the medical countermeasure forming the subject of the joint procurement procedure in question, with the highest safety and quality standards, as required by the relevant legislation; 2. They shall evaluate the ability of the bidder to ensure the security and capacity of supply of the medical countermeasure in question in a cross- border health threat situation; 3. They shall provide for sufficient and adequate flexibility of technical and economic solvency requirements, and lots shall accordingly be adjusted to those in the corresponding tender documents, thereby allowing the involvement and participation of small and medium-sized enterprises in joint procurement procedures and a wider selection of successful suppliers in the awarding process. 4. They shall evaluate lastly the price and costs of the medical countermeasure in question.
Amendment 140 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Amendment 148 #
2020/0322(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3 c (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. The Commission and Member states shall provide up-to-date, accessible and clear information to consumers on their rights and duties regarding jointly procured medical countermeasures, including details on liability for damages, access to legal protection and access to consumer representation.
Amendment 389 #
2020/0310(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. With a view to improving working and living conditions in the Union, this Directive establishes a framework for the promotion of:
Amendment 409 #
2020/0310(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) access of workers to minimum wage protection, in the form of wages set out byby promoting access to collective agreementsbargaining or in the form of a statutory minimum wage in Member States where it exists.
Amendment 421 #
2020/0310(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 3
Article 1 – paragraph 3
3. Nothing in this Directive shall be construed as imposing an obligation on the Member States where wage setting is ensured exclusivemainly via collective agreements to introduce a statutory minimum wage nor to make the collective agreements universally applicable or affect the contractual freedom of the social partners to negotiate, monitor and set wages through collective agreements. This Directive does not oblige Member States to grant access to minimum wage protection to all workers, nor shall it create any obligation on the Member States as regards the level or conditions for the setting of wages.
Amendment 445 #
2020/0310(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
For the purposes of this Directive, the following definitions apply while respecting Member States national law and legal labour market practice:
Amendment 455 #
2020/0310(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
(3) ‘collective bargaining’ means all negotiations which take place in accordance to Member States national law and legal labour market practice: between an employer, a group of employers or one or more employers’ organisations, on the one hand, and one or more workers’ organisations, on the other, for determining working conditions and terms of employment; and/or regulating relations between employers and workers; and/or regulating relations between employers or their organisations and a worker organisation or worker organisations;
Amendment 573 #
2020/0310(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The national criteria referred to in paragraph 1 shall include at least the following elementwhose relevance and relative weight shall be decided by Member States in accordance with their prevailing national socio-economic conditions:
Amendment 863 #
2020/0310(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that, without prejudice to specific forms of redress and dispute resolution provided for, where applicable, in collective agreements, workers, including those whose employment relationship has ended, have access to effective and impartial dispute resolution and a right to redress, including adequate compensation, in the case of infringements of their rightsexisting national law or collective agreements provide for relating to statutory minimum wages or minimum wage protection provided by collective agreements and such rights have been infringed.
Amendment 880 #
2020/0310(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall take the measures necessary to protect workers, including those who are workers’ representatives, from any adverse treatment by the employer and from any adverse consequences resulting from a complaint lodged with the employer or resulting from any proceedings initiated with the aim of enforcing compliance with the rights relating to statutory minimum wages or minimum wage protection provided by collective agreements.provided for in existing national law or collective agreements relating to minimum wage protection
Amendment 902 #
2020/0310(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – title
Article 16 – title
Non-regression, derogation and more favourable provisions
Amendment 907 #
2020/0310(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. TMember States where wage setting is ensured mainly via collective agreements shall be derogated from this Directive; while this Directive shall not affect Member States’ prerogative to apply or to introduce laws, regulations or administrative provisions which are more favourable to workers or to encourage or permit the application of collective agreements which are more favourable to workers.
Amendment 4 #
2020/0157M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas almost half of the land area in Honduras is covered by forests, half of which is tropical rainforest; whereas there is still a huge resource of unclassified trees and species; whereas Honduras has lost about 12.5 % of its forest area since 2015 due mainly to climate change, forest fires, deforestation and illegal logging, and suffered a pest infestation in 2016;
Amendment 7 #
2020/0157M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas Honduras passed its Climate Change Law in 2014 and was the first state to publish its first nationally determined contribution (NDC) in the framework of the Paris Agreement the following year, of which one commitment is to restore one million hectares of forests;
Amendment 8 #
2020/0157M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the share of the forest sector in Honduras’ economy has decreased over the years representing around 3,6% of the GNP in the last 16 years owing to stricter requirements on the legality of timber in Honduras’ export markets and to forest destruction; whereas the Voluntary Partnership Agreement (VPA) process, which emphasises legality and good governance, is helping the forest sector to increase its share, provide rural jobs and generate income for Hondurans;
Amendment 11 #
2020/0157M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas Honduras is a lower- middle- income country where poverty, inequaliaccording to the World Bank classification; whereas it is the second poorest in Latin America, and third poorest in the Western Hemisphere; whereas the poverty, corruption, violence and impunity in Honduras remain persistent concerns, as well as the situation for women's rights, in particular the recent backlash concerning sexual and reproductive health rights;
Amendment 16 #
2020/0157M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
E a. whereas despite the fact that the Honduran Government has made positive commitments and initiated legislation to protect human rights defenders, it remains one of the most dangerous countries in the region for human and indigenous rights defenders and environmental activists who continue to be subject to abuses, violence, arbitrary detentions, threats and killings;
Amendment 18 #
2020/0157M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
F a. whereas the mandate of the Mission to Support the Fight against Corruption and Impunity in Honduras (MACCIH) ended in January 2020 and was not renewed;
Amendment 19 #
2020/0157M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
G a. whereas the EU-Central America Association Agreement was concluded in 2012, and the trade part provisionally applied since 1st of August 2013;
Amendment 20 #
2020/0157M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)
Recital G b (new)
G b. whereas VPAs provides for a Joint Implementation Committee, responsible for its implementation and monitoring;
Amendment 25 #
2020/0157M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
J a. whereas the negotiations leading to the conclusion of this VPA have created a cooperative space among different stakeholders to discuss environmental, human rights, social and economic issues;
Amendment 27 #
2020/0157M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Recital K a (new)
K a. whereas a good forest management requires sustainable land tenure, respect of the environmental needs and human rights, transparency, legal security, trust and long-term investments;
Amendment 29 #
2020/0157M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K b (new)
Recital K b (new)
K b. whereas general elections will take place in Honduras before the end of 2021;
Amendment 31 #
2020/0157M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the conclusion of negotiations on the VPA between the EU and Honduras and calls for its swift ratification by both sides so it can enter into force in 2021, thus allowing for the important next steps in terms of implementation, including setting up the licencing;
Amendment 52 #
2020/0157M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Highly appreciates that Honduras has managed to ensure involvement of government institutions, civil society, private sector, indigenous and afro- descendant people of Honduras, academia and communities, who accepted and contributed to the process to drafting the VPA; welcomes the fact that all these sectors agreed to be present around the same negotiating table and the achievement of the feeling of inclusiveness and the possibility to contribute;
Amendment 53 #
2020/0157M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Believes that the fight against corruption needs to be constant, in every part of the world; welcomes that transparency has proven useful in the process to concluding this VPA, and cannot be enough stressed in the forthcoming process of implementation;
