BETA

1459 Amendments of Daniel DALTON

Amendment 1 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Recital D
D. whereas Japan is one of the EU’s key trading partners, with which it has recently concluded an Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) that enshrines shared values and principles while safeguarding the sensitivities of both partners; whereas the common recognition of fundamental rights, including privacy and data protection, constitutes an important basis for the Adequacy Decision which will provide the legal basis for the transfer of personal data from the EU to Japan;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Recital I
I. whereas Japan has recently modernised and strengthened its data protection legislation to align it with international standards, in particular with the safeguards and individual rights provided by the new European data protection legislative framework; whereas the Japanese data protection legal framework is composed of various pillars, with the Act on Protection of Personal Information (APPI) being the central piece of legislation;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 5 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Recital J
J. wWhereas the Commission reports that with, as regards a view to facilitating international data transfers, the Cabinet of Japan adopted a Cabinet Decision on 12 June 2018 that delegates to the Personal Information Protection Commission (PPC), as the authority competent for administering and implementing the APPI, ‘the power to take the necessary action to bridge differences of the systems and operations between Japan and the concerned foreign country based on Article 6 of the Act in view of ensuring appropriate handling of personal information received from such country’; whereas this decision stipulates that this includes the power to establish enhanced protections through the adoption by the PPC of stricter rules supplementing and going beyond those laid down in the APPI and the Cabinet Order; whereas pursuant to this decision, these stricter rules would be binding and enforceable on Japanese business operators; whereas the Commission has not provided the text of this decision as part of the elements on which it has based its evaluation;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 8 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Recital K
K. whereas the draft Commission implementing decision on the adequate protection of personal data by Japan is accompanied by, as Annex I thereto, the Supplementary Rules adopted by the PPC on 15 June 2018, which are based on Article 6 of the APPI, which explicitly allows the PPC to adopt stricter rules, including for the purpose of facilitating international data transfers; whereas the version of the Supplementary Rules provided by the Commission does not bear any official signature of the PPC; whereas the Supplementary Rules are not available on the official PPC websitewere adopted by the PPC on 15 June 2018 further to a public consultation and will be published upon the adoption of the adequacy decision;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 10 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Recital M
M. whereas the Commission states that the Supplementary Rules would bSupplementary Rules stipulate that they are legally binding on any personal information-handling business operator which receives personal data transferred from the EU on the basis of an adequacy decision and is therefore required to comply with those rules and any related rights and obligations, and that they would be enforceable by both the PPC and the Japanese courts; whereas some Japanese experts question whether the Supplementary Rules are binding;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 12 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Recital O
O. whereas the Japanese data protection legal framework makes a distinction between ‘personal information’ and ‘personal data’ and refers, for some cases, to a specific category of personal data, namely ‘retained personal data’; whereas this distinction differs from the notion of ‘personal data’ under the GDPR but these differences are, to the extent that they are relevant in the context of international transfers, fully addressed by the Supplementary Rules;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 13 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Recital P
P. whereas, according to Article 2(1) of the APPI, the concept of ‘personal information’ includes any information relating to a living individual which enables the identification of that individual; whereas the definition distinguishes two categories of personal information: (i) individual identification codes, and (ii) other personal information whereby a specific individual can be identified; whereas the latter category includes information which by itself does not enable identification but can, when ‘readily collated’ with other information, allow the identification of a specific individual; whereas according to the PPC guidelines the situation and the efforts required, inter alia in terms of time and cost, have to be assessed for each individual case and therefore, the approach is similar to that under the GDPR;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 14 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Recital Q
Q. whereas, according to Article 2(6) of the APPI, ‘personal data’ means personal information constituting a personal information database, etc. defined in Article2(4) of the APPI as a "collective body of information" that is systematically organised which is similar to the concept of a structured"filing system" under Article 2(1) of the GDPR read in combination with its Recital 15; whereas according to Article 4(1) of the GDPR, ‘personal data’ means any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person; whereas an identifiable natural person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data or an online identifier, or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that natural person; whereas in order to determine whether a natural person is identifiable, account should be taken of all the means reasonably likely to be used, such as singling out, either by the controller or by another person, to identify the natural person directly or indirectly;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 16 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Recital R
R. whereas, according to Article 2(7) of the APPI, ‘retained personal data’ means personal data which a personal information-handling business operator has the authority to disclose, correct, add or delete the contents of, cease the utilisation of, erase, or cease the third-party provision of, and which shall be neither those prescribed by cabinet order as likely to harm the public or other interests if their presence or absence is made known, nor those set to be deleted within a period of no longer than one year that is prescribed by cabinet order; whereas the Supplementary Rules align the notion of 'retained personal data' with the notion of 'personal data' to ensure that certain limitations to individual rights attached to the former will not apply to data transferred from the EU;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 17 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Recital S
S. wWhereas, the Japanese data protection law, which is the object of the draft implementing dDecision excludes from itsthe scope of the Act several sectors when they process personal data for specific purposes, as well as personal data that are not part of an electronicbut all filing system (i.e.s, manual filing systems); whereas the draft implementing decision would not apply to the transfer of personal data from the EU to a recipient falling within anyor electronic, are covered by Art. 2(4) of the APPI in combination with Art. 3(2) of the Cabove-mentioned exceptions provided for by Japanese data protection law;inet Order.
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 21 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Recital V
V. whereas the discussions and assessment of the Japanese data protection legislation have been conducted on the basis of English translations of the Japanese acts provided by the Japanese authorities, with the Japanese language version remaining the official/authentic tex that have been systematically verified by the Commission's translation services to ensure legal certainty, with the Japanese language version remaining the official/authentic text due to the fact that Japanese is the official language of Japan while English is not; whereas the publicly available English version of the main data protection act (the APPI) bears the notice that it is a tentative translation which has not been checked either by a native English speaker or by a legal language editor, and thus may be subject to change, being presented for non-Japanese speakers’ ease of understanding and reference; whereas several other Japanese legal references made in the draft implementing decision to demonstrate the adequacy of the data protection framework concern texts that are not publicly available in English;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 22 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Paragraph 4
4. Points out that, in this regard, the European Court of Justice has ruled in the Schrems case that ‘even though the means to which that third country has recourse, in this connection, for the purpose of ensuring such a level of protection may differ from those employed within the European Union in orthat “the term ‘adequate level of protection’ does not require an identical level of protection that that guaranteed in the EU, but must be under sto ensureod as requiring thate the requirements stemmird country ing from Directive 95/46 [the GDPR] read in the light of the Charter are complied with, those means must nevertheless prove, in practice, effective in order to ensure protectionact to ensure, by reason of its domestic law or its international commitments, a level of protection of fundamental rights and freedoms that is essentially equivalent to that guaranteed within the European Union by virtue of the GDPR read in the light of the Charter”;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 25 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Paragraph 5
5. Notes that the right to privacy and to the protection of personal data is guaranteed at constitutional level both in Japan and in the EU, but that a complete alignment of the rules of the EU and Japan will not be possible given the differences in constitutional structure, legal traditions as well as culture and associated societal choices;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 26 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Paragraph 7
7. Notes that the material scope of the adequacy finding is not sufficiently defined in Article 1 of the draft implementing decision, owing to the fact that the APPI excludes from its material scope several categories of business and processing activities; calls on the Commission to provide further and detailed clarifications on the impact of such exclusions on EU personal data transferred to Japan, and to clearly specify in Article 1 of the draft implementing decision which transfers of EU personal data are covered by the adequacy decision, indicating that for transfers of personal data by manual processing, the processing operations concerned would have to be covered where they are subject to further electronic processing in Japancategories of business and processing activities that are excluded from the material scope of the APPI have been expressly excluded from the scope of the Adequacy finding;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 29 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Paragraph 10
10. Notes that no official English translation of the Supplementary Rules had been made publicly available before the Commission’s announcement of the draft adequacy decision on 17 July 2018; stresses the importance of (draft) third- couthe text of the Supplementary Rules is annexed to the draft adequacy decision, moreover the Supplementary legislation being publicly available in official English translation before any draft adequacy decisions based on the documents concerned can be announced; calls on the Commission to put forward draft adequacy decisions for third countries only after an official English translation of the key (draft) legislation in the third country has been made publicly available and after the translated documents have been shared withRules have been negotiated in English between the European Commission and PPC, and their Japanese translation has been verified by the Commission's translation services; these are available to stakeholders, in order to ensure legal certainty and transparency;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 31 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Paragraph 11
11. Requests the Commission to provide clarifications from independent Japanese experts clearly demonstrating the legally binding effect on Japanese business operators of the Supplementary Rules, given that the Commission has considered this necessary in order to ensure an adequate level of protection, as well as the Rules’ enforceable character, i.e. that they can be enforced both by the PPC and by the courts referred to in Annex I to the draft implementing decision;deleted
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 36 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Paragraph 13
13. Considers that as the additional protections of the Supplementary Rules cover only transfers under adequacy decisions, personal data transferred from the EU pursuant to any other GDPR basis (i.e. Articles 46 to 49) would not benefit from those protections; believes this would create a different level of protection for EU citizens, thus undermining the other mechanisms that can be used to transfer personal data; recalls that in view of the scope of the adequacy decision, some data transfers will be conducted under these other available mechanisms;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 44 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Paragraph 15
15. Notes that the definition of ‘personal data’ in the APPI excludes data ‘prescribed by cabinet order as having little possibility of harming an individual’s rights and interests considering their utilisation method’; is concerned that this harm-based approach is in clear contradiction with the EU approach under which all processing of personal data falls within the scope of data protection law; but also notes that this concerns very limited situations;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 45 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Paragraph 16
16. Notes further that the definition of ‘personal information’ in the APPI is limited toncludes information ‘whereby a specific individual can be identified’; also notes that this definition does not include the clarification provided by the GDPR that personal information should also be considered personal data when it can be merely used to ‘single out’ a person, as clearly established by the European Court of Justice;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 47 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Paragraph 17
17. Is concerned that the narrower definition of ‘personal data’ (based on the definition of ‘personal information’) in the APPI might not meet the standard of being ‘essentially equivalent’ to the GDPR and to the case law of the European Court of Justice; questions, therefore, the statement in the draft implementing decision that ‘EU data will always fall into the category of “personal data” under the APPI’;deleted
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 50 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Commission to require further clarifications, including further binding supplementary rules, from the Japanese authorities in order to ensure that all personal data in the meaning of the GDPR are protected when transferred to Japan;deleted
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 54 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Paragraph 21
21. Considers that regarding onward transfers, although the combination of the APPI rules and the Supplementary Rules would ensure a level of protection higher than that provided under the APEC CBPR, the solution provided in the Supplementary Rules, which consists of requiring prior consent on the part of EU data subjects for approval of onward transfer to a third party in a foreign country lacks certain essential elements that would enable data subjects to formul; and that the consequence of a refusal to consent would be thate their consent, as it does not expressly define what is covered by the notion of ‘information on the circumstances surrounding the transfer necessary for the [data subject] to make a decision on his/her consent’, in line with Article 13 of the GDPR, such as the third country of destination of the onward transfer; notes that in addition, the draft implementing decision does not explain the consequences for the data subject in case of refusal of consent for onward transfer of his or her personal data Japanese business operator would be prohibited for onward transferring the personal data in question;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 58 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Paragraph 22
22. Calls on the Commission to further assess and demonstrate whether the independence of the PPC fully complies with the requirements developed through the case law of the European Court of Justice and reflected in the GDPR;deleted
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 60 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Paragraph 23
23. Regrets that, as regards effective enforcement of the APPI, the level of possible fines that would be imposed by the penal authorities is insufficient to ensure effective compliance with the Act, as it does not seem to be proportionate, effective or dissuasive in relation to the gravity of the infringement; calls on the Commission to ensure that the level of fines should be aligned with the GDPR;deleted
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 68 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Paragraph 25
25. Notes that under the Japanese Act on the Protection of Personal Information held by Administrative Organs (APPIHAO), business operators can also hand data over to law enforcement authorities on a ‘voluntary basis’; points out that this is not foreseen in the GDPR or the Police Directive and is concerned that it might not be compliant with the standard of being ‘essentially equivalent’ to the GDPR;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 72 #

2018/2904(RSP)


Paragraph 27
27. RegretNotes that the document ‘Collection and use of personal information by Japanese public authorities for criminal law enforcement and national security purposes’, which forms part of Annex II to the draft implementing decision, does not have the same legally binding effect as the Supplementary Ruleprovides representations and assurances on the rules applying to government access to data, and contains commitments such as regarding concerning the creation of a specific mechanism, administrated and supervised by PPC, to handle and resolve complaints;
2018/11/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 24 #

2018/2855(RSP)


Recital X
X. whereas the Information Commissioner’s Office of the United Kingdom has already issued 23 Information Notices to 17 different organisations and individuals, including Facebook on 2 3 February 2018, to request provision of information from the organisations in a structured way; while Facebook confirmed on 18 May 2018 that Aggregate IQ created and, in some cases, placed advertisements on behalf of the DUP Vote to Leave campaign, Vote Leave, BeLeave and Veterans for Britain;
2018/10/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 36 #

2018/2855(RSP)


Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that the digital age requires electoral laws to be adapted to this new digital reality and suggests Member States introduce an obligatory system of introduce an obligatory system of digital imprints for electronic campaigning and advertising. Any form of political advertising should include easily accessible and understandable information on the publishing organisation and who is legally responsible for spending so that it is clear who sponsored campaigns, similar to existing requirements for printed campaign materials currently in place in various Member Statesneeds appropriate electoral laws and suggests Member States to assess whether measures to enhance transparency such as digital imprints for electronic campaigning and political advertising are feasible;
2018/10/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 45 #

2018/2855(RSP)


Paragraph 9
9. Believes that profiling for political and electoral purposes, as,Underlines that Regulation (EU) 2016/679 severely limits the conditions under which processing puersuant to EU data protection law, it refers toonal data revealing political opinions or philosophical opinions, should be prohibited and is of the opinion that social media platforms should monitor and activebeliefs is allowed; believes that public authorities in cooperation with social media platforms must strictly ienform authorities if such behaviour occursce this rule;
2018/10/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 67 #

2018/2855(RSP)


Paragraph 17
17. Takes note of the privacy improvements that Facebook has undertaken after the Facebook/ Cambridge Analytica scandal, but recalls that Facebook promised to hold a full internal audit of which the European Parliament has not yet been informed and recommends that Facebook make substantial modifications that would also affect the core business model and the structure of its platformregarding the structure of its platform in order to fully comply with relevant EU legislation;
2018/10/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 85 #

2018/2855(RSP)


Paragraph 24
24. Takes the view that data protection authorities should have the same, if not more technical expert knowledge as those organisations under scrutiny. Suggests this objective could be reached by introducing funding by a levy on the sector concerned and that the Member States must ensure appropriate levels of funding of their DPAs;
2018/10/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 94 #

2018/2855(RSP)

Draft motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
30. Urges Council to continue negotiations on the E-Privacy Regulation and to strike an agreement with the European Parliament so as to ensure that the rights of citizens especially regarding the protection of users against targeting are protecdeleted;
2018/10/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2 #

2018/2645(RSP)


Citation 10
— having regard to its Resolution of 6 April 2017 on the adequacy of the protection afforded by the EU-US Privacy Shield12 _________________ 12 Text adopted, P8_TA(2017)0131deleted
2018/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 11 #

2018/2645(RSP)


Recital I
I. whereas in its Resolution of 6 April 2017, the European Parliament, while acknowledging that the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield contains significant improvements regarding the clarity of standards compared to the former EU- U.S. Safe Harbour, also considers that important issues remain as regards certain commercial aspects, national security and law enforcement, whereas it calls on the Commission to conduct, during the first joint annual review, a thorough and in-depth examination of all the shortcomings and weaknesses and to demonstrate how they have been addressed so as to ensure compliance with the EU Charter and Union law, and to evaluate meticulously whether the mechanisms and safeguards indicated in the assurances and clarifications by the US administration are effective and feasibledeleted
2018/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 23 #

