44 Amendments of Emmanuel MAUREL related to 2020/2217(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Recital D (new)
Recital D (new)
D. whereas there are a number of ongoing investigations in Member States into abuse of dominant positions by the GAFAM; whereas there are serious concerns about the data collected by Google and Amazon via their applications;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Recital D (new)
Recital D (new)
D. whereas there are a number of ongoing investigations in Member States into abuse of dominant positions by the GAFAM; whereas there are serious concerns about the data collected by Google and Amazon via their applications;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Recital E (new)
Recital E (new)
E. whereas only public authorities have the means to undertake a large-scale transition to a data economy; whereas the current digital giants have all benefited from the support of the US Administration and the Chinese State through huge tax incentives or subsidies; whereas European values can enable European public authorities to plan this transition in a fair and redistributive way for businesses and territories;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Recital E (new)
Recital E (new)
E. whereas only public authorities have the means to undertake a large-scale transition to a data economy; whereas the current digital giants have all benefited from the support of the US Administration and the Chinese State through huge tax incentives or subsidies; whereas European values can enable European public authorities to plan this transition in a fair and redistributive way for businesses and territories;
Amendment 10 #
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 protectionist; stresses, therefore,; stresses that every non-EU player should still be welcome to operate in the single European data space as long as they meet the EU’s ethical, technological, privacy and security standards;
Amendment 10 #
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 protectionist; stresses, therefore,; stresses that every non-EU player should still be welcome to operate in the single European data space as long as they meet the EU’s ethical, technological, privacy and security standards;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls for public procurement processes and funding programmes to include data access and interoperability requirements; strongly recommends the establishment of a ‘Buy European Act’ requiring a minimum threshold of European digital materials, devices or services to be complied with in connection with public procurement;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls for public procurement processes and funding programmes to include data access and interoperability requirements; strongly recommends the establishment of a ‘Buy European Act’ requiring a minimum threshold of European digital materials, devices or services to be complied with in connection with public procurement;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Takes the view that biometric and health data, given their specific and extremely sensitive nature as well as the potential misuses thereof, should be classified in the highest category of the risk level scale;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Takes the view that biometric and health data, given their specific and extremely sensitive nature as well as the potential misuses thereof, should be classified in the highest category of the risk level scale;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Takes the view that health is a particularly sensitive sector for the processing of personal data; takes the view that AI will undoubtedly benefit society in that sector, but entails risks that justify strict supervision and regulation; takes the view that digital health must not pave the way for the dehumanisation of care; takes the view moreover that the digital divide, if not bridged, is likely to contribute significantly to the spread of medical deserts in Europe;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Takes the view that health is a particularly sensitive sector for the processing of personal data; takes the view that AI will undoubtedly benefit society in that sector, but entails risks that justify strict supervision and regulation; takes the view that digital health must not pave the way for the dehumanisation of care; takes the view moreover that the digital divide, if not bridged, is likely to contribute significantly to the spread of medical deserts in Europe;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Takes the view that personal health data must remain the property of the patient; takes the view that no information concerning a patient's health should be communicated without the patient's full and informed consent; takes the view that personal health data, because of its extremely sensitive nature, must be scrupulously protected; takes the view that the highest cybersecurity standards must be established for those networks;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Takes the view that personal health data must remain the property of the patient; takes the view that no information concerning a patient's health should be communicated without the patient's full and informed consent; takes the view that personal health data, because of its extremely sensitive nature, must be scrupulously protected; takes the view that the highest cybersecurity standards must be established for those networks;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Underlines the specific nature of the health sector; considers that citizens should have secure access to a comprehensive electronic record of data concerning their health and that they should retain control over personal data concerning their health and be able to share it securely with authorised third parties, while unauthorised access should be prohibited, in accordance with data protection legislation; states furthermore that data should be stored on secure local servers and processed by independent bodies;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Underlines the specific nature of the health sector; considers that citizens should have secure access to a comprehensive electronic record of data concerning their health and that they should retain control over personal data concerning their health and be able to share it securely with authorised third parties, while unauthorised access should be prohibited, in accordance with data protection legislation; states furthermore that data should be stored on secure local servers and processed by independent bodies;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2e. Stresses that insurance companies or any other service provider should not be allowed to use data from e-health applications for the purpose of discriminating in the setting of prices;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2e. Stresses that insurance companies or any other service provider should not be allowed to use data from e-health applications for the purpose of discriminating in the setting of prices;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 h (new)
Paragraph 2 h (new)