Amendment 61 #
2020/0157M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Believes that the successful negotiations of this VPA also proves the importance of the Union’s Delegations to third countries;
Amendment 68 #
2020/0157M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Asks the Commission to annually report on the implementation of the EU- Honduras FLEGT VPA to Parliament, including on the work of the Joint Implementation Committee, calls on the Commission to consider improving the regulation on FLEGT licencing at the next review exercise in order to enable it to respond quickly to cases of significant infringements of VPA commitments;
Amendment 74 #
2020/0157M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Supports the European Commission in finding additional potential partners for future voluntary partnership agreements under FLEGT;
Amendment 3 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Defence Procurement Directive seeks to introduce fair and transparent rules for defence procurement in an effort to make it easier forto make sure that defence companies in the Member States tocan access other Member States’' defence markets;
Amendment 4 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the Defence Package Directives are needed to further develop a common European security and defence culture, based on the European Union's shared values and objectives, with respect to the specific character of the security and defence policies of the Member States;
Amendment 7 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the EPRS study pointed out the limitedinsufficient effect of the Defence Procurement Directive on the Europeanisation of defence value chains;
Amendment 9 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas an important reason for the lack of participation of SMEs is the lack of cross-border access to supply chains; whereas, defence supply chains have a substantial national focus, which adds challenges for SMEs that wish to enter defence supply chains in other European countries; whereas, moreover, OEMs continue and limit themselves to subcontract SME's they have a pre- existing working relationship with, due to financial reasons;
Amendment 16 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes some of the positive trends witnessed in the progressive implementation of the Defence Procurement Directive, namely the increasing number of contract notices and contract-award notices issued by Member States, and the increasing proportion of procurement that has been tendered competitively through Tenders Electronic Daily (TED); stresses, howeverStresses, that a very high volume of procurement expenditure is still incurred outside the directive;
Amendment 28 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes, in this regard, that the Commission should take a more proactive roleits responsibility in monitoring the exclusions used by the Member States in their awarding of contracts outside the scope of the Defence Procurement Directive, and should not be mainly reliant on received complaints filed by the industry;
Amendment 35 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Member States to properly implement the Defence Procurement Directives and those with a large established defence industry to lead by example;
Amendment 43 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Observes, further, that there was a slower and lower than expected uptake of certification, and that there are still barriers to effective application of the directive, with low levels of awareness, particularly among SMEs, of the tools available under the directive, and the system used by the Member States in their export controls, in addition to the lack of harmonisation in the implementation of GTLs, which act as major barriers to the effective application of the directive; underlines the fact that an introduction of the ‘de Minimis’ rule principle, known from the Schmidt-Debré harmonisation agreement, in bilateral and/or multilateral agreements between Member States has the potential to further stimulate participation of SMEs in joint ventures and common export licenses throughout the internal market;
Amendment 50 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to further improve the directive’s implementation in individual Member States by continuing its dialogue withinsisting on national authorities in order to resolve outstanding issues;
Amendment 51 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls for increased development of contacts and exchanges between the national transfer control communities across the EU to address the existing divergences of transfer control practices and the lack of trust among Member States, as well as to assess the appointment of unique national points of contact for intra-EU transfers related issues1a; __________________ 1aResearch Paper on the implementation of Directive 2009/81/EC, concerning procurement in the fields of defence and security, and of Directive 2009/43/EC, concerning the transfer of defence-related products, written by Jean-Pierre Maulny and Dr Edouard Simon, Institut des Relations Internationales et Stratégiques (IRIS); and Dr Alessandro Marrone, Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI)
Amendment 56 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Commission and Member States to improve the quality, transparency and availability of data, such as TED data, in order toand reduce the disparities of publication practices, thereby facilitateing the monitoring on implementation of these two directives;
Amendment 57 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Calls on the Commission to study the feasibility of establishing common standardised administrative forms with the objective of lowering businesses' administrative burden, particularly for SMEs, and build a European approach to transfers of defence-related products;
Amendment 59 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Commission to be boldstrong in enforcing the directives, including, where necessary, by making use of infringement proceduresby making use of their right laid down in Article 258 TFEU to start infringement procedures; asks the Commission to initiate infringement procedures instead of solely acting on complaints filed by the industry;
Amendment 63 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Considers, therefore, that the goal of increasing SME participation has onlynot been partially achieved;
Amendment 64 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Is of the opinion that the subcontracting provisions of the directive had no or a very limited impact on the cross-border access of sub-suppliers and defence SMEs; calls on the Member States to ascertain that their internal procedures are not blocking SMEs’llow for SME cross border participation and to simplify access for companies that fall within the EU definition of SMEs for the participation in tendering processes in the fields of defence and security;
Amendment 69 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Considers that Member-State action could significantly improve cross-border market access for SMEs and sub-suppliers in the defence sectors, and therefore, calls on the Member States to seriously take into consideration and follow when possibleimplement the Commission recommendations as much as possible;
Amendment 70 #
2019/2204(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Calls on the Commission to improve access to finance for SMEs such as European guarantee funds;
Amendment 3 #
2019/2202(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. BHighlights that Ukraine is an important geopolitical, geostrategic and trading partner for the European Union; believes that the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) has contributed to the positive evolution of trade and to economic modernisation, has boosted foreign direct investments and has created new jobs on both sides; welcomes the continuous positive results achieved in bilateral trade and economic relations, with the EU being Ukraine's largest trading partner and with Ukrainian imports growing by 12.3 % and exports by 9.7 %, amounting to EUR 43.3 billion in 2019;
Amendment 13 #
2019/2202(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the approval and disbursement in two parts of the fourth consecutive Macro-Financial Assistance (MFA) programme of EUR 1 billion in support to Ukraine; recalls that the MFA has been an important tool in implementing Ukraine’s ambitious reform agenda and accelerating economic growth, notably through the ‘more for more’ approach and the conditionalities attached to it; encourages Ukraine to continue making progress in regulatory approximation; highlights the importance and timeliness of the additional EUR 1.2 billion MFA to Ukraine in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic; notes that it is a crucial demonstration of the EU's solidarity at a time of unprecedented crisis;
Amendment 28 #
2019/2202(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the results achieved under the DCFTA Facility for SMEs in terms of improving access to finance and opening up trade opportunities; highlights that a proper information campaign could enable SMEs to benefit more from the opportunities offered by the DCFTA; calls on the Commission to monitor the impact of the DCFTA on SMEs; notes that the support and promotion of intra-regional trade among Eastern Partnership countries will also create new economic opportunities, including for SMEs;
Amendment 34 #
2019/2202(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. ANotes that poultry meat and poultry meat products are considered as sensitive items in the EU; acknowledges the solution found for the export of ‘other’ cuts of poultry by amending the trade preferences for poultry meat and poultry meat preparations and thereby closing the loophole in the agreement; calls on Ukraine to abstain from similar practices and to fully respect and implement all provisions of the DCFTA in good faith; calls on Ukraine to immediately make further progress in complying with the EU animal welfare requirements;
Amendment 35 #
2019/2202(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Welcomes Ukraine’s reform efforts; underlines that further strengthening the rule of law, structural reforms as well as the fight against corruption are of key importance for creating a more attractive business and investment climate in Ukraine; notes that the Ukrainian civil society and NGOs play an active role in the oversight of reforms and in monitoring the implementation of the Association Agreement; calls on the Commission to prioritise support to these NGOs and civil society organisations;