2018/2645(RSP)


Paragraph 1
1. Takes note of the improvements compared to the Safe Harbour agreement, including the insertion of key definitions, stricter obligations related to data retention and onward transfers to third countries, the creation of an Ombudsperson to ensure individual redress and independent oversight, checks and balances ensuring the rights of data subjects (PCLOB), external and internal compliance reviews, more regular and rigorous documentation and monitoring, the availability of several ways to pursue legal remedy, prominent role for national DPAs in the investigation of claims, and written commitments from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence ruling out indiscriminate mass surveillance; acknowledges that the European Commission is of the view that the U.S. authorities have put in place the necessary structures and procedures to ensure the correct functioning of the Privacy Shield;
2018/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 45 #

2018/2645(RSP)


Paragraph 10
10. In view of the recent revelations of misuse of personal data by companies certified under the Privacy Shield such as Facebook and Cambridge Analytica, or oversight from companies certified under the Privacy Shield such as Facebook, calls on the US authorities competent to enforce the Privacy Shield to act upon such revelations without delay in full respect with the assurances and commitments given to uphold the current Privacy Shield arrangement and if needed, to remove such companies from the Privacy Shield list; calls also on the competent EU data protection authorities to investigate such revelations and, if appropriate, suspend or prohibit data transfers under the Privacy Shield;
2018/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 54 #

2018/2645(RSP)


Paragraph 13
13. Recommends, in the light of the joint review, that the DoC works with European Data Protection Authorities to provides more precise guidance as regards essential principles of the Privacy Shield such as the Choice Principle, the Notice Principle, onward transfers, controller- processor’s relation and access;
2018/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 76 #

2018/2645(RSP)


Paragraph 21
21. Recalls that, as indicated in its Resolution of 6 April 2017, neither the Privacy Shield Principles nor the letters of the US administration provide clarifications and assurances demonstrating the existence of effective judicial redress rights for individuals in the EU in respect of use of their personal data by US authorities for law enforcement and public interest purposes, which were emphasised by the CJEU in its judgment of 6 October 2015 as the essence of the fundamental right in Article 47 of the EU Charter;deleted
2018/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 9 #

2018/2088(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission to collaborate closely with technical researchers to identify, support and leverage potential positive effects of innovative uses, and to investigate, prevent, and mitigate potential harmful effects of malicious uses, and to develop tools, policies, and norms appropriate to AI applications; notes that best practices should be identified in research areas with more mature methods for addressing dual- use concerns, such as security and privacy, and that they should be applied to the area of AI;
2018/11/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 21 #

2018/2088(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that the right to respect for private life and the protection of personal data, as enshrined in Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and in Article 16 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), apply to all areas of robotics and that the Union's legal framework for data protection must be fully complied with in the area of AI systems; reiterates the Commission's "FinTech Action plan: For a more competitive and innovative European financial sector", which highlighted the role regulatory "sandboxes" can play in facilitating both technological innovation and better understanding of innovative business models and market developments by allowing regulators to supervise firms under the Union's legal framework with a margin of discretion with regard proportionality and flexibility;
2018/11/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 8 #

2018/2085(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines that blockchain represents a new paradigm of data storage and management, the rise of which poses both challenges and opportunities in terms of data protection and transparency, and exponentially incthat private blockchain preases the risks of money laundering, the capture of the financial system by organised crime and the financing of terrorismnts potential solutions to money laundering by providing a record of transactions;
2018/09/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 14 #

2018/2085(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that, if adequately designed, blockchains can share the goal of the General Data Protection Regulation by giving data subjects more control over his/her data; recalls, however, that the possible clash between the protection of fundamental rights and the promotion of innovation has to be addressed; notes that blockchain allows for pseudonymisation procedures to ensure the secure data storage of personal information in line with obligations set out in the General Data Protection Regulation; recalls, however, that the General Data Protection Regulation may not be fully compatible with recent technological developments and that regulatory flexibility is required to enable and reap the potentially revolutionary benefits of digital innovation;
2018/09/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 33 #

2018/2085(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the need to consider the implications, both positive and negative, of blockchain technology in view of the goals of Directive (EU) 2018/843 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing1 , which brings providers of exchange services between virtual and fiat currencies, as well as custodian wallet providers, within its scope; notes that this Directive extends the EU’s regulatory reach to prevent criminal organisations from exploiting the anonymity of virtual currency-based transactions, and to improve national regulators’ monitoring of the users of virtual currencies, for whom blockchain may be an enabling technology. _________________ 1 OJ L 156, 19.6.2018, p. 43.deleted
2018/09/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 36 #

2018/2085(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the need to consider the implications, both positive and negative, of blockchain technology in view of the goals of Directive (EU) 2018/843 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing1 , which brings; however makes clear the distinction between public blockchains, which can include providers of exchange services between virtual and fiat currencies, as well as custodian wallet providers, within its scope; notes that this Directive extends the EU’s regulatory reach to prevent criminal organisations from exploiting the anonymity of virtual currency-based transactions, and to improve national regulators’ monitohich fall under the scope of Directive (EU) 2018/843 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering ofr the users of virtual currencies, for whom blockchain may be an enabling technologyerrorist financings cope, and private blockchains, which do not. _________________ 1 OJ L 156, 19.6.2018, p. 43.
2018/09/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 7 #

2018/2046(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that a healthy and empowered consumer environment is a key factor for the completion of the Single Market and for economic growth throughout Europe and highlights that Union legislation on consumer protection has given predictability and confidence to citizens and businesses in many areas such as passenger rights, consumer rights and the fight against unfair commercial practices and unfair contract terms;
2018/06/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 9 #

2018/2046(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Stresses that Single Market policy should be a priority as part of the push for better budget spending, and that equivalent savings should be found in other areas to meet spending commitments;
2018/06/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 10 #

2018/2046(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the increased level of commitment appropriations for the modernisation of the customs union in support of the implementation of the Union Customs Code (Code) and of the development of the electronic customs systems, since the full and uniform implementation of the Code is essential to better protect the citizens and the financial interests of the Union and e-customs constitutes one of the priority areas for a better functioning of the internal market; and underlines that the simplification of customs procedures and effective enforcement of customs systems are essential to combat fraud and drive competition
2018/06/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 22 #

2018/2046(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls that the Programme for the Competitiveness of Enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises (COSME ) is a crucial tool to encourage an entrepreneurial culture, to support existing small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and ensure their competitiveness, sustainability and growth, help them embrace digital transformation, as well as to promote the advancement of the knowledge society, and expects that the reduction on payment appropriations for COSME in the draft budget 2019 is only due to a detailed calculation of outstanding amounts by the Commission, since it is of capital importance to avoid bottlenecks and shortages in the payment of COSME actions;
2018/06/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 25 #

2018/2046(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Calls for the reinforcement of Single Market tools that increase awareness of internal market rules; underlines the continuation of financial allocations for SOLVIT, the European Consumer Centres Network and Fin-Net;
2018/06/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 26 #

2018/2046(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8 b. Highlights the importance of standards for EU market competitiveness; recalls that adequate financial support is necessary for the activities of European Standard Organisations (ESOs);
2018/06/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 154 #

2018/2046(BUD)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68 a (new)
68 a. Recalls the 2014 ECA analysis which estimated the costs of the geographic dispersion of the Parliament to be EUR 114 million per year; furthermore, notes the finding from its resolution of 20 November 2013 on the location of the seats of the European Union’s Institutions1a that 78 % of all missions by Parliament statutory staff arise as a direct result of the Parliament's geographic dispersion; emphasises that the report also estimates the environmental impact of the geographic dispersion to be between 11 000 to 19 000 tonnes of CO2 emissions; reiterates the negative public perception caused by this dispersion and calls therefore for a roadmap to a single seat and a reduction in the relevant budget lines; _________________ 1a OJ C 436, 24.11.2016, p. 2.
2018/10/03
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 2 #

2018/2023(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Action Plan on Alternative Fuels Infrastructure; stresses also the benefits of low-carbon innovations to the EU’s global competitive position and calls for the EU to become a global leader on decarbonisation whilst maintaining a technology neutral approach; urges the Member States and industry, furthermore, to demonstrate an enhanced level of ambition and to speed up its implementation, including by developing efficient, complete and coherent national policy frameworks;
2018/04/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 10 #

2018/2023(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the need for a more harmonised EUn industry- led approach, in order to ensure interoperability of payment services, transparent consumer information and cross-border continuity; urges greater collaboration between public and private actors in this respect;
2018/04/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 20 #

2018/2023(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Appreciates the coordination at EU level; encourages the Commission to assess in the course of 2018 whether interoperability of payment services can be best advanced by legislative or non- legislative action, while not hampering market innovation;
2018/04/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 25 #