2h. Calls for a ban throughout the EU on the deployment of live facial recognition systems for law enforcement agencies and on the use of automated recognition, in public spaces, of other human characteristics such as gait, fingerprints, DNA, voice and other biometric and behavioural signals;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 h (new)
Paragraph 2 h (new)
2h. Calls for a ban throughout the EU on the deployment of live facial recognition systems for law enforcement agencies and on the use of automated recognition, in public spaces, of other human characteristics such as gait, fingerprints, DNA, voice and other biometric and behavioural signals;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 i (new)
Paragraph 2 i (new)
2i. Stresses that biases inherent in underlying datasets are inclined to gradually increase and amplify existing discrimination, in particular for persons belonging to minority ethnic groups or racialised communities; takes the view that such an effect is unacceptable, in particular in the area of law enforcement;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 i (new)
Paragraph 2 i (new)
2i. Stresses that biases inherent in underlying datasets are inclined to gradually increase and amplify existing discrimination, in particular for persons belonging to minority ethnic groups or racialised communities; takes the view that such an effect is unacceptable, in particular in the area of law enforcement;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 j (new)
Paragraph 2 j (new)
2j. whereas the digital sector is currently responsible for 4% of global greenhouse gas emissions; whereas the greenhouse effect and the strong increase in use suggest that that carbon footprint will double by 2025;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 j (new)
Paragraph 2 j (new)
2j. whereas the digital sector is currently responsible for 4% of global greenhouse gas emissions; whereas the greenhouse effect and the strong increase in use suggest that that carbon footprint will double by 2025;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 k (new)
Paragraph 2 k (new)
2k. whereas data localisation in the EU represents an important step towards strategic autonomy; whereas relocation of data centres in Europe should be encouraged;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 k (new)
Paragraph 2 k (new)
2k. whereas data localisation in the EU represents an important step towards strategic autonomy; whereas relocation of data centres in Europe should be encouraged;
Amendment 31 #
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 avoid unnecessary administrative burdens fortailored to the capacities of 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 31 #
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 avoid unnecessary administrative burdens fortailored to the capacities of 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 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that an ambitious regulatory framework can stimulate innovation in the AI sector by setting clear limits and standards, in particular for SMEs;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that an ambitious regulatory framework can stimulate innovation in the AI sector by setting clear limits and standards, in particular for SMEs;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Takes the view that EU data protection rules should be adapted to take into account the increased complexity and interconnection of medical robots that may be required to handle highly sensitive personal information and medical data;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Takes the view that EU data protection rules should be adapted to take into account the increased complexity and interconnection of medical robots that may be required to handle highly sensitive personal information and medical data;
Amendment 45 #
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;
Amendment 45 #
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;
Amendment 50 #
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,voluntary data sharing agreements will further accelerate the development of the EU data economy;
Amendment 50 #
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,voluntary data sharing agreements will further accelerate the development of the EU data economy;
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of defining fair contractual conditionstandards 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 ons regards cooperation for data sharing and pooling, as well as more guidance for businesses on competition law matters from the Commission, are needed;
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of defining fair contractual conditionstandards 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 ons regards cooperation for data sharing and pooling, as well as more guidance for businesses on competition law matters from the Commission, are needed;
Amendment 65 #
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;
Amendment 65 #
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;
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Declares that a distinction between the legal regimes concerning personal and non-personal data is essential, as not sharing any commercial datasets is often the only option for businesses due to the complexity of the existing rules and the great legal uncertainty as to whether personal data is sufficiently depersonalised; notes that this distinction may be difficult to draw in practice given the existence of mixed data, for which specific rules and approaches should be introduced; believes that models that focus on anonymisation, which requires a clear legal base and a list of criteria, and other technical ways of ensuring privacy must be encouraged, such as the shift from the sharing of data to the sharing of computation, application programming interfaces (APIs), synthetic data and data sandboxes;
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Declares that a distinction between the legal regimes concerning personal and non-personal data is essential, as not sharing any commercial datasets is often the only option for businesses due to the complexity of the existing rules and the great legal uncertainty as to whether personal data is sufficiently depersonalised; notes that this distinction may be difficult to draw in practice given the existence of mixed data, for which specific rules and approaches should be introduced; believes that models that focus on anonymisation, which requires a clear legal base and a list of criteria, and other technical ways of ensuring privacy must be encouraged, such as the shift from the sharing of data to the sharing of computation, application programming interfaces (APIs), synthetic data and data sandboxes;
Amendment 89 #
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; considers also that the protection afforded by the Whistleblower Directive should apply to the forthcoming Europa Data Strategy too;
Amendment 89 #
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; considers also that the protection afforded by the Whistleblower Directive should apply to the forthcoming Europa Data Strategy too;