Amendment 40 #
2019/2202(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Welcomes the positive steps taken by Ukraine in digital transformation and calls on the Commission and Member States to further support Ukraine’s efforts in this field, including in e-governance and digital economy; acknowledges in this regard the new EUR 25 million EU programme supporting e-governance and the digital economy in Ukraine;
Amendment 17 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. Whereas the EU’s common commercial policy is an exclusive competence of the EU that is carried out together by the European Commission, the Council and the Parliament;
Amendment 18 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
A b. Whereas the Common Commercial Policy comprises a body of trade agreements and legislative measures which aims to ensure that the EU continues to safeguard its existing social and regulatory model, while using trade policy to promote EU values around the world; whereas the EU should step up its efforts to promote fair competition, ensuring a level playing field and addressing contemporary trade issues; whereas fulfilling these objectives requires good orientation of Union trade policy and full and efficient implementation and monitoring thereof in a fairer and more transparent manner;
Amendment 19 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
A c. Whereas the Union is the world’s leading commercial power and the biggest single market in the world, acting as a major driver of economic prosperity; whereas the Union is the world’s leading exporter of goods and services, sustaining more than 36 million jobs in Europe; whereas the last indicators reveal that in 2019 the EU exports on goods rose to €2.132.3 billion, which amounts to an increase of 3,5% from the previous year, being the largest exporter of agri-food products in the world; whereas despite the current global challenges the main trading partners are the US and China;
Amendment 20 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A d (new)
Recital A d (new)
A d. Whereas the EU trade and investment policy also provides investors with market access and investment protection through legal certainty and a stable, predictable and properly regulated environment in which to conduct their economic activities;
Amendment 21 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A e (new)
Recital A e (new)
A e. Whereas since the European Commission adopted in 2015 the Communication entitled ‘Trade for All: Towards a more responsible trade and investment policy’, the EU has concluded and started applying a number of new trade agreements.
Amendment 22 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A f (new)
Recital A f (new)
A f. Whereas EU trade agreements should represent opportunities for growth through market access and the lifting of trade barriers; whereas it is of fundamental importance that negotiations are conducted in a spirit of reciprocity and mutual benefit, in order to tackle unfair trade practices and secure EU rules and standards; whereas the Union should continue safeguarding EU geographical indications, which are of great economic and cultural value, in multilateral and bilateral negotiations;
Amendment 37 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Amendment 69 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that choices in our relationship with the two other trade superpowers, China and the USA, which represent approximately 30 % of our trade exchanges, are key when it comes to driving EU trade policy;
Amendment 82 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. 5. Stresses its support for an open, fair, balanced, sustainable, and valued based and multilateral trading system, considering that it has been under pressure over the last years;
Amendment 85 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls for a substantive reform of the WTO, based on modernising its rule- book in order to make it more effective by providing structural and long-term solutions; encourages WTO members to reach an ambitious and balanced agreement on the long-standUnderlines the primary political and economic importance of the multilateral system and calls the international trading partners to work towards the achievement of a well- functioning dissue of fishery subsidies during the ministerial summit in Nur-Sultan, Kazakhstan and send out a clear signal that the WTOpute settlement system at the WTO, based on modernising its rule- book in order to guarantee its still able to deliver on its negotiating funceffectiveness and provide structural and long-term solutions;
Amendment 101 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Takes note ofIs very concerned with the dramastic change in the US trade strategy over the past three years, which is focused on bilateral trade, the rise of protectionist measures and often legally questionable unilateral trade measures; takes note ofpoints out the limited progress made towards implementing the joint US-EU Statement of 25 July 2018; stresses the importance of relaunching the EU-US talks on the basis of the existing negotiating mandates adopted in April 2019 by the Council;
Amendment 128 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that China remainpresents a market of opportunities because of its size and growth, but that great challenges remain for EU businesses due to the consolidation of the state-lere are many barriers for EU businesses to access and operate in this market, due to the state-led and state- sponsored Chinese economy, where state- owned businesses benefit from exclusive or dominating market access; condemns all types of discriminatory measures facing EU companies in China and calls on the Commission to constantly monitor the persistent acts of discrimination and work with the Chinese authorities in order to put an end to such actdismantle such acts and barriers;
Amendment 183 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. NotWelcomes the progress made towards implementing the African Continental Free Trade Area (ACFTA), which aims to provide a single continental market for goods and services, with free movement of people and investments; welcomes the EU’s support in setting up the new African Union Trade Observatory; calls for continued EU support for ACFTA in line with the Africa-Europe Alliance for Sustainable Investments and Jobs;
Amendment 187 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19 a. Recalls that the European Union and Latin America maintain close cooperation with each other on the basis of their historical, cultural and economic ties, with the LAC region representing the EU's fifth largest trade partner. Believes that the EU's presence in the region is fundamental in terms of both enhancing cooperation based on shared values as well as a vector for pursuing the EU's external action policy, notably in terms of strengthening the multilateral rules-based trade system;
Amendment 188 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19 b. Welcomes the conclusions of the trade negotiations with Mexico and the Mercosur countries, which have both the potential to deepen our strategic partnership with Latin America and to create additional opportunities in our trade relations with those countries; notes that such opportunities would also give EU companies access to an increasingly growing market;
Amendment 190 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 d (new)
Paragraph 19 d (new)
19 d. Considers that the Association Agreement between the EU and Mercosur represents the first "block to block" deal of its nature, with the potential to create a free market area encompassing approximately 800 million citizens, and placing the EU in a unique position given its "first mover advantage" in an otherwise highly-protectionist market;
Amendment 195 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Welcomes the entry into force of the EU-Singapore trade agreement of 21 November 2019; welcomes its consent on the EU-Vietnam agreement and calls for its quick implementation; notes that in 2018 the EU exported to Vietnam around 13.8€ billion worth of goods and points out that the rules-based FTAs and IPAs will ensure predictability and rule-of-law for investors, as well as positively increase exports in both ways and create stability and trust for SMEs; views these agreements as a step towards concluding an FTA with the entire Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) region;
Amendment 201 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 8 a (new)
Subheading 8 a (new)
Stresses that the European Commission and Member States must work on a better communication strategy of EU trade policy benefits and awareness-raising in order to effectively engage with society and stakeholders; recalls that roadmaps provide the opportunity for the European Commission to communicate and explain the reasons behind a particular initiative and its objectives, as well as to engage with them and receive feedback; points out that the European Commission should ensure the full transparency of roadmaps and other consultation activities to maximise their impact and guarantee the involvement of stakeholders;
Amendment 273 #
2019/2197(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32 a. Notes that rules under EU trade agreements should be effectively enforced in order to ensure their effectiveness and address market distortions; stresses the urgency on this matter and welcomes the European Commission’s proposal to amend the Enforcement Regulation, with the aim of reinforcing the Union’s tools on compliance and enforceability of trade rules; points out that sanctions should only be used as a measure of last resort, as they have proven to be inefficient; asks the European Commission to further clarify the role of the proposed Chief Trade Enforcement Officer;
Amendment 2 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3 a (new)
Citation 3 a (new)
- having regard to Regulation (EU) 2019/881 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on ENISA (the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity) and on information and communications technology cybersecurity certification and repealing Regulation (EU) No 526/2013 (Cybersecurity Act),