2018/2023(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Urges the Commission and the Member States to step up financial support for the deployment of alternative fuels infrastructure; notes the relevance of priority-setting in the next MFF; calls on the Member States to acknowledge the positive effects of fiscal incentives, grant schemes and public-private partnerships.
2018/04/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 104 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) The presence of terrorist content online has serious negative consequences for users, for citizens and society at large as well as for the online service providers hosting such content, since it undermines the trust of their users and damages their business models. In light of their central role and the technological means and capabilities associated with the services they provide, online service providers have particular societal responsibilities to protect their services from misuse by terrorists and to help tackle terrorist content disseminated through their services, whilst taking into account the fundamental importance of the freedom of expression and information in an open and democratic society.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 117 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
(7) This Regulation contributes to the protection of public security while establishing appropriate and robust safeguards to ensure protection of the fundamental rights at stake. This includes the rights to respect for private life and to the protection of personal data, the right to effective judicial protection, the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to receive and impart information, the freedom to conduct a business, and the principle of non-discrimination. Competent authorities and hosting service providers should only adopt measures which are necessary, appropriate and proportionate within a democratic society, taking into account the particular importance accorded to the freedom of expression and information, which constitutes one of the essential foundations of a pluralist, democratic society, and is one of the values on which the Union is founded. MAny measures constitutingshould avoid interference in the freedom of expression and information should be strictly targeted, in the sense that they mustand in so far as possible should serve to prevent the dissemination of terrorist content through a strictly targeted approach, but without thereby affecting the right to lawfully receive and impart information, taking into account the central role of hosting service providers in facilitating public debate and the distribution and receipt of facts, opinions and ideas in accordance with the law.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 121 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) The right to an effective remedy is enshrined in Article 19 TEU and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Each natural or legal person has the right to an effective judicial remedy before the competent national court against any of the measures taken pursuant to this Regulation, which can adversely affect the rights of that person. The right includes, in particular the possibilityin the context of this Regulation, the possibility for users to contest the removal of content resulting from measures taken by the hosting service provider as foreseen in this Regulation and to be informed of effective means of remedies. It also includes the right for hosting service providers and content providers to effectively contest the removal orders, imposed proactive measures or penalties, before the court of the Member State whose authorities issued the removal order, imposed proactive measures or penalties, or the court where the hosting service provider is established or represented.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 127 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
(9) In order to provide clarity about the actions that both hosting service providers and the competent authoritiesy should take to prevent the dissemination of terrorist content online, this Regulation should establish a definition of terrorist content for preventative purposes drawing on the definition of terrorist offences under Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council9 . Given the need to address the most harmful terrorist propaganda online, the definition should capture material and information that incites, encourages or advocates the commission or contribution to terrorist offences, provides instructions for the commission of such offences or promotes the participation in activities of a terrorist group. Such information includes in particular text, images, sound recordings and videos. When assessing whether content constitutes terrorist content within the meaning of this Regulation, competent authorities as well as hosting service providers should take into account factors such as the nature and wording of the statements, the context in which the statements were made and their potential to lead to harmful consequences, thereby affecting the security and safety of persons. The fact that the material was produced by, is attributable to or disseminated on behalf of an EU-listed terrorist organisation or person constitutes an important factor in the assessment. Content disseminated for educational, journalistic or research purposes should be adequately protected. Furthermore, the expression of radical, polemic or controversial views in the public debate on sensitive political questions should not be considered terrorist content. The right to such expression can be invoked before the court of the Member State where the hosting service provider has its main establishment or where the legal representative designated by the hosting service provider pursuant to this Regulation resides or is established. _________________ 9 Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA (OJ L 88, 31.3.2017, p. 6).
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 134 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
(10) In order to cover those online hosting services where terrorist content is disseminated, this Regulation should apply to information society services which store information provided by a recipient of the service at his or her request and in making the information stored directly available to third parties, irrespective of whether this activity is of a mere technical, automatic and passive naturee public. By way of example such providers of information society services include social media platforms, video streaming services, video, image and audio sharing services, file sharing and other cloud services, excluding cloud IT infrastructure service providers, to the extent they make the information directly available to third parties and websites where users can make comments or post reviewse public. The Regulation should also apply to hosting service providers established outside the Union but offering services within the Union, since a significant proportion of hosting service providers exposed to terrorist content on their services are established in third countries. This should ensure that all companies operating in the Digital Single Market comply with the same requirements, irrespective of their country of establishment. The determination as to whether a service provider offers services in the Union requires an assessment whether the service provider enables legal or natural persons in one or more Member States to use its services. However, the mere accessibility of a service provider’s website or of an email address and of other contact details in one or more Member States taken in isolation should not be a sufficient condition for the application of this Regulation.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 143 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) The procedure and obligations resulting from legal orders requesting hosting service providers to remove terrorist content or disable access to it, following an assessment by the competent authorities, should be harmonised. Member States should remain free as to the choice of the competent authorities allowing them to designate administrative, law enforcement or judicial authorities with that taskfreely designate a single competent authority with that task, unless their constitutional arrangements prevent a single authority from being responsible. Given the speed at which terrorist content is disseminated across online services, this provision imposes obligations on hosting service providers to ensure that terrorist content identified in the removal order is removed or access to it is disabled within one hour from receiving the removal order. It is for the hosting service providers to decide whether to remove the content in question or disable access to the content for users in the Union.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 146 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
(14) The competent authority should transmit the removal order directly to the addressee and point of contact by any electronic means capable of producing a written record under conditions that allow the service provider to establish authenticityestablish the authenticity of the order without unreasonable financial or other burden on the service provider, including the accuracy of the date and the time of sending and receipt of the order, such as by secured email and platforms or other secured channels, including those made available by the service provider, in line with the rules protecting personal data. This requirement may notably be met by the use of qualified electronic registered delivery services as provided for by Regulation (EU) 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council12 . _________________ 12 Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 on electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market and repealing Directive 1999/93/EC (OJ L 257, 28.8.2014, p. 73).
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 157 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) In order to ensure that hosting service providers exposed to terrorist content take appropriate measures to prevent the misuse of their services, the competent authorities should request hosting service providers having received a removal order, which has become final, to report on the proactive measures taken. These could consist of measures to prevent the re-upload of terrorist content, removed or access to it disabled as a result of a removal order or referrals they received, checking against publicly or privately-held tools containing known terrorist content. They may also employ the use of reliable technical tools to identify new terrorist content, either using those available on the market or those developed by the hosting service provider. The service provider should report on the specific proactive measures in place in order to allow the competent authority to judge whether the measures are necessary, effective and proportionate and whether, if automated means are used, the hosting service provider has the necessary abilities for human oversight and verification. In assessing the effectiveness, necessity and proportionality of the measures, competent authorities should take into account relevant parameters including the number of removal orders and referrals issued to the provider, their economic capacity and the impact of its service in disseminating terrorist content (for example, taking into account the number of users in the Union), as well as the safeguards put in place to protect freedom of expression and information and the number of incidents of restrictions on legal content.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 158 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
(19) Following the request, the competent authority should enter into a dialogue with the hosting service provider about the necessary proactive measures to be put in place. If necessary, the competent authority should impose the adoption of appropriate, effective and proportionate proactive measures where it considers that the measures taken are insufficient to meet the risks. The competent authority should only impose proactive measures that the hosting service provider can reasonably be expected to implement, taking into account, among other factors, the hosting service provider's financial and other resources. A decision to impose such specific proactive measures should not, in principle, lead to the imposition of a general obligation to monitor, as provided in Article 15(1) of Directive 2000/31/EC. Considering the particularly grave risks associated with the dissemination of terrorist content, the decisions adopted by the competent authorities on the basis of this Regulation could, in exceptional circumstances, derogate from the approach established in Article 15(1) of Directive 2000/31/EC, as regards certain specific, targeted measures, the adoption of which is necessary for overriding public security reasons. Before adopting such decisions, the competent authority should strike a fair balance between the public interest objectives and the fundamental rights involved, in particular, the freedom of expression and information and the freedom to conduct a business, and provide appropriate justification.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 162 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
(24) Transparency of hosting service providers' policies in relation to terrorist content is essential to enhance their accountability towards their users and to reinforce trust of citizens in the Digital Single Market. Hosting service providers should publish annual transparency reports containing meaningful information about action taken in relation to the detection, identification and removal of terrorist content, as well as the number of restrictions on legal content. Competent Authorities should also publish annual transparency reports containing meaningful information on the number of legal orders issued, the number of removals, the number of identified and detected terrorist content removed and the number of restrictions on legal content.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 166 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
(25) Complaint procedures constitute a necessary safeguard against erroneous removal of content protected under the freedom of expression and information. Hosting service providers should therefore establish user-friendly complaint mechanisms and ensure that complaints are dealt with promptly and in full transparency towards the content provider, and this should include information on all effective remedy options, including judicial redress routes. The requirement for the hosting service provider to reinstate the content where it has been removed in error, does not affect the possibility of hosting service providers to enforce their own terms and conditions on other grounds.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 168 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
(26) Effective legal protection according to Article 19 TEU and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union requires that persons are able to ascertain the reasons upon which the content uploaded by them has been removed or access to it disabled. For that purpose, the hosting service provider should make available to the content provider meaningful information enabling the content provider to contest the decision. However, this does not necessarily require a notification to the content provider. Depending on the circumstances, hosting service providers may replace content which is considered terrorist content, with a message that it has been removed or disabled in accordance with this Regulation. Further information about the reasons as well as possibilities for the content provider to contest the decision should be given upon request. Where competent authorities decide that for reasons of public security including in the context of an investigation, it is considered inappropriate or counter-productive to directly notify the content provider of the removal or disabling of content, they should inform the hosting service provider.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 181 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
(39) The use of standardised templates facilitates cooperation and the exchange of information between competent authorities and service providers, allowing them to communicate more quickly and effectively. It is particularly important to ensure swift action following the receipt of a removal order, depending on the size and means of the hosting service provider. Templates reduce translation costs and contribute to a high quality standard. Response forms similarly should allow for a standardised exchange of information, and this will be particularly important where service providers are unable to comply. Authenticated submission channels can guarantee the authenticity of the removal order, including the accuracy of the date and the time of sending and receipt of the order.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 185 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. This Regulation lays down uniform rules to prevent and address the misuse of hosting services for the dissemination of terrorist content online. It lays down in particular:
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 188 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) a set of measures to be put in place by Member States to identify terrorist content, to enable its swift removal by hosting service providers in accordance with Union law providing suitable safeguards for freedom of expression and information and to facilitate cooperation with the competent authorities in other Member States, hosting service providers and where appropriate relevant Union bodies.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 197 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. This Regulation shall not have the effect of undermining the obligation to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty on the European Union.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 204 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) 'hosting service provider' means a provider of information society services consisting in the storage of information provided by and at the request of the content provider and in making the information stored available to third partiese public;
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 237 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
(6) ‘dissemination of terrorist content’ means making terrorist content available to third partiese public on the hosting service providers’ services;
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 242 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Hosting service providers shall take appropriate, reasonable and proportionate actions in accordance with this Regulation, against the dissemination of terrorist content and to protect users from terrorist content. In doing so, they shall act in a diligent, proportionate and non- discriminatory manner, and with due regard in all circumstances to the fundamental rights of the users and take into account the fundamental importance of the freedom of expression and information in an open and democratic society. In particular those actions shall not amount to general monitoring.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 263 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) rules on duties of care to be applied by hosting service providers in order to prevent the public dissemination of terrorist content through their services and ensure, where necessary, its swift removal;
2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 267 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point g
(g) where relevantnecessary and appropriate, the decision not to disclose information about the removal of terrorist content or the disabling of access to it referred to in Article 11.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 268 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point g a (new)
(g a) deadlines for appeal for the hosting service provider and for the content provider.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 290 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Hosting service providers shallmay, where appropriate, in particular where there is a non-incidental level of exposure to terrorist content and receipt of removal orders, take proactive measures to protect their services against the dissemination of terrorist content. The measures shall be effective, targeted and proportionate, taking into accounto the risk and level of exposure to terrorist content, paying particular regard to the fundamental rights of the users, and the fundamental importance of the freedom of expression and information in an open and democratic society.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 306 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. Where the competent authority referred to in Article 17(1)(c) considers that the proactive measures taken and reported under paragraph 2 do not respect the principles of necessity and proportionality or are insufficient in mitigating and managing the risk and level of exposure, it may request the hosting service provider to re-evaluate the measures needed or to take specific additional proactive measures. For that purpose, the hosting service provider shall cooperate with the competent authority referred to in Article 17(1)(c) with a view to identifying the changes or specific measures that the hosting service provider shall put in place, establishing key objectives and benchmarks as well as timelines for their implementation.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 310 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. Where no agreement can be reached within the three months from the request pursuant to paragraph 3, the competent authority referred to in Article 17(1)(c) may issue a decision imposing specific additional necessary and proportionate proactive measures. The competent authority shall not impose a general monitoring obligation. The decision shall take into account, in particular, the economic capacity of the hosting service provider and the effect of such measures on the fundamental rights of the users and the fundamental importance of the freedom of expression and information. Such a decision shall be sent to the main establishment of the hosting service provider or to the legal representative designated by the service provider. The hosting service provider shall regularly report on the implementation of such measures as specified by the competent authority referred to in Article 17(1)(c).
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 324 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Hosting service providers shall set out in their terms and conditions their policy to prevent the dissemination of terrorist content, including, where appropriate, a meaningful explanation of the functioning of proactive measures including particular on the use of automated tools.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 327 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Hosting service providers and the authorities competent to issue removal orders shall publish annual transparency reports on action taken against the dissemination of terrorist content.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 333 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point d
(d) overview and outcome of complaint procedures, including the number of cases in which it was established that content was wrongly identified as terrorist content.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 340 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Safeguards shall consist, in particular, of human oversight and verifications wherof the appropriate and, in any event,ness of the decision to remove or deny access to content, in particular with regard to the right to freedom of expression and information. Human oversight shall be required where a detailed assessment of the relevant context is required in order to determine whether or not the content is to be considered terrorist content.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 344 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Hosting service providers shall promptly examine every complaint that they receive and reinstate the content without undue delay where the removal or disabling of access was unjustified. They shall inform the complainant about the outcome of the examination within two weeks from the receipt of the complaint.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 346 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2, the complaint mechanism of hosting service providers shall be complementary to the applicable laws and procedures of the Member States.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 348 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. Upon request of the content provider, the hosting service provider shall inform the content provider about the reasons for the removal or disabling of access, including the legal basis for this action, and possibilities to contest the decision.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 349 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. An appeal as referred to in Article 4 (9) shall be lodged with the court of the Member State where the hosting provider has its main establishment or where the legal representative designated by the hosting service provider pursuant to Article 16 resides or is established.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 366 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Each Member State shall designate the authority or authorities competent to
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 380 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. The competent authority shall have the power to issue a decisionExcept in cases where a hosting service provider has already been in receipt of a prior removal order, the competent authority must communicate with the hosting service provider before issuing a removal order requiring the hosting service provider to remove terrorist content or disable access to it.
2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 391 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Competent authorities shall consider unintentional delays, in particular by small and medium sized businesses and start ups, to be mitigating factors when determining the types and level of penalties.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 394 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
No sooner than [three years from the date of application of this Regulation], the Commission shall carry out an evaluation of this Regulation and submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the application of this Regulation including the functioning of the effectiveness of the safeguard mechanisms. The report shall also cover the impact of this Regulation on freedom of expression and information. Where appropriate, the report shall be accompanied by legislative proposals. Member States shall provide the Commission with the information necessary for the preparation of the report.
2019/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 419 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Upon request by the hosting service provider or by the content provider, the competent authority shall provide a detailed statement of reasons, including the reasons why the content must be removed within the deadline set out in paragraph 2, this shall be without prejudice to the obligation of the hosting service provider to comply with the removal order within the deadline set out in paragraph 2.
2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 442 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4 a Consultation procedure for removal orders 1. The issuing authority shall submit a copy of the removal order to the competent authority referred to in Article 17(1)(a) of the Member State in which the main establishment of the hosting service provider is located at the same time it is transmitted to the hosting service provider in accordance with Article 4(5). 2. In cases where the competent authority of the Member State in which the main establishment of the hosting service provider is located has reasonable grounds to believe that the removal order may impact fundamental interests of that Member State, it shall inform the issuing competent authority. 3. The issuing authority shall take these circumstances into account and shall, where necessary, withdraw or adapt the removal order.
2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 473 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Where it has been informed according to Article 4(9) and after establishing that a hosting service provider has received a non-incidental number of final removal orders, the competent authority referred to in Article 17(1)(c) shall request the hosting service provider to submit a report, within three months after receipt of the request and thereafter at least on an annual basis, on the specific proactive measures it has taken, including by using automated tools, with a view to:
2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 518 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5
5. A hosting service provider may, at any time, request the competent authority referred to in Article 17(1)(c) a review and, where appropriate, to revoke a request or decision pursuant to paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 respectively. The competent authority shall provide a reasoned decision within a reasonable period of time after receiving the request by the hosting service provider. Decisions taken pursuant to Article 6(4) shall, at the request of the hosting service provider, be subject to review by a competent national court.
2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 681 #

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall lay down the rules on penalties applicable to systematic and ongoing breaches of the obligations by hosting service providers under this Regulation and shall take all necessary measures to ensure that they are implemented. Such penalties shall be limited to infringement of the obligations pursuant to:
2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 38 #

2018/0227(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
(9 a) The Commission's "FinTech Action plan: For a more competitive and innovative European financial sector" highlighted the role regulatory "sandboxes" can play in facilitating technological innovation, and that a consistent approach among supervisors would foster the roll out innovation across the EU single market; and the UK's Information Commissioner’s Office consulted on establishing a “regulatory sandbox” focused on AI applications which it intends to launch in 2019;
2018/10/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 60 #

2018/0227(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
(40) The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), applicable from May 2018 onwards, by providing for a single set of rules directly applicable in the Member States legal orders, will guarantee the free flow of personal data between EU Member States and reinforce trust and security of the individuals, two indispensable elements for a real Digital Single Market. The actions undertaken under this Programme, when they involve the processing of personal data, should therefore support the application of the GDPR, for instance in the field of artificial intelligence and blockchain technologybut recognises that the GDPR may not be fully compatible with recent technological developments, for instance in the field of artificial intelligence and blockchain technology, and that regulatory flexibility may be required to reap the full benefits of these technologies.
2018/10/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 66 #

2018/0227(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) build up and strengthen core artificial intelligence capacities in the Union, including data resources and libraries of algorithms in compliance with data protection legislation, unless developed as part of a regulatory"sandbox";
2018/10/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 72 #

2018/0227(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) support, together with Member States, the procurement of advanced cybersecurity equipment, tools and data infrastructures in full compliance with data protection legislation, unless developed as part of a regulatory"sandbox";
2018/10/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 54 #

2018/0168(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) Any existing or new types of motor vehicles fall within the scope of Directive 2009/103/EC. However, some vehicles are less likely to cause significant damage to persons or property than others. It would be disproportionate to extend the scope of compulsory third party liability insurance to such vehicles. It is therefore necessary to limit the scope of Directive 2009/103/EC to those vehicles for which the Union considers that safety and security requirements are necessary before they are placed in the market, i.e. vehicles that are subject to type-approval. In line with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, requirements at EU level should cover those vehicles that have the potential to cause significant damage and might be used in a cross-border situation. Nothing in this Directive prevents Member States from maintaining or introducing new provisions covering these vehicles. Member States should continue to be able to decide at national level the appropriate level of protection of road users who may be injured by vehicles other than those subject to type-approval.
2018/12/10
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 58 #

2018/0168(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 b (new)
(3b) It is further appropriate to exclude from the scope of Directive 2009/103/EC all vehicles intended exclusively for use in non-traffic situations. These vehicles are generally used in controlled environments and are subject to other forms of liability insurance, such as employers’ or public liability insurance, which ensures that injured parties received adequate compensation. However, it should continue to be possible for individual Member States to decide whether compulsory motor insurance is the appropriate form of cover for these vehicles and under what conditions.
2018/12/10
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 60 #

2018/0168(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 c (new)
(3c) Use of vehicles in traffic includes the use of a vehicle on a road or other public place. Traffic implies a certain degree of volume and regularity. The isolated use of a vehicle for other purposes in areas without public access should not be seen as the use of a vehicle in traffic and should not lead to an obligation to hold compulsory insurance. Where a vehicle is used in non-traffic- related situations, Member States should be able to limit the scope of compulsory insurance. This is particularly relevant in situations where the principal function of the vehicle, at the time of the accident, was related to secondary functions of that vehicle. Nothing in this Directive prevents Member States from maintaining or introducing new provisions that extend the scope of compulsory motor insurance to these situations.
2018/12/10
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 61 #

2018/0168(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 d (new)
(3d) To avoid a situation where insurance is required for vehicles which are registered but incapable of being moved because they are in a museum, because they are undergoing restoration or because they are not being used for a lengthy period of time and are immobilised by the disconnection of the battery or other essential component, the scope of Directive 2009/103/EC should be explicitly limited to vehicles which are capable of use.
2018/12/10
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 68 #

2018/0168(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
(8) Previous claims histories of policyholders who seek to conclude new insurance contracts with insurance undertakings should be easily authenticated in order to facilitate the recognition of such claims history when concluding a new insurance policy. In order to simplify the verification and authentication of claims history statements, it is important that the content and format of the statement of such claims histories are the same across all Member States. In addition, insurance undertakings that take into account claims history statements to determine motor insurance premiums should not discriminate on the basis of nationality or solely on the basis of the previous Member State of residence of the policyholder. To enable Member States to verify how insurance undertakings treat claims history statements, insurance undertakings should publish their policies in respect of their use of claims history when calculating premiums.
2018/12/10
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 75 #

2018/0168(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) To promote a consistent approach for victims of incidents where a motor vehicle is used as a weapon to commit a violent crime or terrorist act, Member States should ensure their respective national motor guarantee body regulated by Article 10 of Directive 2009/103/EC handles any and all claims arising from such an act.
2018/12/10
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 82 #

2018/0168(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 1 – point 1 a
1a. ‘use of a vehicle’ means any use of such vehicle, intended normally to serve as a means of transportbe used in traffic, that is consistent with the normal function of thate vehicle, irrespective of the vehicle's characteristics and irrespective of the terrain on which the motor vehicle is used and of whether it is stationary or in motion.;
2018/12/10
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 84 #

2018/0168(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 b (new)
Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 1
(1b) In Article 3, the first paragraph is amended as follows: Each Member State shall, subject to Article 5, take all appropriate measures to ensure that civil liability in respect of the use of vehiclesvehicles which are capable of use normally based in its territory isare covered by insurance.
2018/12/10
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 93 #

2018/0168(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
(3a) In Article 10, the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 is amended as follows: 1. Each Member State shall set up or authorise a body with the task of providing compensation, at least up to the limits of the insurance obligation for damage to property or personal injuries caused by an unidentified vehicle or a vehicle for which the insurance obligation provided for in Article 3 has not been satisfied, including with respect to incidents where a motor vehicle is used as a weapon to commit a violent crime or terrorist act.
2018/12/10
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 95 #

2018/0168(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 a – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Each Member States shall set up or authorise a body to compensate injured parties habitually residing within their territory, at least up to the limits of the insurance obligation referred to in Article 9(1) for personal injuries or material damage, caused by a vehicle insured by an insurance undertaking in any of the following situations:
2018/12/10
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 96 #

2018/0168(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 a – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the insurance undertaking or its claims representative has not provided a reasoned reply to the points made in a claim for compensation within three monthsa reasonable period of time after the date on which the injured party presented his or her claim to that insurance undertaking.
2018/12/10
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 102 #

2018/0168(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 10 a – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall not allow the body referred to in paragraph 1 to make the payment of compensation subject to any reduction or requirements other than those laid down in this Directive and in particular not the requirement that the injured party should establish that the party liable or the insurance undertaking is unable or refuses to pay.
2018/12/10
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 122 #

2018/0168(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 16 – paragraph 5 a (new)
The Commission shall consult with all relevant stakeholders before adopting those implementing acts and seek to reach a mutual agreement between stakeholders as to the content and the form of the claims history statement.
2018/12/10
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 133 #

2018/0168(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Directive 2009/103/EC
Article 28 c
No later than seven years after the date of transposition of this Directive, an evaluation of this Directive shall be carried out. That evaluation shall, in particular, assess the suitability of this Directive in light of technological developments related to autonomous and semi- autonomous vehicles. The Commission shall communicate the conclusions of the evaluation accompanied by its observations to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee.
2018/12/10
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 104 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
(17) Automated and connected vehicles may be able to make a huge contribution in reducing road fatalities since in the region of 90 per cent of road accidents are estimated to result from human error. As automated vehicles will gradually be taking over tasks of the driver, harmonised rules and technical requirements for automated vehicle systems, such as a transparent, technology neutral and non-proprietary standard that provides verifiable safety assurance for AV decision-making, should be adopted at Union level.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 108 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 a (new)
(18a) As the average age of a vehicle in the Union is over 10 years, retrofitting existing vehicles with Advanced Driver Assistance Systems can contribute substantially to reducing road fatalities in the Union. In this regard, the Union should continue to assess whether retrofitting the existing fleet, particularly buses and trucks, with Advanced Driver Assistance Systems is feasible and cost- effective.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 109 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 b (new)
(18b) Vehicle security is not any longer limited to protection against vehicle theft, but needs to target protection of the whole vehicle architecture preventing loss or compromise of system and component integrity. This, to ensure that a vehicle, system, separate technical unit, components as well as parts and equipment compliance with safety and environmental approval requirements remain effective and have reduced risk of being compromised during the vehicle’s life, within reasonable but up to date protection measures. The connectivity and automation of vehicles increase the possibilities for unauthorised, remote access to in-vehicle data and illegal modification of software over-the-air; to take into account the upcoming risks resulting of that, UN Regulations on security, cyber security and over-the-air software updates should be applied mandatory as soon as possible after their entry into force. It should be ensured that vehicles, their systems, separate technical units, components, parts and equipment are equipped with up to date security technology when placed on the market and that this high level of security is maintained by regularly updating hardware and software until a vehicle’s end-of-life. However, these security measures should not compromise the obligations from the vehicle manufacturer to provide access to comprehensive diagnostic information and in-vehicle data relevant to repair and maintain a vehicle.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 113 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
(25) Detailed technical requirements and specific adequate test procedures for type- approval of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units should be laid down in delegated acts before the date of application of this Regulation. Moreover, manufacturers should be allowed sufficient time to adapt to the requirements of this Regulation and the delegated implementing acts adopted pursuant to it. Some vehicles are produced in small quantities. Therefore, it is appropriate that requirements set out in this Regulation and its implementing measures, take into account such vehicles or classes of vehicles where such requirements are incompatible with the use or design of such vehicles, or where the additional burden imposed by them is disproportionate. Therefore, the application of this Regulation should be deferred, .
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 124 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 3
(3) ‘intelligent speed assistance’ means a system to aid the driver in observing the appropriate speed for the road environment by providing haptic feedback through the accelerator pedal with speed limitcontrol or through visual or audible speed warning information obtained through observation of road signs and signals, based on infrastructure signals or electronic map data, or both, made available in-vehicle;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 133 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 6
(6) ‘advanced distraction recognition’ means a system capable of recognition of the level visual attention of the driver to the traffic situation and warning the driver if needed;deleted
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 135 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 7
(7) ‘emergency stop signal’ means rapid flashing stop lamps or direction- indicator lamps to indicate to other road users to the rear of the vehicle that a high retardation force is being applied to the vehicle relative to the prevailing road conditions;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 141 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 8
(8) ‘reversing detection’ means a camera or monitor, optical or detection system to make the driver aware of people and objects at the rear of the vehicle with the primary aim to avoid collisions upon reversing;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 143 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 11
(11) ‘lane-keeping system’ means a system monitoring thassisting the driver in keeping a safe position of the vehicle with respect to the lane or road boundary and applying a torque to the steering wheel, or pressure to the brakes, at least when a lane departure occurs or is about to occur and a collision may be imminent;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 151 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 21
(21) ‘automated vehicle’ means a motor vehicle designed and constructed to move autonomously for extendedcertain periods of time without continuous human supervision, but where driver intervention is still expected or required in case operational design domain limits are reached;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 153 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 27 a (new)
(27a) ‘security’ means state-of-the-art protection against vehicle theft as well as against tampering of vehicle systems, components, parts or equipment that could result in compromised or abolished system integrity leading to an unsafe vehicle or incompliance with environmental performance requirements but that continues allowing comprehensive access to repair and maintenance relevant data and information;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 155 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point 27 b (new)
(27b) ‘cyber security’ means protection against remote tampering and vehicle integrity compromising manipulations;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 159 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 5 – point d
(d) on board instruments, electrical system, vehicle lighting and protection against unauthorized usesecurity including cyberattackssecurity;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 165 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. When adopting delegated acts under this Article the Commission shall take into account vehicles or classes of vehicles which are produced in small quantities. Where such requirements are incompatible with the use or design of such vehicles, or where the additional burden imposed by them is disproportionate to those vehicles, the Commission shall introduce derogations or other modifications to the requirements in order to mitigate the impact for small volume manufacturers or ultra small volume manufacturers, where necessary.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 180 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) advanced distraction recognition;deleted
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 191 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) it shall be possible for the driver to feel through the accelerator pedal that the applicable speed limit is reached or exceededknow the applicable speed limit has been reached either through haptic feedback on the accelerator control or through visual or audible speed warning information;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 202 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) it shall not be possible to switch off or supress the system;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 208 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) it shall be possible for the driver to override the system’s prompted vehicle speed smoothly through normal operation of the accelerator pedal without need for kick-downcontrol;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 220 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. A motor vehicle equipped with an advanced distraction recognition system in accordance with point (d) of paragraph 1, may be considered to meet the requirement in point (c) of that paragraph too.deleted
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 243 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) it shall be possible to switch off systems only one at a time, and only at standstill with the parking brake engaged, by a complex sequence of actions to be carried out by the driver;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 254 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) the way in which they are capable of recording and storing data shall be such that the data is protected against manipulation and can be made available to national authorities, on the basis of Union or national legislation in compliance with Regulation (EU) No 2016/679, over a standardised interface or any other publicly or commonly accessible connector or solution available on the market for the purposes of accident data analysis, and such that the precise vehicle type, version and variant, and in particular the active safety and accident avoidance systems fitted to the vehicle, can be identified.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 273 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 5
5. Vehicles of categories M2, M3, N2 and N3 shall be designed and constructed so as to enhance the direct visibility of vulnerable road users from the driver seat. The requirement shall remove the blind spot to the front and driver’s side of trucks and significantly reduce the blind spot to the nearside of the truck. The requirement shall be varied depending on truck category.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 284 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – title
Specific requirements relating to assisted or automated vehicles
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 285 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. In addition to the other requirements of this Regulation and of the delegated acts adopted pursuant to it that are applicable to vehicles of the respective categories, assisted or automated vehicles shall comply with the requirements set out in the delegated acts adopted under paragraph 2 relating to:
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 290 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) event (accident) data recorders for assisted or automated vehicles;
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 292 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) harmonised format for the exchange of data for instance for multi- brand vehicle platooning.deleted
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 300 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 a (new)
Article 16a Review and Reporting By ... [three years after the date of application of this Regulation] and every three years thereafter, the Commission shall submit an evaluation report to the European Parliament and to the Council, on the achievements of all road safety measures and systems, including those retrofitted to existing vehicles, and their penetration rates.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 308 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
The delegated acts referred to in Article 12 shall be published at least 24 months before their application.
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 323 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Table – subheading 2 – line 9
Heavy duty direct vision D D D DC C C C
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 328 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Table – subheading 4 –title
Requirements concerning Requirements concerning ON BORD INSTRUMENTS, ON BORD INSTRUMENTS, ELECTRICAL SYSTEM AND VEHICLE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM, VEHICLE LIGHTING LIGHTING
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 329 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Table – subheading 4 – line 3
Protection against UN Regulation No 18 unauthorised use, cyber- UN Regulation No 97 A A A1 A1 A A1 A1 A A 1 attacks, immobilizer and alarm systems UN Regulation No 116 alarm systems
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 331 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Table – subheading 4 – line 3 a (new)
Vehicle security requirements, including A A A A A A A A A A A cyber security
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 336 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Table – subheading 5 – line 3
Advanced distraction recognition may also cover drowsiness and attention Advanced distraction detection. Distraction avoidance C C C C C C recognition by technical means may also be taken into consideration as an alternative to advanced distraction recognition. deleted
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 346 #