Amendment 37 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that due to the COVID-19 crisis, showed it is of paramount importance for the protection of EU citizens that in all the crises that might challenge the European Union the safety of all products needed to tackle the emergencyies is the highest, especially for medical and protective equipment, including products from outside the EUsold on line and products from outside the EU; stresses the need for online platforms and online market places to take proactive measures to tackle misleading practices and disinformation regarding emergency products sold online; calls, therefore, on the Commission and Member States to strengthen their coordinated actions within the product safety framework;
Amendment 45 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 on market surveillance but highlights that, with the exception of customs checks, it only applies to products subject to Union harmonisation legislation, while around one third of all products circulating in the EU are non-harmonised products; urges the Commission to update and establish aligned market surveillance rules, including those for for offline and online, for both harmonized and non-harmoniszed products, and make them fit for purpose in the digital age;
Amendment 52 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out the need to adapt product safety rules to the digital worldnew market realities and the imperatives of the green and digital transition; asks the Commission to address the challenges of emerging technologies such as 3D-printingartificial intelligence (AI), the internet of things (IoT) and, robotics and others in its revision of the General Product Safety Directive (GPSD), and to identify and close gaps within existing legislation such as the Machinery Directive and Radio Equipment Directive, while avoiding duplicating legislation;
Amendment 58 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to redefine the term ‘product’ as part of the revision of the GPSD in coordination with potential revision of other legislative frameworks such as the Product Liability Directive (PLD), so that it reflects the complexity of emerging technologies, including stand-alone software and software or updates which entail substantial modification to the product leading to a de facto new product;
Amendment 71 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Agrees AI systems should be safe in order to be trustworthy, as outlined by the High-Level Expert Group in its Ethics Guidelines for trustworthy AI; is convinced that an EU-wide approach to AI, including a common definition, is needuropean operational framework is of key importance in avoiding the fragmentation of the Single Market, resulting from differing national legislations. Thus, the EU needs to avoidct at the European level in terms of a fragmentation of the internal market, which would underminwork for investment, data infrastructure, research and common ethical norms that would enhance the trust of citizens and businesses, create legal uncertainty and weakenimprove the EU’s economic competitiveness;
Amendment 76 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses that the Commission should screen the existing AI standards in place and consult with businesses and other stakeholders to understand which new standards are needed, should carry out a periodic assessment of the European regulatory framework related to AI in order to ensure the product safety, consumer and data protection;
Amendment 86 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. EncourageAsks the Commission to assess the feasibility of developing measures, such as risk-based assessment schemes and conformity assessment mechanisms, where they do not yet exist, tothat ensure the safety and security of products with embedded emerging technologies, and to provide support to SMEs to reduce the burden such measures can creat; underlines that products with embedded emerging technologies such as AI may evolve with the time via updates and self- learning processes and that these measures that apply only at the time of the placing of the product on the market may therefore not be fit for purpose;
Amendment 95 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Highlights the fact that the connectivity of products can lead to new safety and security risks; urges the Commission to thoroughly reassess the potential risks of connected products and adapt the application of conformity assessment modules for those products with a substantially increased risk level;
Amendment 115 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Encourages economic operators to integrate safety mechanisms in emerging technologies, including self-repair mechanisms, to prevent the upload of unsafe software, raise awareness of safety problems of their products, and ensure and improve safety throughout their lifecycle;
Amendment 120 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to enhance connectivity infrastructure, including new communication technologies, like 5G, in order to also improve the safety of connected products;
Amendment 129 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Is convinced that the cybersecurity of connected devices can compromise product safety, and that thiUnderlines that connected devices and interlinked services are subject to cyber-attacks and in order to improve the safety of products, cybersecurity concerns needs to be addressed in the revision of the relevant rules and recommendations;
Amendment 157 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Encourages the Commission to cooperate with the Member States in order to increase the resources and expertise of their market surveillance authorities, to enhance cooperation among them, including at cross-border level and online markets, improve the efficiency and effectiveness of checks, and properly staff custom authorities so as to be able to identify unsafe products, in particular from third countries, and prevent their circulation in the internal market;
Amendment 169 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Urges Member States to set minimum sampling rates; and asks market surveillance authorities to carry out sector- specific mystery shopping, including from online shopping marketplaces, on a regular basis at least once a year, in particular for the product categories most notified on the Safety Gate (Rapex);
Amendment 171 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Asks the Commission to use the revision of the GPSD to clarify market surveillance authorities should contact the relevant economic operator in the following orders: EU-based authorised representative with a mandate from the manufacturer, EU-based manufacturer, importer & distributor or fulfilment service provider;
Amendment 173 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on the Commission to swiftly adopt implementing acts in accordance with Regulation 2019/1020, and in particular Article 25 thereof, laying down benchmarks and techniques for checks on harmonised and non-harmonised products, and to include minimum requirements on scale and frequency of checks for products entering the Union market so as to ensure consistent, effective and uniform enforcement of Union law;
Amendment 190 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Asks the Commission to explore the option, that suppliers, which are established in a third country, have to designate a legal representative, established in the Union, who can beheld accountable for the selling of products, to European consumers, which do not comply with Union rules of safety;
Amendment 208 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Urges the Commission to further harmonise the methodology and criteria for assessing risks in all Member States in order to ensure a level playing field for all economic operators;
Amendment 219 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. EncouragesNotes that while online platforms, such as online market places, have benefited both retailers and consumers by improving choice and lowering prices, at the same time, an increasing number of non-compliant sellers - especially from third countries – are offering unsafe or illegal products in the European market, therefore urges the Commission to establish regulations in order to ensure the cooperation of the online marketplaces to react as quickly as possible to notifications from Rapex, and to cooperate effectively with the Member States’ competent authorities by immediately withdrawing unsafe products, and taking measures to avoid that they reappear; asks the Commission to create guidelines for online marketplaces on how to react effectively to unsafe products;
Amendment 228 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Asks onlinStresses that the Commission should establish clear guide lines for the marketplaces to enhance their cooperation, consult Rapex before placing products on their websites, exchange information on sellers that break the rules, take effective measures against them and their supply chain, and develop an easily accessible tool for consumers to report unsafe products;
Amendment 231 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Urges the Commission and the Member States to oblige online marketplaces to create an interfaceto assess how online marketplaces could improve their interconnection with the Rapex system in order to ensure that products offered for sale are safe, and require them to introduce a link to Rapex on their websites so as to raise awareness about this platform;
Amendment 252 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Welcomes the fact that the European standardisation programme for 2020 addresses the challenges emerging within the Digital Single Market, such as AI, IoT, protection of data, including health data, cybersecurity and automated mobility; asks the Commission to define standardsmandate Cen-Cenelec to define standards, including for traditional sectors, not previously using IT, allowing the deployment of interoperable technologies to provide for safe EU-wide emerging technologies;
Amendment 256 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Stresses that the safety of products should be a priority for the Commission in updating the legislation in order to cover security risks generated by connected products and the risks to be hacked.