2018/0145(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – Notes to the table – point D
Date for refusal to grant EU type- approval: [PO: Please insert the date 48 months after the date of application of this Regulation] Date for the prohibition of the registration of vehicles, as well as the placing on the market and entry into service of components and separate technical units: [PO: Please insert the date 84 months after the date of application of this Regulation]deleted
2018/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 62 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
(2) Online intermediation services can be crucial for the commercial success of undertakings who use such services to reach consumers. The growing intermediation of transactions through online intermediation services, fuelled by strong data-driven indirect network effects, lead to an increased dependence of suchusage by business users, including micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, onf those services in order for them to reach consumers. Given that increasing dependeninteraction and the scalability of online services, the providers of those services often havecan have superior bargaining power, depending on the nature of their services, the sector to which they belong and the availability of alternatives. If this superior bargaining power, which is misused, it can enables them to effectively behave unilaterally in a way that can be unfair and that can be harmful to the legitimate interests of their businesses users and, indirectly, also of consumers in the Union.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 70 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4) The dependence ofrelationship between business users onand online intermediation services may also not leads to a situation in which business users often have limidequated possibilities to seek redress where unilateral actions of the providers of those services lead to a dispute. In many cases, those providers do not offer accessible and effective internal complaint-handling systems. Existing alternative out-of-court dispute settlement mechanisms can also be ineffective for a variety of reasons, including a lack of specialised mediators and business users’ fear of retaliation.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 87 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
(6) A uniform and targeted set of mandatory rules should therefore be established at Union level to ensure a fair, predictable, sustainable and trusted online business environment within the internal market by ensuring, in particular, that the business users of online intermediation services are afforded appropriate transparency as well as effective redress possibilities throughout the Union. Those rules should also provide for appropriate transparency as regards the ranking of corporate website users in the search results generated by online search engines. At the same, those rules should be such as to safeguardrecognise and support the important innovation potential of the wider online platform economy.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 99 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) A wide variety of business-to- consumer commercial relations are intermediated online by providers operating multi-sided services that are essentially based on the same ecosystem- building business model. In order to capture the relevant services, online intermediation services should be defined in a precise and technologically-neutral manner. In particular, the services should consist of information society services, which are characterised by the fact that they aim to facilitate the initiating of direct transactions between business users and consumers, irrespective of whether the transactions are ultimately concluded either online, on the online portal of the provider of the online intermediation services in question or that of the business user, or offline. In addition, the services should be provided on the basis of contractual relationships both between the providers and business users and between the providers and the consumers. Such a contractual relationship should be deemed to exist where both parties concerned express their intention to be bound in an unequivocal and verifiable manner, without an express written agreement necessarily being required.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 112 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
(9) Examples of online intermediation services covered by this Regulation should consequently include online e-commerce market places, including collaborative ones on which business users are active, online software applications services and online social media services. However, this Regulation should not apply to online advertising serving tools or online advertising exchanges which are not provided with the aim of facilitating the initiation of direct transactions andor which do not involve a contractual relationship with consumers. This Regulation should also not apply to online payment services, since they do not themselves meet the applicable requirements but are rather inherently auxiliary to the transaction for the supply of goods and services to the consumers concerned.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 131 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) To ensure that the general terms and conditions of a contractual relationship enable business users to determine the commercial conditions for the use, termination and suspension of online intermediation services, and to achieve predictability regarding their business relationship, those terms and conditions should be drafted in clear and unambiguous language which is easily understood by an average business user. Terms and conditions should not be considered to have been drafted in clear and unambiguous language where they are vague, unspecific or lack detail on important commercial issues and thus fail to give business users a reasonable degree of predictability on the most important aspects of the contractual relationship.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 141 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 a (new)
(14a) Intermediary service providers may modify their terms and conditions in response to practices they become aware of that harm consumers in a variety of different manners. Given the huge diversity of content that business users distribute through intermediaries, such harmful practices may not always be foreseen in specific terms by the intermediary services provider. In such cases, intermediary service providers are exempted from the 15 days notice period for application of the new terms and conditions.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 146 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) In order to protect business users it should be possible for a competent court to establish that non-compliant terms and conditions are not binding on the business user concerned, with effects ex nunc. Any such finding by a court should however only concern the specific provisions of the terms and conditions which are not compliant. The remaining provisions should remain valid and enforceable, in as far as they can be severed from the non- compliant provisions. Sudden modifications to existing terms and conditions may significantly disrupt business users’ operations. In order to limit such negative effects on business users, and to discourage such behaviour, modifications made in contravention of the obligation to provide a set notice period, should therefore be null and void, that is, deemed to have never existed with effects erga omnes and ex tunc for the duration of that notice period.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 156 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16) A provider of online intermediation services can have legitimate reasons to decide to suspend or terminate the provision of its services, in whole or in part, to a given business user, including by delisting individual goods or services of a given business user or effectively removing search results. However, given that such decisions can significantly affect the interests of the business user concerned, they should be properly informed of the reasons thereof. The statement of reasons should allow business users to ascertain whether there is scope to challenge the decision, thereby improving the possibilities for business users to seek effective redress where necessary. In addition, requiring a statement of reasons should help to prevent or remedy any unintended removal of online content provided by business users which the provider incorrectly considers to be illegal content, in line with Commission Recommendation (EU) No 2018/33422. The statement of reasons should identify the objective ground or grounds for the decision, based on the grounds that the provider had set out in advance in its terms and conditions, and refer in a proportionate manner to the relevant specific circumstances that led to that decision. However, such statement of reasons should not be provided if the information could help a business user suspected of performing practices that are harmful to the consumers or to the platform maintain or improve their harmful practices. _________________ 22 Commission Recommendation (EU) No 2018/334 of 1 March 2018 on measures to effectively tackle illegal content online (OJ L 63, 6.3.2018, p. 50).
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 159 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
(17) The ranking of goods and services by the providers of online intermediation services has an important impacts on consumer choiceawareness of offers and, consequently, oncan influence the commercial success of the business users offering those goods and services to consumers. Providers of online intermediation services should therefore outline the main parameters determining ranking beforehand, in order to improve predictability for business users, to allow them to betto allow them to better understand the functioning of the ranking mechanism. This description should provide business users with an adequater understand the functioning of how the ranking mechanism and to enable them to compare the ranking practices of various providertakes account of the characteristics of the goods or services offered by the business user, and their relevance to the consumers of the specific online intermediation services. The notion of main parameter should be understood to refer to any general criteria, processes, specific signals incorporated into algorithms or other adjustment or demotion mechanisms used in connection with the ranking. The description of the main parameters determining ranking should also include an explanation of any possibility for business users to actively influence ranking against remuneration, as well as of the relative effects thereof. This description should provide business users with an adequate understanding of how the ranking mechanism takes account of the characteristics of the actual goods or services offered by the business user, and their relevance to the consumers of the specific online intermediation services.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 164 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) Similarly, the ranking of websites by the providers of online search engines, notably of those websites through which undertakings offer goods and services to consumers, has an important impact on consumer choice and the commercial success of corporate website users. Providers of online search engines should therefore provide a description of the main parameters determining the ranking of all indexed websites, including those of to corporate website users as well as other websites. In addition to the characteristics of the goods and services and their relevance for consumers, this description should in the case of online search engines also allow corporate website users to obtain an adequate understanding of whether, and if so how and to what extent, certain design characteristics of the website used, such as their optimisation for display on mobile telecommunications devices, is taken into account.. In the absence of a contractual relationship between providers of online search engines and corporate website users, that description should be available to the public in an obvious and easily accessible location on the relevant online search engine. To ensure predictability for corporate website users, the description should also be kept up to date, including the possibility that any changes to the main parameters should be made easily identifiable. Whilst the providers are under no circumstances required to disclose any trade secrets as defined in Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council23 when complying with this requirement to disclose the main ranking parameters, the description given should at least be based on actual data on the relevance of the ranking parameters used. _________________ 23 Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure (OJ L 157, 15.6.2016, p. 1).
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 189 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
(20) The ability to access and use data, including personal data, can enable important value creation in the online platform economy. Accordingly, it is important that providers of online intermediation services provide business users with a clear description of the scope, nature and conditions of their access to and use of certain categories of data. The description should be proportionate and might refer to general access conditions, rather than an exhaustive identification of actual data, or categories of data, in order to enable business users to understand whether they can use the data to enhance value creation, including by possibly retaining third-party data services. Processing of personal data should comply with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council.24 _________________ 24 Regulation (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) (Text with EEA relevant) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1) This Regulation should not require online intermediation services providers to share personal data with third parties beyond what is set out in their privacy policies.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 212 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
(25) Providers of online intermediation services should bear a reasonable proportion of the total costs of the mediation, taking into account all relevant elements of the case at hand. To that aim, the mediator should suggest which proportion is reasonable in the individual case. However, that proportion should never be less than half of those costs.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 218 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
(27) Various factors, such as limited financial means, a fear of retaliation and exclusive choice of law and forum provisions in terms and conditions, can limit the effectiveness of existing judicial redress possibilities, particularly those which require business users or corporate website users to act individually and identifiably. To ensure the effective application of this Regulation, organisations, associations representing business users or corporate website users, as well as certain public bodies set-up in Member States, should be granted the possibility to take action before national courts. Such action before national courts should aim to stop or prohibit infringements of the rules set out in this Regulation and to prevent future damage that could undermine sustainable business relationships in the online platform economy. In order to ensure that such organisations or associations exercise that right effectively and in an appropriate manner, they should meet certain criteria, in particular relating to transparency of funding. Considering the particular status of the relevant public bodies in Member States where such bodies have been set up, it should only be required that those have been specifically charged, in accordance with the relevant rules of national law, with bringing such actions either in the collective interest of the parties concerned or in the general interest, without there being a need to apply those criteria to such public bodies. Any such actions should in no way affect the rights of the business users and corporate website users to take judicial action on an individual basis.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 239 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. This Regulation shall apply where the terms and conditions of a contractual relationship, regardless of their name or form, are not individually negotiated by the parties to them.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 240 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. This Regulation is without prejudice to Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 254 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
(b) they, as a primary function, allow business users to offer goods or services to consumers, with a view to facilitating the initiating of direct transactions between those business users and consumers, irrespective of whethere those transactions are ultimately concluded on the online portal of the online intermediation service or business user;
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 263 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
(5) ‘online search engine’ means a digital service that allows users to perform searches of, in princip, including a website or a part thereof and applications, including mobile, all websites or websites in a particular language on the basis of a querypplications or other online interface that allows users to perform searches on any subject in the form of a keyword, phrase or other input, and returns linkresults in which information related to the requested content can be found;
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 276 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8
(8) ‘ranking’ means the relative prominence in search results given to the goods or services offered to consumers by business users through online intermediation services, or to websites indexed for consumers by online search engines, as presented, organised or communicated to those consumers by the providers of online intermediation services or by providers of online search engines, respectively, irrespective of the technological means used for such presentation, organisation or communication;
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 279 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
(10) ‘terms and conditions’ means all terms, conditions, and clauses and other information, irrespective of their name or form, which govern the contractual relationship between the provider of online intermediation services and their business users and are unilaterally determined by the provider of online intermediation services.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 293 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) are drafted in clear and unambiguous language;
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 303 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) set out the objective grounds for decisions to suspend or terminate, in whole or in part, the provision of their online intermediation services to business users.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 318 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services shall notify to the business users concerned of any envisaged modification of their terms and conditions, except where those modifications are of a purely administrative nature and have no negative effect on the business users concerned.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 328 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The envisaged modifications shall not be implemented before the expiry of a notice period which is reasonable and proportionate to the nature and extent of the envisaged modifications and to their consequences for the business user concerned. That notice period shall be at least 15 days from the date on which the provider of online intermediation services notifies the business users concerned about the envisaged modifications.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 334 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
During the 15 days’ notice period, business users should not be able to submit new goods, content or services to the platform unless they accept the new terms and conditions.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 341 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. Modifications to terms and conditions implemented by a provider of online intermediation services contrary to the provisions of paragraph 3 shall be null and void for the remainder of the notice period.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 347 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5
5. Paragraph 3 shall not apply where a provider of online intermediation services is subject to a legal obligation which requires it to modify its terms and conditions in a manner which does not allow it to respect the notice period referred to in the second subparagraph of paragraph 3. Paragraph 3 shall also not apply if the terms and conditions have been modified in order to protect the legitimate interests of users or the operation of the online intermediation service.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 368 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. The statement of reasons referred to in paragraph 1 shall contain a reference to the specific facts or circumstances that led to the decision of the provider of online intermediation services, as well as a reference to the applicable objective ground or grounds for that decision referred to in Article 3(1)(c).
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 372 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Paragraph 1 shall not apply where the provision of a statement of reasons would place the provider of online intermediation services at risk of: (a) a breach of a legal obligation or direction of a relevant enforcement authority, including where a statement of reasons would prejudice an ongoing investigation, or would otherwise risk legal liability for the provider or its affiliates; or (b) compromise the operation of the online intermediation service, including the risk of harm to other business users of the online intermediation service or other third parties. Where a provider of online services considers that the business user concerned has repeatedly contravened the applicable terms and conditions resulting in their suspension or termination, they shall not be required to provide a statement of reasons and shall instead inform the given business user that this subparagraph applies.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 388 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services shall set out in their terms and conditions the main parameters determining ranking and the reasons for the relative importance of those main parameters as opposed to other parameters.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 399 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Where those main parameters include the possibility to influence ranking against any direct or indirect remuneration paid by business users to the provider of online intermediation services concerned, that provider of online intermediation services shall also include in its terms and conditions a description of those possibilities and of the effects of such remuneration on ranking.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 405 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Providers of online search engines shall set out for corporate website users the main parameters determining ranking, by providing an easily and publicly available description, drafted in clear and unambiguous language on the online search engines of those providers. They shall keep that description up to date.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 418 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The descriptions referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be sufficient to enable the business users or corporate website users to obtain an adequate understanding of whether, and if so how and to what extent, the ranking mechanism takes account of the followingthe ranking mechanism as regards:
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 429 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Providers of online intermediation services and providers of online search engines shall, when complying with the requirements of this Article, not be required to disclose any trade secrets as defined in Article 2(1) of Directive (EU) 2016/943, nor any business sensitive information which could undermine the provider’s competitive advantage or facilitate the manipulation of results or the deception of customers.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 434 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Providers of online intermediation services and providers of online search engines shall make sure that the information revealed under this Article does not result in a consumer harm following manipulation of ranking by business users and corporate business websites.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 450 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of online intermediation services shall include in their terms and conditions a description of any material differentiated treatment which they give, or may give, in relation to, on the one hand, goods or services offered to consumers through those online intermediation services by either that provider itself or any business users which that provider controls and, on the other hand, other business users.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 516 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
3. Providers of online intermediation services shall, on request of the business user concerned, grant each business user access to anonymised consumer data which are generated through the facilitation of a transaction between consumers and the business user concerned. This obligation is without prejudice to the obligations with which online intermediation services must comply under the applicable data protection and privacy rules'.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 527 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8
Restrictions to offer different conditions 1. services, providers of online intermediation services restrict the ability of business users to offer the same goods and services to consumers under different conditions through other means than through those services, they shall include grounds for that restriction in their terms and conditions and make those grounds easily available to the public. Those grounds shall include the main economic, commercial or legal considerations for those restrictions. 2. paragraph 1 shall not affect any prohibitions or limitations in respect of the imposition of such restrictions that result from the application of other Union rules or from national rules that are in accordance with Union law and to which the providers of the online intermediation services are subject.Article 8 deleted through other means Where, in the provision of their The obligation set out in
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 553 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services shall provide for an internal system for handling the complaints of business users. The decision taken by the online intermediation services provider that is the subject of the complaint shall remain in force for the duration of the internal decision-making process.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 568 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) communicate to the complainant the outcome of the internal complaint- handling process, in an individualised manner and drafted in clear and unambiguous in clear language.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 577 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services shall annually establish and make easily available to the public information on the functioning and effectiveness of their internal complaint- handling system.deleted
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 580 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Providers of online intermediation services shall annually establish and makeinclude in documentation easily available to the publicbusiness users information on the functioning and effectiveness of their internal complaint-handling system.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 584 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
That information shall include the total number of complaints lodged, the subject- matter of the complaints, the time period needed to process the complaints and the decision taken on the complaints.deleted
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 588 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
That information shall include the total number of complaints lodged, the subject- matter of themain types of complaints, the average time period needed to process the complaints and the decision taken on the complaints, whilst protecting the privacy of the business users involved.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 600 #

2018/0112(COD)

Providers of online intermediation services shallmay identify in their terms and conditions one or more mediators with which they are willing to engage to attempt to reach an agreement with business users on the settlement, out of court, of any disputes between the provider and the business user arising in relation to the provision of the online intermediation services concerned, including complaints that could not be resolved by means of the internal complaint-handling system referred to in Article 9.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 612 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
The decision taken by the online intermediation services provider at the source of the dispute between the latter and the business user shall remain in force for the duration of the mediation process.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 620 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. Providers of online intermediation services and business users shall engage in good faith in any attempt to reach an agreement through the mediation of any of the mediators which they identified in accordance with paragraph 1, with a view to reaching an agreement on the settlement of the dispute.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 630 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. Providers of online intermediation services shall bear a reasonable proportion of the total costs of mediation in each individual case. A reasonable proportion of those total costs shall be determined, on the basis of a suggestion by the mediator, by taking into account all relevant elements of the case at hand, in particular the relative merits of the claims of the parties to the dispute, the conduct of the parties, as well as the size and financial strength of the parties relative to one another. However, providers of online intermediation services shall in any case bear at least half of the total cost.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 663 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Organisations or associations shall have the right referred to in paragraph 1 only where, at the time of bringing the action, they meet all of the following requirements:
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 675 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) they have no structural or financial interrelationship with a third person or organisation that financially benefits of the action by providing legal assistance or financial support;
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 680 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) the entity has the know-how, human and financial resources and ability to conduct the litigation in question efficiently and in the interests of the group they represent;
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 685 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c b (new)
(cb) the entity has clearly communicated any costs and risks to those business users or corporate website users before acting on their behalf and has obtained the consent of a majority of those users following a clear request to bring an action on their behalf;
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 686 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c c (new)
(cc) the entity has existed for at least 4 years before initiating a declaratory action
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 715 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. By [date: three years after the date of entry into forceapplication], and subsequently every three years, the Commission shall evaluate this Regulation and report to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee.
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 723 #

2018/0112(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. It shall apply from [date: sixeighteen months following the day of its publication].
2018/10/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 43 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) In order to ensure a wide application of harmonised rules on clinical aspects of HTA and enable pooling of expertise and resources across HTA bodies, it is appropriate to require joint clinical assessments to be carried out for all medicinal products undergoing the central marketing authorisation procedure provided for under Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council,11 which incorporate a new active substance, and where those medicinal products are subsequently authorised for a new therapeutic indication. Joint clinical assessments should also be carried out on certain medical devices within the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of the Council12 which are in the highest risk classes and for which the relevant expert panels have provided their opinions or views. A selection of medical devices for joint clinical assessment should be made based on specific criteria. _________________ 11 Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency (OJ L 136, 30.4.2004, p. 1). 12Regulation (EU) 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2017 on medical devices, amending Directive 2001/83/EC, Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 and Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 and repealing Council Directives 90/385/EEC and 93/42/EEC (OJ L 117, 5.5.2017, p. 1).
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 46 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) In order to ensure a Member-State led approach to joint clinical assessments and scientific consultations, Member States should designate national HTA authorities and bodies which inform decision-making as members of the Coordination Group. The designated authorities and bodies should ensure an appropriately high level of representation in the Coordination Group and technical expertise in its sub- groups, taking into account the need to provide expertise on the HTA of medicinal products and medical devices.
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 51 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) The establishment of a time-frame for the joint clinical assessments for medical devices should take into account the highly decentralised market access pathway for medical devices and the availability of appropriate evidence data required to carry out a joint clinical assessment. As the required evidence may only become available after a medical device has been placed on the market and in order to allow for the selection of medical devices for joint clinical assessment at an appropriate time, it should be possible for assessments of such devices to take place following market launch of medical devices.deleted
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 53 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
(19) In all cases the joint work carried out under this Regulation, in particular the joint clinical assessments, should produce high quality and timely results, and not delay or interfere with the CE marking of medical devices or market access of health technologies. This work should be separate and distinct from regulatory assessments of the safety, quality, efficacy or performance of health technologies carried out pursuant to other Union legislation and have no bearing on decisions taken in accordance with other Union legislation.
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 62 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
(25) In order to ensure a uniform approach to the joint work provided for in this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission to establish a common procedural and methodological framework for clinical assessments, procedures for joint clinical assessments and procedures for joint scientific consultations. Where appropriate, distinct rules should be developed for medicinal products and medical devices. In the development of such rules, the Commission should take into account the results of the work already undertaken in the EUnetHTA Joint Actions. It should also take into account initiatives on HTA funded through the Horizon 2020 research programme, as well as regional initiatives on HTA such as the Beneluxa and Valletta Declaration initiatives. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council.13 _________________ 13 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by the Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 83 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) medical devices classified as class IIb and III pursuant to Article 51 of Regulation (EU) 2017/745 for which the relevant expert panels have provided a scientific opinion in the framework of the clinical evaluation consultation procedure pursuant to Article 54 of that Regulation;deleted
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 85 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) in vitro diagnostic medical devices classified as class D pursuant to Article 47 of Regulation (EU) 2017/74617 for which the relevant expert panels have provided their views in the framework of the procedure pursuant to Article 48(6) of that Regulation. _________________ 17Regulation (EU) 2017/746 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2017 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices and repealing Directive 98/79/EC and Commission Decision 2010/227/EU (OJ L 117, 5.5.2017, p. 176).deleted
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 86 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. The Coordination Group shall select the medical devices referred to in paragraph 1 points (b) and (c) for joint clinical assessment based on the following criteria: (a) unmet medical needs; (b) potential impact on patients, public health, or healthcare systems; (c) significant cross-border dimension; (d) major Union-wide added value; (e) the available resources.deleted
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 112 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shallmay decide to:
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 122 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shallmay notify the Commission of the outcome of a health technology assessment on a health technology which has been subject to a joint clinical assessment within 30 days from its completion. That notification shallmay be accompanied by information on how the conclusions of the joint clinical assessment report have been applied in the overall health technology assessment. The Commission shall facilitate the exchange of this information between Member States through the IT platform referred to in Article 27.
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 131 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) cooperation with the notified bodies and expert panels on the preparation and update of joint clinical assessments of medical devices.deleted
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 145 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) cooperation with the expert panels referred to in Article 106(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/745 on the joint scientific consultations on medical devices.deleted
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 151 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) collaborative assessments on medical devices;deleted
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 152 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) health technology assessments on health technologies other than medicinal products or medical devices;
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 167 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) facilitate cooperation with the relevant Union level bodies on the joint work on medical devices including the sharing of confidential information.deleted
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 179 #