Amendment 271 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29a. Acknowledges, that the success of any product or innovation stands and falls with the trust placed in its quality and safety and that the EU’s goal must be to ensure this trust, especially in an increasingly digital networked world; encourages the European Commission to further develop the established and successful quality infrastructure, consisting of metrology, standardisation, accreditation, conformity assessment and market surveillance, in consultation with all partners involved, to meet these new challenges;
Amendment 281 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Asks retailers, online marketplaces and consumer associations to play a greater role in recalls of unsafe products purchased online or offline by ensuring adequate information is available to consumers, asks the Commission to assess how new technologies and algorithms can make this process more effective and ensure that a larger number of affected consumers are reached;
Amendment 283 #
2019/2190(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31a. Urges the Commission to develop legislation obliging online marketplaces, given their direct communication with consumers, to inform consumers in case they bought an unsafe or otherwise non- compliant product from their online marketplace;
Amendment 374 #
2019/2176(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Urges Turkey to protect the rights of minorities and vulnerable groups, including women, LGBTI people and ethnic and religious minorities; condemns the pervasive hate-speech against LGBTI people, especially when done by high-level political and religious figures; condemns the lack of proper investigation, prosecution and sanction of hate speech, both online and offline, and of hate crime; calls on authorities and officials to firmly condemn all acts of violence and hate speech against minorities and vulnerable groups and to investigate and prosecute them effectively;
Amendment 390 #
2019/2176(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Urges the Turkish authorities to end the protracted bans on Pride marches in several cities; calls on the Turkish authorities to ensure that the right to freedom of assembly and association, as enshrined in Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights, can be effectively enjoyed, without discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity, in respect of the recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe;1a _________________ 1a https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_det ails.aspx?ObjectID=09000016805cf40a
Amendment 4 #
2019/2173(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 22 a (new)
Citation 22 a (new)
— having regard to the fifth country monitoring report of the European Commission Against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), published on September 20171a , and to the conclusions on Montenegro concerning the state of implementation of the 2017 recommendations, published on June 2020,1b __________________ 1a https://rm.coe.int/second-report-on- montenegro/16808b5942 1bhttps://rm.coe.int/ecri-conclusions-on- the-implementation-of-the- recommendations-in-respe/16809e8273
Amendment 110 #
2019/2173(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Welcomes progress on the protection of LGBTI rightthe rights of LGBTI persons and the adoption of the law on same-sex partnerships and calls on authorities to ensure all necessary conditions for its adequate and timely implementation; stresses that the situation of transgender and non-binary persons needs to be improved; urges the collection of disaggregated data relating to hate speech and crime based on sexual orientation and gender identity as recommended by ECRI and calls for their effective sanctioning;
Amendment 171 #
2019/2173(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Reiterates that the European Union has swiftly mobilised substantial support for the Western Balkans to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic health emergency and the socio-economic recovery of the region; calls on Montenegrin authorities to take into strong consideration the needs of the most vulnerable groups in society such as women, Roma and LGBTI persons, people with disabilities and other minorities when creating and implementing COVID-19 socio-economic relief measures;
Amendment 217 #
2019/2171(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Expresses concern over the fundamental rights situation, specifically the persisting discrimination and hate speech faced by the LGBTI community, migrants and asylum seekers, as well as ethnic and religious minorities, and calls for more effective and comprehensive countrywide human rights and anti- discrimination strategies, as well as measures against interfaith and interethnic intolerance; stresses the need to duly prevent and prosecute the proliferation of hate speech, hate crimes and violence, and to promote social inclusion of minorities and vulnerable populations, including the Roma;
Amendment 223 #
2019/2171(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Stresses that the situation of LGBTI persons can be significantly improved by new legal measures and modifications such as legalising same-sex partnerships, the explicit protection of sexual orientation, gender identity and sex characteristics against hate speech and violence in the Criminal Code, quick, transparent and accessible procedures for legal gender recognition based on self- determination,1a and ensuring legal guarantees for the bodily integrity, autonomy, self-determination and informed consent of intersex persons, in line with its position on the matter;1b __________________ 1a In line with Council of Europe guidelines: Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers Recommendation to Member States on measures to combat discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity, available, CM/Rec(2010)5, available on http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref- XML2HTML-EN.asp?fileid=21736. 1b Texts adopted, P8_TA(2019)0128.
Amendment 318 #
2019/2171(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls for a co-ordinated, strategic countrywide response to the ongoing health emergency and post-pandemic recovery measures in full respect of the principle of non discrimination; recalls COVID-related EU support to address the acute situation in the country; calls on the European Commission and the Member States to allocate a sufficient number of COVID-19 vaccines to the Western Balkan countries;
Amendment 323 #
2019/2171(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Stresses the need for the Bosnian authorities to find a better balance between fundamental rights and freedoms and necessary restrictions due to the pandemic; regrets the selective enforcement of the ban on assemblies, which resulted in the ban of the route of the 2020 Sarajevo Pride march;
Amendment 6 #
2019/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to ensure thatReiterates that the objective of EU competition policy is to promotes fair competition and reciprocal trading conditions at EU and global levelin a free and dynamic internal market; notes that an increasing number of external actors operate within the further aim of strengthening our own industry in the EUat internal market and stresses the need to ensure that EU competition rules apply to all actors active within the EU internal market; calls, on therefore, for unfair trading Commission to safeguard the EU level playing field with a more coordinated, assertive and integrative approactices to be addressed effectively by making full use of the available instruments, developing new, effective tools and tackling the distortive effects of foreign state ownership and subsidies in the internal market, in particular where EU funding is involvedh of existing instruments instruments, including competition and procurement policies as well as trade instruments; calls on the Commission to also consider including state subsidies and government ownership as exclusion criteria and/or the contract award criteria of the EU's public procurement direction as well as the extraterritorial application of EU competition policy to address the distortive effects of foreign state ownership and subsidies in the internal market; welcomes in this regards the recent proposal by the Dutch government the strengthen the level playing field on the internal market; welcomes, against this backdrop,lso the new Commission’s intention to strengthen the foreign direct investment screening mechanism, and calls for discussions on the EU’s international procurement instrument to be resumed;
Amendment 5 #
2019/0142M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the US on October 18th 2019, based on the WTO arbitration decision circulated on 2 October 20198 , declared its willingness to impose, in retaliation for illegal EU subsidies granted to the aircraft manufacturer Airbus, tariffs on USD 7.5 billion worth of EU imports also of agricultural and industrial items in addition to aircraft; __________________ 8European Communities and Certain Member States – Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft: Recourse to Article 7.9 of the SCM Agreement and Article 22.7 of the DSU by the United States of 4 October 2019 (WT/DS316/42).
Amendment 17 #
2019/0142M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes and acknowledges the fact that, while it remains unclear whether any compensation has been foreseen, other WTO members that export beef to the EU agreed to support this agreement by accepting that the vast majority of the quota would be allocated to the US;
Amendment 28 #
2019/0142M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Supports the Commission in its efforts to and stresses the importance of finding negotiated solutions, such as this agreement, including this agreement, a fair and balanced solution for our respective aircraft industries and the revocation of the US tariffs on steel, aluminium and olives in order to dilute current trade tensions between the EU and the US; calls on the US to work with the EU in this regard;
Amendment 32 #
2019/0142M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 36 #
2019/0142M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 19 #
2018/0356M(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Remains very concerned about various and ongoing human rights violations in Vietnam, including a crackdown on human rights defenders and civil society organisations, the curtailing of press freedom, freedom of expression and association as well as the application of the death penalty in Viet Nam; calls on Viet Nnam to introduce a moratorium and move towards abolitionon the death penalty and to move towards abolition; also calls on Vietnam to repeal its cyber security law, to release all political prisoners and to introduce a swift timeline for the ratification and implementation of outstanding ILO conventions; highlights that human rights constitute a cornerstone of the trade and sustainable development chapter of the FTA; calls for periodic evaluation of progress in the field of human rights and social development as well as the impact of the agreement;
Amendment 69 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a) In order to establish whether it is in the interest of the Union to launch an investigation, a variety of aspects should be taken into account, including the interests of the domestic industry, users, and consumers as part of broader EU interests. The main interest is the opening of third country markets and improving market access opportunities for Union economic operators in order to achieve reciprocity, which should be given priority.
Amendment 74 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) If the investigation confirms the existence of the restrictive measures or practices and the consultations with the country concerned do not lead to sufficient corrective action(s) that result in improvements to the tendering opportunities for Union economic operators, goods and services within a reasonable timeframe, the Commission should be able to adopt, where appropriate, price adjustment measure applying to tenders submitted by economic operators originating in that country and/or including goods and services originating in that country.under this Regulation, IPI measures in the form of a score adjustment or of the exclusion of tenders
Amendment 76 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 a (new)
Recital 22 a (new)
(22a) If the third country does not accept to enter into consultations with the European Union, the Commission should take appropriate action to address the lack of reciprocity on the third country procurement market.
Amendment 83 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
Amendment 102 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) ‘score adjustment measure’ means the relative diminution by a given percentage of the score of a tender resulting from its evaluation by a contracting authority or a contracting entity on the basis of the contract award criteria defined in the procurement documents; in cases where price or cost is the only contract award criterion, the score adjustment measure means the relative increase, for the purpose of the evaluation of tenders, by a given percentage of the price offered by a tenderer;
Amendment 122 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
Amendment 129 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In the interest of legal certainty for Union and third-country economic operators, contracting authorities and contracting entiternational market access commitments undertaken by the Union towards third countries in the field of public procurement and concessions require, inter alia, the equal treatment of economic operators from those countries. Consequently, measures adopted under this Regulation can only apply to economic operators, goods or services from countries that are not parties to the plurilateral WTO Agreement on Government Procurement or to bilateral or multilateral trade agreements with the Union that include commitments on access to procurement and concessions markets, or from countries that are parties, the international market access commitments undertaken by the Union towardso such agreements but only regarding procurement procedures for goods, services or concessions that are not covered by those agreements. Irrespective of the application of measures adopted under this Regulation, and in accordance with the Communication from the Commission of 24 July 2019 on ‘Guidance on the participation of third- countries in the field of public procurement and concessions should be reflected in the legal order of the EU, thy bidders and goods in the EU procurement market’ and with Directives 2014/23/EU, 2014/24/EU and 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, economic operators from third countries which do not have any agreement providing for the opening of the Union’s procurement market or whose goods, services and works are not covered by ensuring effective application thereof. such an agreement, do not have secured access to procurement procedures in the Union and could be excluded.
Amendment 141 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
Amendment 142 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9
Article 9
Authorities or entities concerned The Commission shall determine the contracting authorities or entities or categories of contracting authorities or entities, listed by Member State, whose procurement is concerned by the measure. To provide the basis for this determination, each Member State shall submit a list of appropriate contracting authorities or entities or categories of contracting authorities or entities. The Commission shall ensure that an appropriate level of action is taken and that a fair distribution of the burden among Member States is achieved.rticle 9 deleted
Amendment 146 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
Amendment 159 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) When assessing whether restrictive and/or discriminatory procurement measures or practices exist in a third country that result in the impairment of access of Union goods, services or economic operators to the procurement or concession markets, the Commission should examine to what degree laws on public, rules or other measures on procurement and concessions of the country concerned ensure transparency in line with international standards in the field of public procurement, and do not result in serious and preclude any discriminaurring restrictions against Union goods, services andor economic operators. In addition, it should examine to what degree individual contracting authorities or contracting entities maintain or adopt discriminatoryrestrictive practices against Union goods, services andor economic operators.