2018/0018(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2
2. When preparing those implementing and delegated acts, the Commission shall take into account the distinctive characteristics of the medicinal product and medical device sectors.
2018/06/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 31 #

2017/2085(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to bring forward requirements administered under type approval processes to improve pedestrian and cyclist awareness and safety as regards heavy duty vehicles with large blind-spot zones; acknowledges requirements in the weights and dimensions Directive 96/63/EC as amended by Directive (EU) 2015/719 and encourages that the mandate given to the Commission is reviewed to ensure it is fit for purpose or renewed in future legislation in order that legal certainty is given to allow action in this area;
2017/06/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 37 #

2017/2085(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Recognises the added value of retrofitting older vehicles where appropriate with additional safety features included in newer models; believes that incentivising retrofitting through tax reductions and lower insurance premiums could be an effective tool in enhancing vehicle safety in Europe;
2017/06/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1 #

2017/2067(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission’s Strategy on Cooperative Intelligent Transport Systems (C-ITS); recognises the potential for both users and companies in a smarter use of data in the transport sector; considers C-ITS a valuable contributor to making transport safer, more efficient and, sustainable and responsive to user requirements;
2017/10/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 8 #

2017/2067(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Urges Europe to maintain its leading global position in the field of C- ITS; encourages all stakeholders to speed up the deployment of C-ITS technologies; underlines, in this respect, the need for high-quality, competitive, continuous and reliable services throughout the Union;
2017/10/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 11 #

2017/2067(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Deems it necessaryessential to ensure that consumers’ rights to privacy and to the protection of their personal data be fully upheld; therefore urges the Commission to ensure the correct implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation; calls on car manufacturers to inform consumers adequately about their rights and never to sell in-car data without explicit consent;
2017/10/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 20 #

2017/2067(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses the importance of technical harmonisation and standardisation of data and definitions regarding C-ITS, including backward compatibility, so as to ensure a successful roll-out and interoperability at all levelsof a technologically neutral approach in the interests of consumer choice and safety as well as to speed-up the roll-out in Europe of 5G;
2017/10/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 27 #

2017/2067(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Furthermore, where practicable, encourages the adoption of a global approach to technical harmonisation and standardisation of data;
2017/10/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 32 #

2017/2067(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the strategy’s focus on user involvement; encourages the Commission to facilitate the exchange of best practices; underlines the need for dedicated cross-border C-ITS pilots, includingsuch as, but not limited to C-Roads, supported by adequate funding;
2017/10/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 33 #

2017/2065(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines the need to tackle all forms of digital protectionism, including unjustified data localisation requirements, as a top priority, as such protectionism is contrary to the EU’s data protection rules and undermines the efficiency benefits of digital trade;
2017/10/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 38 #

2017/2065(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the Commission to act as the benchmark for setting high data protection standards on data flows and to prioritise tackling digital non-tariff barriers including unjustified data localisation requirements at international level and to consult the appropriate EU data protection institutions and bodies during the negotiation process of international or trade agreements that may potentially impact data protection.
2017/10/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 44 #

2017/2065(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses the benefits of working at an international level through the WTO on ensuring the free flow of data, and on a bilateral level pursuing data adequacy agreements in new trade agreements and seeking to add data annexes to existing agreements;
2017/10/02
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 8 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the emergence of the collaborative economy in transport and tourism services, acknowledging that, with an appropriate regulatory framework in place, it has potential tond its generation of new entrepreneurial opportunities, jobs and growth whilst provideing more varied andefficient, affordable and varied services to customers and to boost new forms of cooperative exchanges between citizens in the EU;
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 15 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Notes that customer satisfaction with collaborative economy transport and tourism services is much higher than with traditional services;
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 16 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Welcomes the opportunities the collaborative economy provides to small businesses, local economies and rural areas, particularly in the tourism sector, but also notably in the transport sector as well; furthermore notes that travellers with lower incomes particularly benefit from the collaborative economy;
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 19 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Highlights that in the tourism sector home-sharing represents a great use of resources and under-used space, especially in areas that do not traditionally benefit from tourism;
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 20 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1 d. Condemns, in this regard, regulations being imposed by some public authorities which seek to restrict the supply of tourist accommodation via the collaborative economy;
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 21 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 e (new)
1 e. Welcomes the opportunities the collaborative economy offers for flexible working hours that fit around other commitments, helping to bring people left out of the workplace back into employment;
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 35 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the Member States’ response to the development of collaborative business models has so far been very fragmented; welcomes in this regard the Commission communication on a European agenda for the collaborative economy, but regrets that it fails to establish an explicit harmonised legal framework for the collaborative economyalongside the sharing of best practices, enourages the Commission and Member States to ensure the full implementation of existing rules;
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 36 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that, if developed in a responsible manner, the collaborative economy maywill continue to create significant opportunities for citizens and consumers, who benefit from enhanced competition, tailored services, increased choice and lower prices;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 43 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Recognises that no two collaborative economy business models are the same, that the diversity of the collaborative economy is one of its strengths, and that therefore any overarching regulation of the entire collaborative economy would not be practicable;
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 47 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that, in the context of the collaborative economy, issues related to consumer protection, liability allocation, insurance schemes, social protection of workers (whether they are employed or self-employed) and data protection are the most urgent ones, and expects a regulatory intervention in that regard; emphasises that a regulatory frameworkhighly relevant, though not exclusive to collaborative business models; emphasises that any new proposals for regulation in these areas should follow an evidence- based approach, including examination of whether existing rules are being properly implemented, and should not be exclusive to collaborative business models, but rather on a sectoral basis; the regulatory framework in the EU transport sector should creatensure a level playing field, foster innovations and contribute to the overall development and fulfilment of the EU transport policy goals, such as transport decarbonisation, territorial cohesion, affordability, accessibility and safety;
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 48 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Agrees that the collaborative economy could also generates new entrepreneurial opportunities, jobs and growth, and could plays an important role in making the economic system not only more efficient, but also socially and environmentally sustainable;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 54 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Believes that, society benefits through sharing economy business models, from a better allocation of resources and assets that are otherwise under-used, which in turn contributes to greater sustainability in consumption and supports the circular economy;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 58 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Acknowledges, at the same time, that the collaborative economy iscan having a profounde a significant impact on long-established business models; underlinestands the riskchallenges of having different legal standards for similar economic actors; is concerned about the risk of redubalancing consumer protection with consumer empowerment, workers' rights andwith workers opportunities and the potential for tax compliance; acknowledges the effectnd tax transparency; recognises that the collaborative businesses are having on the urbaneconomy affects both urban and rural environments;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 71 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Points to the risks of increasing regulatory grey areas, the consequent disregard of existing regulations and the fragmentation of the Single MarketBelieves that regulation needs to be fit for purpose for the digital age; action to address regulatory grey areas and the fragmentation of the Single Market must be future proof and should underpin, not undermine digital innovations; is aware that, if not properly governed, these changes could result in legal uncertainty about applicable rules and constraints in exercising individual rights;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 84 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Considers the development of a dynamic and clear legal environment to be of paramount importance for the collaborative economy to flourish in the EU; notes that there are already many examples of using self and co-regulation to achieve these goals;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 86 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls the potential of collaborative economy models to significantly improve the efficiency of the transport system and reduce undesired externalities of traffic such as congestion and emissions from traffic; emphasises the need tobenefits of fully integrateing collaborative transport services into the conventional transport system and the need to avoid administrative systems or legislative measures which might lead to exclusion of collaborative transport services from transport planning and operations, with a view to enabling the creation of smooth complete travel chains and the provision of new forms of sustainable mobility;
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 93 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Welcomes the fact that the digital revolution has enabled seamless multimodal ticketing and travel in a single journey for transport users with collaborative economy apps;
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 110 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. UrgNotes the need tofor clearly distinguish between legitimate ride- sharing definitions to provide legal certainty, and in the provision of commercial transporting services (i.e. ‘non- professional’ vs ‘professional’ service provision) in EU terminology, and urges the Commissiocontext of transport to differentiate between carpooling on the one hand and sharing of costs in tohe come up with proposals to adapt Union legislation accordingly; considers the monetary threshold to be one advisable way to make this distinctionntext of an existing trip the driver planned for his own purpose, and regulated passenger transport services;
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 116 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Member States to establish measures to reduce the risk and possibility of the occurrence of grey economy activities and tax avoidance in accordance with collaborative economy services, and invites the Commission to facilitate an exchange of best practises between tax authorities and stakeholders with a view to developing appropriate solutions for payments of taxes in the sharing economy;deleted
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 120 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Member States to establish measurEncourages the sharing of best practices between Member States to reduce the risk and possibility of the occurrence of grey economy activities and tax avoidance in accordance with collaborative economy services, and invites the Commission to facilitate an exchange of best practises between tax authorities and stakeholders with a view to developing appropriate solutions for payments of taxes in the sharing economy;
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 126 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Is concerned that, while a largeNotes that many parts of the nascent collaborative economy aremains unregulated, covered by national and local regulation; recognises however that some significant differences are emerging among Member States due to national, regional and local regulations, as well as case-law, posing a risk of fragmentation of the Single Market;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 133 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Warns of the danger that, without an appropriate legal framework, intermediation platforms might serve as a suitable seedbed forRecognises there might be a potential risk of intermediation platforms encouraging new monopolies, and therefore asksreminds Member States and the Commission of the need to monitor the development of the market and, where needed, to propose measures to protect the competitiveness of European companies in a European market address clear market failures when they occur;
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 137 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the Commission's intent to tackle the current fragmentation, but regrets that its communication did not bring sufficient clarity about the applicability of existing EU legislation to different collaborative economy models; calls for a clear enforcement framework of the consumer acquis and of the Services Directive; encourages the Commission and Member States to ensure the full implementation of existing rules, using infringement procedures whenever incorrect or insufficient implementation of the legislation is identified;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 141 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Recognises the role that collaborative platforms self-governing capacities can take in the ongoing improvement of the regulatory environment by correcting market failures themselves which have traditionally been addressed through regulation;
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 142 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Stresses that while online intermediaries are subject to and need to comply with all laws of the European Union, including consumer protection and competition, the liability safe harbours of intermediaries are essential to the protection of the openness of the internet, fundamental rights, legal certainty and innovation in the transport sector;
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 147 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Agrees that market access requirements for collaborative platforms and service providers must be necessary, justified and proportionate, and that this assessment shcould be dependent in certain but not all circumstances, take into consideration whether services are provided by professional or private individuals, making peer providers subject to lighter legal requirements; recognises the need for both incumbents and new operators and services linked to digital platforms to develop in a business-friendly competitive environment, with transparency with regard to legislative changes;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 151 #

2017/2003(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to include representatives of the collaborative economy in stakeholder dialogues and impact assessment procedures.
2017/03/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 159 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Urges the Commission to provide further guidelines to Member States with a view to laying down effective criteria for distinguand Member States to work together to agree guidelines for distinguishing between peers and professionals, which is crucial for the fair development of the collaborative economy; requests the European Commission to conduct a study of existing thresholds in the collaborative economy across Member States in order to get a better understanding of exishting between peers and professionals, which is crucial for the fair developmentpractices and to be able to analyse the best possible way forward, bearing in mind differing economic realities and purchasing powers across Member States; recognises that a one-size fits all solution may not be appropriate; notes that such guidelines should take into account the fact that there may be several definitions of what is a professional depending ofn the collaborative economyarea of law considered; Stresses that an important criteria to distinguish a peer from a professional is whether the user is making a profit or only sharing costs;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 162 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Stresses the need to provide clear definitions so as to offer platforms and their users legal certainty and ensure the development of the collaborative economy in the EU; notes that in the mobility sector, it is important to clearly differentiate between (i) carpooling on the one hand and sharing of costs in the context of an existing trip the driver planned for his own purpose, and (ii) regulated passenger transport services on the other hand;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 167 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Draws attention, at the same time, to the risk that establishing thresholds may create a disparity between micro and small businesses on the one side, and peers on the other; calls therefore for the legislation applicable to professional service providers to be revised in order to level the playing field among comparable categories ofa full analysis of potential impacts to be ascertained before considering whether the legislation applicable to professional service providers should be revised and to remove unnecessary regulatory burdens; cautions against calls for legislative actions which stifle innovation;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 172 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Believes that consumers should enjoy a high and effective level of protection, regardless of whether services are provided by professionals or peers; highlights, in particular, the importance of protecting consumersconsumer protection in peer-to-peer transactions; welcomes the Commission's initiative to ensure the adequacy of consumer law and preventing abuse of the collaborative economy; recognises that some forms of protection can be delivered by platforms without the need for regulation;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 187 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Emphasises that, in many cases, rules for protecting consumers are still needed in the collaborative economy; also believes in many cases the collaborative economy empowers consumers through additional information and choice, though there are some areas where this is not the case, especially due to persisting asymmetric information or lack of choice;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 196 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Commission to clarify the collaborative platforms liability regime, which could enhance responsible behaviour and increasStresses that while online intermediaries are subject to and need to comply with all laws of the European Union, including consumer protection and competition, the liability safe harbours of intermediaries are essential to the protection of the openness of the internet, fundamental rights, legal certainty and innovation; recognises in this respect that the provisions on intermediary liability in the e-Commerce Directive muser confidencet remain future-proof and technologically neutral;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 212 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on the Commission to further scrutinise EU legislation in order to reduce uncertainties concerning the rules applicable to collaborative business models and to assess whether new or amended rules are desirablappropriate;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 219 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Believes that any new regulation should leverage platforms' self-governing capacities; is convinced that collaborative platforms themselves couldan take an active role in suchcreating a new regulatory environment by correcting many asymmetric information and other market failures which have been traditionally addressed through regulation, especially by digital trust-building mechanisms;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 232 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Strongly believes, at the same time, that this self-regulating capacity does not undercut the need for regulation, especially for market failures that platforms cannot address and for other nWhereas self-regulation has proved to be a good alternative to ex-ante regulation, especially in the area of the collaborative economy thanks to new technological developments such as two- way rating mechanisms; notes that customer satisfaction with collabormative goals (e.g. reversing inequalities, boosting fairness, inclusiveness, and openness, etc.)economy services is much higher than in the traditional sectors; believes, at the same time, that this self-regulating capacity does not replace the need for regulation, such as the Services and eCommerce Directives, and EU consumer law to ensure coherence and complementarity;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 238 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Points out the crucial importance of clarifying methods by which decisNotes that it may be useful to assess the use of data where it may have different impacts on different segments of society and to prevent discriminations, based on algorithmut recalls that the European Union has alre taken and of guaranteeing algorithm fairness; emphasises the need to verify the potential harm to privacy caused by big data, to assess the impact of data on different segments of society and to prevent dady developed a comprehensive framework for data protection and applies the principles of equality and non- discrimination in its policies; strongly believes that algorithms or other similar intellectual property or commercial secrets should not be undermined by vague or poorly defined principles, as thisc rimination; callsks undermining the very value of the products or services themselves; nevertheless con the Commission to lay down effective critsiders that the use of automated pricing mechanisms or similar tools which unduly influence commercial for developing algorithm accountability principles for information-based collaborative platformsconsumer decision making and run counter to EU competition law should be examined, as part of the EU's role on antitrust policy;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 246 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
24. Is convincedBelieves that a common EU horizontal and harmonised regulatory framework, consisting of a combination of general principles and specific rules, needs to be developed, in addition to anyregulatory framework must be pro- innovation, technologically neutral and future proof and establish sector-ial specific regulation that might be neededations whilst recognising general principles;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 251 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24 a. Believes that the existing EU regulatory framework should continue to be applied, and that future changes consisting of general principles and specific rules should be considered in response to any gaps or needs on a case- by-case basis, in line with better regulation principles.
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 260 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Encourages the Commission to foster a level playing field for competition among collaborative platforms; stresses the importance of identifying and addressing barriers to the emergence and scaling-up of collaborative businesses, especially start- ups; underlines in this context the need for free flow of data, data portability and interoperability, which facilitate switching between platforms and prevent lock-in, and which are key factors for open and fair competition and empowering users of collaborative platforms; acknowledges the need to balance greater data portability and interoperability, where necessary, with the legitimate interests of market players that invest in product development to ensure a fair return on their investments and thereby contribute to innovation;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 269 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
27. Is concerned about the difficulties that have emerged so farthat there may have been some difficulties in some sectors in relation to tax compliance and enforcement, despite the increased traceability of economic transactions via online platforms; recognises that these issues have been addressed in certain Member States; therefore invites the European Commission and Member States to facilitate an exchange of best practices between tax authorities and stakeholders to allow Member States to develop appropriate solutions for payments of taxes in the sharing economy;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 279 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
29. Encourages the Member States to agree on a uniform set of information that businesses must disclose to tax authorities in the framework of their tax information duties; points out that existing collaboration between national authorities and companies that exploit the opportunities afforded by digital technology have resulted in more effective, accountable and transparent tax collection systems, thereby enabling all parties to fulfil their tax and social security obligations;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 283 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
30. Agrees that functionally similar tax obligations should be applied to businesses providing comparable services, and is convinced; notes that taxes should be paid where profits are generatedin full accordance with national and local taxation laws;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 299 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31 a. Recognises that, the sharing economy creates opportunities for entrepreneurship and empowers people from all demographics and across the generations;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 303 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
32. Underlines the paramount importance of safeguarding workers’employment rights in collaborative services, of avoiding social dumping, and of guaranteeing fair working conditions and adequate social protectiontaking into account its potential for more flexible forms of employment and identifying new forms of employment and enhancing the rights and protection of genuine self-employed workers;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 314 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
33. Is concerned about the risk that on-demand workers might not enjoy genuine legal protection, and that collaborative platforms might pass on their risks to workers with no entrepreneurial responsibilitiesBelieves that on-demand workers should enjoy appropriate legal protection;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 319 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33 a. Notes that the collaborative economy creates new, flexible jobs for young people entering the labour market, self-employed workers and marginalised groups that might otherwise be excluded from the labour market;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 338 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
35. Believes that there is ample room for manoeuvre for national, regional and local authorities to adopt context-specific regulationguidelines in order to address clearly identified public interest objectives with proportionate measures fully in line with EU legislation; calls on the Commission therefore to support the Member States in their policy-making and in adopting rules consistent with EU law;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 347 #

2017/2003(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
36. Notes that first movers have been cities, where urban conditions such as population density and physical proximity favour the adoption of collaborative practices; is also convinced that the collaborative economy can offers significant opportunities to inner peripheries and rural areas, tooas well as to regions and tourism more generally;
2017/02/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 201 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4
[...]deleted
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 240 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
The making available of a Declaration of Conformity in accordance with the first subparagraph shall be deemed sufficient in cases where the manufacturer is obliged to provide the Declaration of Conformity with the product under Union legislation.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 241 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a Electronic labelling Where a product is able to display information electronically through either an integral screen, via connection to an external screen or via a machine-readable code or where the product has a function allowing the end-user to select the display of the relevant information, the following requirements shall be deemed fulfilled where such information is provided electronically: (a) requirement to affix the CE marking and (where obligatory) the identification number of the notified body visibly, legibly and indelibly on the product or onto its data plate; (b) requirement to indicate the product type, batch or serial number or other element allowing for their identification; (c) requirement to indicate the manufacturer's name, registered trade name or registered trade mark and the address at which they can be contacted; and (d) requirement to indicate the importer’s name, registered trade name or registered trade mark and the address at which they can be contacted.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 263 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. A market surveillance authority that enters into a partnership arrangement under paragraph 1 may charge the economic operator fees representing the costs reasonably incurred by the authority in the exercise of its functions under paragraphs 1 and 2shall not provide such services on a commercial or competitive basis.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 265 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Market surveillance authorities may enter into memoranda of understanding with businesseeconomic operations or organisations representing businesseeconomic operators or end- users for the carrying out, or financing, of joint activities aimed at identifying non- compliance or promoting compliance in specific geographical areas or with respect to specific categories of product. Where a memorandum of understanding is concluded with economic operators directly, other economic operators who make available products in the same category of products may request to participate under the memorandum of understanding agreed.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 312 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Market surveillance authorities shall ensure that a product is withdrawn or recalled from the market or that the making available of the product on the market is prohibited or restricted if, when it is being used either in accordance with its intended purpose or under conditions that can be reasonably foreseen and it is properly installed and maintained, either of the following conditions would be met: product is liable to compromise the health or safety of end-users.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 314 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) the product does not conform to applicable requirements under Union harmonisation legislation.deleted
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 325 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Where a market surveillance authority makes one of the following findings, it shall require the relevant economic operator to put an end to the non-compliance concerned: (a) the CE marking has been affixed in violation of Article 30 of Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 or of relevant Articles of the applicable Union harmonisation legislation; (b) the CE marking has not been affixed; (c) the identification number of the notified body involved in the production control phase has been affixed in violation of relevant Articles of the applicable Union harmonisation legislation or has not been affixed; (d) the EU declaration of conformity has not been drawn up or has not been drawn up correctly; (e) the technical documentation is either not available or not complete; (f) any other administrative requirement provided for in relevant Articles of the applicable Union harmonisation legislation is not fulfilled.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 326 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Where the non-compliance referred to in paragraph 3a persists, the Member State concerned shall take all appropriate measures to restrict or prohibit the product being made available on the market or ensure that it is recalled or withdrawn from the market.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 328 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Market surveillance authorities shall perform their activities with a high level of transparency and shall make available to the general public any information that they deem relevant for the general public. They shall also ensure that the following information is entered in the system referred to in Article 34:
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 335 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5
5. Market surveillance authorities shall exercise their powers and carry out their duties independently, impartially and without bias. They shall observe confidentiality in order to protect commercial secrets, subject to any obligations laid down in applicable Union legislation to make information available to the Commission and to other applicable disclosure requirements laid down in Union law in order to protect the interests of users in the Union.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 358 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) the power to perform system audits of economic operators’ organisations, including audits of any procedures that they have in place to ensure compliance with this Regulation and with applicable Union harmonisation legislation;deleted
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 360 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) the power to have access to any relevant document, data or information related to an instance of non-compliance, require economic operators to make available to them such documentation, information and other technical specifications, including any form or format and irrespective of its storage medium or the place where it is storedccess to software and algorithms, that the authorities consider necessary for the purpose of carrying out the market surveillance activities;
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 363 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point d
(d) the power to require any public authority, body or agency within the market surveillance authority's Member State, or any natural or legal person, to provide any information, data or document, in any form or format and irrespective of its storage medium or the place where it is stored, for the purposes of enabling the market surveillance authority to investigate whether any non- compliance has occurred or is occurring and to establish the details of that non- compliance, including in particular information, data or documents required for the purposes of identifying and tracing financial and data flows, ascertaining the identity and contact details of persons involved in financial and data flows and ascertaining bank account information and the ownership of websites;deleted
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 365 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point e – introductory part
(e) the power to do any of the following, or to request another public authority to do any of the following on the basis of a duly justified and reasonable suspicion, for the purposes of an investigation by the market surveillance authority or at the request of an applicant authority:
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 374 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point f
(f) the power to take samples of products free of charge, in return for fair compensation, in order to detect non-compliance and obtain evidence;
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 377 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point h
(h) the power to take temporary measures, where there are no other effective means available to prevent a serious risk, including in particular temporary measures requiring hosting service providers to remove, disable or restrict access to content or to suspend or restrict access to a website, service or account or requiring domain registries or registrars to put a fully qualified domain name on hold for a specific period of time;deleted
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 459 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3
3. Products deemed to be non- compliant on the basis of a decision of a market surveillance authority in one Member State, shall be presumed to be non-compliant by market surveillance authorities in another Member State, unless economic operators can provide evidence to the contrary.deleted
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 466 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 4
4. The decisions of a market surveillance authority referred to in paragraph 3 shall be published in the information and communication system referred to in Article 34.deleted
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 481 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. AMarket surveillance authorities and authorities designated under Article 26(1) shall suspend the release of a product for free circulation if, in the course of controls referred to in Article 26, it is established that: there is cause to believe that the product will pose a serious risk.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 482 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the product is not accompanied by the documentation required by the Union harmonisation legislation applicable to it;deleted
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 483 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the product is not marked or labelled in accordance with that Union harmonisation legislation;deleted
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 484 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the product bears a CE marking or other marking required by that Union harmonisation legislation which has been affixed in a false or misleading manner;deleted
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 485 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the identity and contact details of a person responsible for compliance information with respect to the product is not indicated or identifiable in accordance with Article 4(5);deleted
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 489 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) for any other reason, there is cause to believe that the product will not comply with the requirements set out in the Union harmonisation legislation applicable to it when it is placed on the market or that it will pose a serious risk.deleted
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 492 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Where in the course of controls under Article 26(1) a market surveillance authority or an authority designated under Article 26(1) makes one of the following findings, it shall require the relevant economic operator to put an end to the non-compliance concerned: (a) the CE marking has been affixed in violation of Article 30 of Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 or of relevant Articles of the applicable Union harmonisation legislation; (b) the CE marking has not been affixed; (c) the identification number of the notified body involved in the production control phase has been affixed in violation of relevant Articles of the applicable Union harmonisation legislation or has not been affixed; (d) the EU declaration of conformity has not been drawn up or has not been drawn up correctly; (e) the technical documentation is either not available or not complete; (f) any other administrative requirement provided for in relevant Articles of the applicable Union harmonisation legislation is not fulfilled.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 493 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Where the non-compliance referred to in paragraph 1a persists, the relevant authority shall suspend the release of a product for free circulation.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 494 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2
2. AMarket surveillance authorities or authorities designated under Article 26(1) shall immediately notify the market surveillance authorities of any suspension of release referred to in paragraph 1 or 1b.
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 495 #

2017/0353(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 3
3. Where the market surveillance authorities have reason to believe that a product will not comply with the Union harmonisation legislation applicable to it or will pose a serious risk, they shall require the authorities designated under Article 26(1) to suspend the process for its release for free circulation.deleted
2018/05/24
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 327 #

2017/0352(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
(57) The costs for the development of the interoperability components projected under the current Multiannual Financial Framework are lower than the remaining amount on the budget earmarked for Smart Borders in Regulation (EU) No 515/2014 of the European Parliament and the Council57 . Accordingly, this Regulation, pursuant to Article 5(5)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 515/2014, should reallocate the amount currently attributed for developing IT systems supporting the management of migration flows across the external borders. In addition, eu-LISA shall use best endeavours to keep costs to a minimum and to identify and implement the most cost-effective technical solutions. _________________ 57 Regulation (EU) No 515/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 establishing as part of the Internal Security Fund, the Instrument for financial support for external borders and visa and repealing Decision No 574/2007/EC (OJ L 150, 20.5.2014, p. 143).
2018/07/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 642 #

2017/0352(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1
1. A link between data from two or more information systems shall be classified as green where the linked data do not share: (i) the same biometric data but have the same or similar identity data; or (ii) the same or similar identity data but have indistinguishable biometric data, and the authority responsible for the verification of different identities concluded it refers to two different persons.
2018/07/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 660 #

2017/0352(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) the linked data shares the same identity data and different biometric data and the authority responsible for the verification of different identities has concluded it refers to the same person and their biometric data has changed due to injury, illness or other legitimate reason.
2018/07/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 872 #

2017/0352(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 1
For a period of twofour years from the date the ESP commences operations, the obligations referred to in Article 7(2) and (4) shall not apply and the utilisation of the ESP shall be optional.
2018/07/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 919 #

2017/0352(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
While respecting the provisions of national law on the publication of sensitive information, each Member State and Europol shall prepare annual reportreports every four years on the effectiveness of access to data stored in the common identity repository for law enforcement purposes, containing information and statistics on:
2018/07/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 925 #

2017/0352(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 2
Member State and Europol annual reports shall be transmitted to the Commission by 30 June of the subsequent year.
2018/07/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 340 #

2017/0351(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 62
(62) The costs for the development of the interoperability components projected under the current Multiannual Financial Framework are lower than the remaining amount on the budget earmarked for Smart Borders in Regulation (EU) No 515/2014 of the European Parliament and the Council61 . Accordingly, this Regulation, pursuant to Article 5(5)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 515/2014, should reallocate the amount currently attributed for developing IT systems supporting the management of migration flows across the external borders. In addition, eu-LISA shall use best endeavours to keep costs to a minimum and to identify and implement the most cost-effective technical solutions. _________________ 61 Regulation (EU) No 515/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 establishing as part of the Internal Security Fund, the Instrument for financial support for external borders and visa and repealing Decision No 574/2007/EC (OJ L 150, 20.5.2014, p. 143).
2018/07/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 658 #

2017/0351(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1
1. A link between data from two or more information systems shall be classified as green where the linked data do not share: (i) the same biometric data but have the same or similar identity data; or (ii) the same or similar identity data but have indistinguishable biometric data, and the authority responsible for the verification of different identities concluded it refers to two different persons.
2018/07/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 676 #

2017/0351(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) the linked data shares the same identity data and different biometric data and the authority responsible for the verification of different identities has concluded it refers to the same person and their biometric data has changed due to injury, illness or other legitimate reason.
2018/07/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 958 #

2017/0351(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 1
For a period of twofour years from the date the ESP commences operations, the obligations referred to in Article 7(2) and (4) shall not apply and the utilisation of the ESP shall be optional.
2018/07/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1005 #

2017/0351(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
While respecting the provisions of national law on the publication of sensitive information, each Member State and Europol shall prepare annual reportreports every four years on the effectiveness of access to data stored in the common identity repository for law enforcement purposes, containing information and statistics on:
2018/07/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1011 #