Amendment 161 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Contracting authorities and contracting entities may on an exceptional basis decide not to apply the price adjustmentIPI measure with respect to a procurement or a concession procedure if:
Amendment 162 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
Amendment 165 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 170 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) The Commission should be ablat any time, on its own initiative or, at the application of EU interested parties or a Member State, to initiate at any timor at the request of the European Parliament, initiate an investigation into restrictive procurement measures or practices allegedly adopted or maintained by a third country. . Such investigative procedures should be without prejudice to Regulation (EU) No 654/2014The Committee on International Trade can initiate and approve such a request on behalf of the European Parliament and of the Council .
Amendment 174 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. Where a contracting authority or contracting entity intends not to apply a price adjustmentn IPI measure , it shall indicate its intention in the contract notice that it publishes pursuant to Article 49 of Directive 2014/24/EU or Article 69 of Directive 2014/25/EU or in the concession notice pursuant to Article 31 of Directive 2014/23/EU. It shall notify the Commission no later than tenhirty calendar days after the publicationbefore the award of thea contract notice.
Amendment 175 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a) When determining whether the adoption of an IPI measure is in the EU interest, the objective of achieving reciprocity by opening third country procurement markets and improving market access opportunities for Union economic operators should be prioritized.
Amendment 176 #
2012/0060(COD)
2a. Any request for an exception requires the approval by the Commission before the award of the contract. The Commission may also reject the request for an exception if the requirements for the justification are not met.
Amendment 177 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – point d
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – point d
(d) the ground on which the decision not to apply the price adjustmentIPI measure is based, and a detailed justification for the use of the exception;
Amendment 177 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 b (new)
Recital 19 b (new)
(19b) If the Commission concludes that there is a considerable market presence of economic operators from the third country concerned on the European Single Market, it should consider exclusion instead of a score adjustment measure when adopting an IPI measure.
Amendment 178 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 c (new)
Recital 19 c (new)
(19c) Given the overall policy objective of the Union to support the economic growth of least developed countries (LDCs) and their integration into global value chains, it would not be in the Union’s interest to start an investigation against such countries under this Regulation, unless there are reasonable indications of circumvention of any adopted IPI measures. Consequently, this Regulation is not intended to apply to LDCs benefitting from the "Everything But Arms" arrangement as defined in Regulation (EU) No 978/2012.
Amendment 180 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Contracts concluded with an economic operator in violation of price adjustmentIPI measures adopted or reinstated by the Commission pursuant to this Regulation shall be ineffective.
Amendment 181 #
2012/0060(COD)
(20) If the existence of a restrictive and/or discriminatory procurement measure or practice in a third country is confirmedWhen conducting the investigation, the Commission should invite the third country concerned to enter into consultations with a view to eliminating and remedying any restrictive measures or practices and effectively improving the tendering opportunities for Union economic operators, goods and services in respect of public procurement and concession markets in that country.
Amendment 187 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) If the investigation confirms the existence of the restrictive measures or practices and the consultations with the third country concerned do not lead to sufficient satisfactory corrective action(s) that effectively result in improvements to the tendering opportunities for Union economic operators, goods and services within a reasonableshort timeframe, or the Commission should be able to adopt, where appropriate, price adjustment measure applying to tenders submitted by economic operators originating in that country and/third country concerned declines to enter into consultations, the Commission should adopt, under this Regulation, IPI measures in the form of a score adjustment or inexcluding goods and services originating in that countrysion of tenders.
Amendment 195 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) SuchA score adjustment measures should be applied only for the purpose of the evaluation of tenders comprising goods or servicesubmitted by economic operators originating in the country concerned. To avoid circumvention of those measures, it may also be necessary to target certain foreign-controlled or owned legal persons that, although established in the European Union, are not engaged in substantive business operations that have a direct and effective link withIt should not affect the price actually due to be paid under the economy of at least one Member State . Appropriate measures should not be disproportionate to the restrictive procurement practices to which they respondtract to be concluded with the successful tenderer.
Amendment 198 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23 a (new)
Recital 23 a (new)
(23a) In light of the overall policy objective of the Union to support small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), the Commission and contracting authorities and contracting entities should duly consider the effects under this Regulation, with a view to limiting the administrative burden for SMEs. The Commission in cooperation with the Member States should make available guidelines for best practices for SMEs, in order to ensure the efficiency of this Regulation and the consistency of its implementation.
Amendment 201 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23 b (new)
Recital 23 b (new)
(23b) To avoid possible circumvention of an IPI measure, additional contractual obligations should be imposed and its implementation monitored after the award of the contract. Those obligations should only apply in case of procurement procedures to which an IPI measure is applicable, as well as to contracts awarded based on a framework agreement where such contracts are equal to or above a certain threshold and when that framework agreement was subject to an IPI measure.
Amendment 208 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
Amendment 211 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
Amendment 216 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
Amendment 222 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) It is imperative that contracting authorities and contracting entities have access to a range of high-quality products meeting their purchasing requirements at a competitive price. Therefore, contracting authorities and contracting entities should be able not to apply price adjustment, on an exceptional basis, to not apply IPI measures limiting access of non- covered goods and services in casef there are no Union and/or covered goods or services available which meet the requirements of the contracting authority or contracting entity or where such action relates to safeguarding essential public needs, for examplepolicy needs in the fields of health and public safeecurity, or where tpublic health. The application of the measure would lead to a disproportionate increase in the price or costs of the contractse exceptions should require the prior approval of the Commission before awarding any contract. The contracting authorities and contracting entities should consult with the Commission in a timely and comprehensive manner when they intend to submit a request for an exception, as well as to allow for appropriate monitoring of the implementation of this Regulation.
Amendment 227 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) In case of misapplication by contracting authorities or contracting entities of exceptions to price adjustment measures limiting acIPI measures, which negatively affects the chancess of non-covered goods and services, the Commission should be able to apply the corrective mechanism of Article 3 ofeconomic operators having a right to participate in the procurement procedure, Council Directives 89/665/EEC20 or Article 8 of Council Directive 92/13/EEC21 . In addition, contracts concluded with an economic operator by contracting authorities or contracting entities in violation of price adjustment measures limiting access of non-covered goods and services should be ineffective. _________________ 20Council Directive 89/665/EEC on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts (OJ L 395, 30.12.1989, p. 33). 21Council Directive 92/13/EEC coordinating the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of Community rules on the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors (OJ L 76, 23.3.1992, p. 14) and 92/13/EEC should be applicable. The affected economic operator may therefore initiate a review procedure according to the national law implementing these Directives, if, for example, a competing economic operator should have been excluded or a bid should have been ranked lower due to the application of an IPI measure. The Commission should also be able to apply the corrective mechanism according to Article 3 of Council Directive 89/665/EEC7 or Article 8 of Council Directive 92/13/EEC8.
Amendment 237 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) Regular reporting by the Commission should make it possible to monitor the application and efficiency of the procedures established by this RegulationIn line with the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making and with the view, among others, to ease administrative burdens, in particular on Member States, the Commission should review the scope, functioning and efficiency of this Regulation. Such review will address, inter alia, the effectiveness of the IPI measures, the thresholds, the additional contractual obligations, as well as the use of exceptions. The Commission should report on its assessment to the European Parliament and the Council. The review may be followed up by appropriate legislative proposals.
Amendment 263 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5
Article 1 – paragraph 5
Amendment 272 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) ‘score adjustment measure’ means the relative diminution by a given percentage of the score of a tender resulting from its evaluation by a contracting authority or a contracting entity on the basis of the contract award criteria defined in the procurement documents. In cases where price or cost is the only contract award criterion, the score adjustment measure means the relative increase, for the purpose of the evaluation of tenders, by a given percentage of the price offered by a tenderer;
Amendment 334 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4
Article 4
Amendment 340 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5
Article 5
Amendment 343 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter 3 – title
Chapter 3 – title
Investigations, consultations and price adjustment measureadditional contractual obligations
Amendment 349 #
Amendment 352 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 354 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Upon publication of the notice, the Commission shall invite the third country concerned to submit its views, provide information and enter into consultations with the Commission in order to remove the alleged third-country measure or practice. The Commission shall regularly inform Member States within the Committee established by Article 7 of Regulation (EU) 2015/1843 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a (“Trade Barriers Regulation”) and the European Parliament. _________________ 1aRegulation (EU) 2015/1843 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 October 2015 laying down Union procedures in the field of the common commercial policy in order to ensure the exercise of the Union’s rights under international trade rules, in particular those established under the auspices of the World Trade Organization (OJ L 272, 16.10.2015, p. 1).
Amendment 356 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 361 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. The assessment by the Commission of whether the alleged restrictive and/or discriminatory procurement measures or practices have been adopinvestigation and consultations shall be concluded within a period of six months after the dated or are maintained by the third country concerned shall be made on the basis of the information supplied by interested parties and Member States, of facts collected by the Commission during its investigation, or both. The assessment shall be concluded within a period of eight months after the initiation of the investigation. In duly justified cases, this period may be extended by four monthsf the publication in the Official Journal of the initiation notice. In duly justified cases, the Commission may, before the end of the initial six months, extend that period by three months, by publishing a notice in the Official Journal of the European Union and informing the third country, EU interested parties, Member States and the European Parliament.
Amendment 363 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Upon conclusion of the investigation and consultations, the Commission shall make publicly available a report recording the main findings of the investigation and a proposed course of action. If the Commission decides to apply an IPI measure, it will specify whether it proposes to impose a score adjustment measure or exclusion.
Amendment 366 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. WhereIf the Commission concludes as a result of, following its investigation, that the alleged restrictive and/or discriminatory procurementthird-country measures or practices are is not maintained or that ithey does not result in restrictions toa serious and recurrent impairment of access byof Union economic operators or Union goods andor services to the public procurement or concession markets of the third country concerned, the Commission shall terminate the investigation. , and publish a notice of termination in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Amendment 372 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The Commission may suspend the investigation and consultations at any time if the third country: (a) takes corrective measures that effectively improve the access of Union economic operators or Union goods or services, or (b) undertakes commitments towards the Union to eliminate or phase out the third country measure or practice within a reasonable period of time and no later than three months. The Commission shall resume the investigation and consultations if it concludes that the reasons for the suspension are no longer valid in accordance with this Article. The Commission shall publish a notice in the Official Journal of the European Union in case of suspension or resumption of the investigation and consultations.
Amendment 377 #
Amendment 386 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8
Article 8
Amendment 428 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8 a (new)
Amendment 432 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9
Article 9
Authorities or entities concerned The Commission shall determine the contracting authorities or entities or categories of contracting authorities or entities, listed by Member State, whose procurement is concerned by the measure. To provide the basis for this determination, each Member State shall submit a list of appropriate contracting authorities or entities or categories of contracting authorities or entities. The Commission shall ensure that an appropriate level of action is taken and that a fair distribution of the burden among Member States is achieved.rticle 9 deleted
Amendment 437 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a (new)
Amendment 442 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10
Article 10
Amendment 451 #
2012/0060(COD)
Amendment 465 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Contracting authorities and contracting entities may decide no, on an exceptional basis, decide to submit a request to not apply the price adjustmentan IPI measure with respect to a procurement or a concession procedure if:
Amendment 473 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) there are no Union and/or covered goods or services available which meet the requirements ofonly tenders from economic operators originating in the countracting authorityy subject to an IPI measure, or contracting entityly such tenders meet the tender requirements; or
Amendment 476 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) this is justified for overriding reasons of public interest in the field of public security or public health;
Amendment 481 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 487 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. Where a contracting authority or contracting entity intends nodecides to submit a request to not apply a price adjustmentn IPI measure , it shall indicate its intention in the contract notice that it publishes pursuant to Article 49 of Directive 2014/24/EU or Article 69 of Directive 2014/25/EU or in the concession notice pursuant to Article 31 of Directive 2014/23/EU. It shall notify the Commission no later than ten calendar days after the publication of the contract noticrequest the Commission, no later than thirty days before the award of the contract. The Commission may approve an exception if it fulfils the requirements in paragraph 1. The Commission shall ensure that exceptions are implemented in a uniform manner. The Commission shall reject a request for an exception to apply an IPI measure if the request does not fulfil the requirements in paragraph 1. If the Commission intends to reject a request for an exception to apply an IPI measure, it shall notify the contracting authority or contracting entity within the aforementioned time.
Amendment 491 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Any contracting authority or contracting entity seeking to invoke an exception set out in paragraph 1 shall require the approval by the Commission before the award of the contract.
Amendment 494 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The notificationrequest for an exception by a contracting authority or contracting authority shall contain the following information:
Amendment 522 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15
Article 15
Amendment 525 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Amendment 526 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17
Article 17
Amendment of Directive 2014/25/EU Articles 85 and 86 of Directive 2014/25/EU shall be deleted with effect from the entry into force of this Regulation.rticle 17 deleted
Amendment 532 #
2012/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 a (new)
Article 17 a (new)
Article 17a Review No later than three years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation and every three years thereafter, the Commission shall review the scope, functioning and efficiency of this Regulation, and shall report its findings to the European Parliament and the Council.