2017/0351(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 2
Member State and Europol annual reports shall be transmitted to the Commission by 30 June of the subsequent year.
2018/07/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 143 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3
3. This Regulation will until 31 December 2024 be complemented by additional measures corresponding to a reduction of 10 g CO2/km as part of the Union's integrated approach referred to in the 2007 Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament27. _________________ 27 Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 7 February 2007 Results of the review of the Community Strategy to reduce CO2 emissions from passenger cars and light- commercial vehicles (COM(2007) 19 final).
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 147 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 4
4. From 1 January 2025 the following EU fleet-wide targets shall apply: (a) new passenger car fleet, an EU fleet-wide target equal to a 15% reduction of the average of the specific emissions targets in 2021 determined in accordance with point 6.1.1 of Part A of Annex I; (b) new light commercial vehicles fleet, an EU fleet-wide target equal to a 15% reduction of the average of the specific emissions targets in 2021 determined in accordance with point 6.1.1 of Part B of Annex I;deleted for the average emissions of the for the average emissions of the
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 162 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) for the average emissions of the new passenger car fleet, an EU fleet-wide target equal to a 320% reduction of the average of the specific emissions targets in 2021 determined in accordance with point 6.1.2 of Part A of Annex I;
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 166 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point b
(b) for the average emissions of the new light commercial vehicles fleet, an EU fleet- wide target equal to a 3015% reduction of the average of the specific emissions targets in 2021 determined in accordance with point 6.1.2 of Part B of Annex I.
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 184 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) for each calendar year from 2021 until 20249, the specific emissions target determined in accordance with points 3 and 4 of Parts A or B of Annex I as appropriate or, where a manufacturer is granted a derogation under Article 10 , in accordance with that derogation and point 5 of Parts A or B of Annex I;
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 188 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) for each calendar year, starting from 202530, the specific emissions targets determined in accordance with point 6.3 of Parts A or B of Annex I.
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 217 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) the average mass in running order for all new passenger cars and new light commercial vehicles registered in the Union in the preceding calendar year until 31 December 20209;
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 220 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) the 2025 and 2030 EU fleet-wide targets referred to in Article 1(4) and (5) calculated by the Commission in accordance with points 6.1.1 and 6.1.2 of Parts A and B of Annex I;
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 221 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) the values for a2021, a2025 and a2030 calculated by the Commission in accordance with point 6.2 of Parts A and B of Annex I.
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 229 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4
The Commission may adjust the cap with effect from 20251 onwards to reflect the switch to WLTP. Those adjustments shall be performed by means of delegated acts in accordance with Article 16.
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 266 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part A – point 4 – introductory part
4. For the calendar years 2021 to 20249, the specific emissions target for a manufacturer shall be calculated as follows:
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 269 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part A – point 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 4
M0 is 1379.88 in 2021, and as defined in Article 13(1)(a) for the period 2022, 2023 and to 20249;
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 270 #

2017/0293(COD)

6. From 1 January 202530, the EU fleet- wide targets and the specific emissions targets of CO2 for a manufacturer shall be calculated as follows:
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 276 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part A – point 6 – point 6.1 – point 6.1.1
6.1.1. EU fleet-wide target for 2025 to 2029 EU fleet-wide target202520212025) Where, EU fleet-wide target2021 is the average, weighted on the number of newly registered cars of each individual manufacturer, of the specific emissions targets determined for each individual manufacturer in 2021 in accordance with point 4 Reduction factor2025 is the reduction specified in Article 1(4)(a)deleted
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 282 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part A – point 6 – point 6.2 – introductory part
6.2. Specific emissions reference targets from 202530 onwards
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 284 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part A – point 6 – point 6.2 – point 6.2.1
6.2.1. 2025 to 2029 The specific emissions reference target = EU fleet-wide target2025 20250) Where, EU fleet-wide target2025 is as determined in accordance with point 6.1.1 a2025 is null where, a20212 emissions (dependent variable) of each individual vehicle in the 2021 EU fleet average emissions2021 2 of all newly registered vehicles in 2021 of those manufacturers for which a specific emissions target is calculated in accordance with point 4 TM is the average test mass in kilograms of all newly registered vehicles of the manufacturer in the relevant calendar year TM0 is the value determined in accordance with Article 13(1)(d)deleted
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 287 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part A – point 6 – point 6.3 – paragraph 1
The specific emissions target from 202530 onwards
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 296 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part A – point 6 – point 6.3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Specific emissions reference target is the specific emissions reference target of CO2 determined in accordance with point 6.2.1 for the period 2025 to 2029 and 6.2.2 for 2030 onwards
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 311 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part A – point 6 – point 6.3 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
x is 15% in the years 2025 to 2029 and 320% in 2030 onwards.
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 317 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part B – point 6 – introductory part
6. From 1 January 202530, the EU fleet- wide targets and the specific emissions target of CO2 for a manufacturer shall be calculated as follows:
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 319 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part B – point 6 – point 6.1 – introductory part
6.1. The EU fleet-wide targets for 2025 and 2030
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 321 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part B – point 6 – point 6.1 – point 6.1.1
6.1.1. EU fleet-wide target for 2025 to 2029 EU fleet-wide target202520212025) Where, EU fleet-wide target2021 is the average, weighted on the number of newly registered light commercial vehicles of each individual manufacturer, of the specific emissions targets determined for each individual manufacturer in 2021 in accordance with point 4 Reduction factor2025 is the reduction specified in Article 1(4)(b)deleted
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 326 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part B – point 6 – point 6.2 – introductory part
6.2. The specific emissions reference target from 202530 onwards
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 330 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part B – point 6 – point 6.2 – point 6.2.1
6.2.1. 2025 to 2029 The specific emissions reference target = EU fleet-wide target2025 0) Where, EU fleet-wide target2025 is as determined in accordance with point 6.1.1 α is a2025020210 determined in accordance with Article 13(1)(d), where, a2025 is null a20212 emissions (dependent variable) of each newly registered vehicle in the 2021 EU fleet average emissions2021 2 of all newly registered vehicles in 2021 of those manufacturers for which a specific emissions target is calculated in accordance with point 4 TM is the average test mass in kilograms of all newly registered vehicles of the manufacturer in the relevant calendar year TM0 is the value determined in accordance with Article 13(1)(d)deleted
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 336 #

2017/0293(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part B – point 6 – point 6.3 – point 6.3.1
6.3.1. From 2025 to 2029 The specific emissions target = (specific emissions reference target – (øtargets2025)) · ZLEV factor Where, Specific emissions reference target is the specific emissions reference target for the manufacturer determined in accordance with point 6.2.1 øtargets is the average, weighted on the number of newly registered light commercial vehicles of each individual manufacturer, of all the specific emissions reference targets determined in accordance with point 6.2.1 ZLEV factor is (1+y-x), unless this sum is larger than 1.05 or lower than 1.0 in which case the ZLEV factor shall be set to 1.05 or 1.0 as the case may be Where, y is the share of zero- and low-emission vehicles in the manufacturer's fleet of newly registered light commercial vehicles calculated as the total number of zero- and low-emission vehicles, where each of them is counted as ZLEVspecific in accordance with the formula below, divided by the total number of light commercial vehicles registered in the relevant calendar year null x is 15%deleted
2018/05/18
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 146 #

2017/0291(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive 2009/33/EC
Article 4 – point 4 – point c
(c) a vehicle of category M3, N2 or N3 class 1 (as defined by UN Regulation 107), N2 or N3 which is powered by alternative fuels as defined by Article 2 paragraph 1 of Directive 2014/94/EU and as defined in Table 3 in the Annex .
2018/06/11
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 218 #

2017/0291(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex I – subheading 4
Directive 2009/33/EC
Annex 1 – table 3 – title
Table 4: Minimum target for the share of light-duty clean vehicles as defined in accordance with table 2 iArticle 4 of this Directive on the total public procurement of light- duty vehicles at Member State level*
2018/06/11
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 41 #

2017/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
(2) To ensure a coherent framework for the inter-urban carriage of passengers by regular coach and bus services throughout the Union, Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009 should apply to all inter- urban carriage by regular services. The scope of that Regulation should therefore be extended.deleted
2018/10/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 56 #

2017/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4) Commercial regular service operations should not compromise the economic equilibrium of existingnflict with the exclusive rights under an existing or planned future public service contracts. For this reason, the regulatory body should be able to carry out an objective economic analysis to ensure that this is the case.
2018/10/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 65 #

2017/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
(6) In order to ensure fair competition in the market, operators of regular services should be provided with access rights to publicly owned terminals in the Union on fair, equitable, non-discriminatory and transparent terms. Appeals against decisions rejecting or limiting access should be lodged with the regulatory body.
2018/10/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 73 #

2017/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) Authorisation for both national and international regular services should be subject to an authorisation procedure. Authorisation should be granted, unless there are specific grounds for refusal attributable to the applicant, or the service would compromise the economic equilibrium of a public service contract. A distance threshold should be introduced to ensure that commercial regular service operations do not compromise the economic equilibrium of existing public service contracts. In the case of routes already served by more than onflict with the exclusive rights under an existing or planned public service contract, it should be possible to increase that threshold.
2018/10/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 87 #

2017/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) Insofar as this Regulation harmonises the rules in national markets for regular coach and bus services and access to terminals, its objectives, namely the promotion of inter-urban mobility and the increase of the modal share of sustainable passenger transport modes, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States. Therefore, the Union may adopt measures, in line with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objectives pursued.deleted
2018/10/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 114 #

2017/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 2 – paragraph 9
9. ‘terminal’ means any facility with a minimum area of 600m2,Subject to the definitions and requirements laid down in national legislation, ‘terminal’ means any publicly- owned facility which provides a parking place that is used by coaches and buses for the setting down or picking up of passengers;
2018/10/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 183 #

2017/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 5 a – paragraph 1
1. Terminal operators shall grant carriers the right to access publicly owned terminals for the purpose of operating regular services including any facilities or services provided in that terminal under fair, equitable, non-discriminatory and transparent conditions.
2018/10/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 189 #

2017/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 5 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Terminal operators shall endeavour to accommodate all requests for access in order to ensure optimum use of publicly owned terminals.
2018/10/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 206 #

2017/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 5 a – paragraph 3
TPublic terminal operators shall publish at least the following information in two or more official languages of the Union:
2018/10/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 295 #

2017/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 b – title
Authorisation procedure for international regular services
2018/10/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 298 #

2017/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 b – paragraph 1
1. TMember States may choose to establish an authorisation procedure for national regular interurban services. Where an authorisation procedure is required for national regular interurban services in a Member State, the authorising authority shall take a decision on the application within two months of the date of submission of the application by the carrier. This may be extended to four months where an analysis is requested in accordance with Article 8c(2) (d) and (e).
2018/10/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 303 #

2017/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 b – paragraph 2
2. Authorisations for national regular services shall be granted unless refusal can be justified on one or more of the grounds listed in points (a) to (ce) of Article 8c(2) and, if the service is carrying passengers over a distance of less than 100 kilometres as the crow flies,; Notwithstanding, the competent authority must reject the authorisation when so required, within the period specified in paragraph 1, by the competent authority of one of the Member States on whose territory passengers are picked up or set down, for one or more of the reasons listed in points a) to e) of Article 8c(2)(d).
2018/10/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 331 #

2017/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 c – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point d
(d) a regulatory body establishes onthat the basis of an objectivservice economic analysis that the service would compromise the economic equilibrium offlicts with the exclusive rights awarded to an operator under a public service contract.
2018/10/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 332 #

2017/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 c – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point d a (new)
(da) the applicant has applied for authorisation for a regular service on a particular route or network or in a particular area where a competent authority has granted or planned to grant to an undertaking – or public service operator - an exclusive right to perform the same, similar or equivalent public transport services in return for the discharge of public service obligations within the framework of a public service contract, or if the proposed regular service occurs in an urban or suburban centre or conurbation, or it meets the transport needs between it and the surrounding areas.
2018/10/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 339 #

2017/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 d – paragraph 1
1. Member States may limit the right of access to the international and national market for regular services if the proposed regular service carries passengers over distances of less than 100 kilservice would conflict with the exclusive rights awarded to an operator under a public service contract or if it occurs in an urban or suburban centre or conurbation, or meets the transport needs between it and the surrounding areas. When a competres as the crow flies and if the service would compromise the economic equilibrium of a public service contractent authority has granted or plans to award exclusive rights to an undertaking performing a public service contract in accordance with Article 3 of Regulation (EC) Nº 1370/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council, the protection of exclusive rights shall only relate to the operation of public transport passenger transport services within the routes, areas or networks covered by those rights.
2018/10/04
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 59 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
(14) Railway undertakings should facilitate the transfer of rail passengers from one operator to another by the provision of through-tickets. In this respect, wthenever possibley should also cooperate with ticket vendors providing combined journeys.
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 85 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
(29) To maintain a high level of consumer protection in rail transport, Member States should be required to designate national enforcement bodies to monitor closely and enforce this Regulation at national level. Those bodies should be able to take a variety of enforcement measures. Passengers should be able to complain to those bodies about alleged infringements of the Regulation. To ensure the satisfactory handling of such complaints, the bodies should also cooperate with each other. , and to provide the option for passengers of binding alternative dispute resolution, in line with Directive 2013/11/EU1b.Passengers should be able to complain to those bodies about alleged infringements of the Regulation, and to use online dispute resolution established under Regulation 524/2013/EU1c where agreed. It should also be provided that complaints may be made by organisations representing groups of passengers. To ensure the satisfactory handling of such complaints, the bodies should also cooperate with each other and the Regulation should continue to be listed in the Annex to the revised Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation 2017/2394/EU 1d. Enforcement bodies shall each year publish reports on their websites detailing the number and type of complaints that they have received, detailing the outcome of their enforcement actions. In addition, these reports shall be made available on the website of the European Union Agency for Railways. __________________ 1b1b 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 and Directive 2009/22/EC (OJ L 165, 18.6.2013, p. 14). 1c1c Regulation 524/2013/EU 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 Directive 2009/22/EC (OJ L 165, 18.6.2013, p.1). 1d1d Regulation 2017/2394/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2017 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 (OJ L 345, 27.12.2017, p. 1).
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 96 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) theproper procedures for handling of complaints;
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 98 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) general rules on enforcement, including through the option for passengers of binding alternative dispute resolution.
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 120 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)
(6 a) ‘combined journey’ means a ticket or tickets representing more than one transport contract for successive railway services operated by one or more railway undertakings;
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 125 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8
(8) ‘through-ticket’ means a ticket or tickets representing a single transport contract for successive railway services operated by one or more railway undertakings, forming part of an end-to- end journey;
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 127 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 10
(10) ‘journey’ means the carriage of a passenger between a station of departure and a station of arrival under a single transport contract;
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 131 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 15
(15) ‘missed connection’ means a situation where a passenger misses one or more services in the course of a journey or combined journey as a result of the delay or cancellation of one or more previous services;
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 132 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 16
(16) ‘ person with disabilities ’ and ‘person with reduced mobility’ means any person who has a permanent or temporary physical , mental, intellectual or sensory impairment which, in interaction with various barriers, may hinder their full and effective use of transport on an equal basis with other passengers or whose mobility when using transport is reduced due to age;
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 174 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. Railway undertakings, tour operators and ticket vendors shall offer tickets and, where available, through-tickets and reservations, through-tickets, reservations and combinations of tickets that provide the most optimal and cost-effective journey or combined journey, including cross- border, in an impartial and non- discriminatory manner. They shall make all possible efforts to offer through-tickets, including for journeys across borders andor involving night trains and journeys with more than one railway undertaking.
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 182 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Without prejudice to paragraphs 3 and 4, railway undertakings, tour operators and ticket vendors shall distribute tickets to passengers for single and any combined or return journeys via at least one of the following points of sale:
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 256 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) if the train is blocked on the track, accessible transport from the train to the railway station, to the alternative departure point or to the final destination of the service, where and when physically possible.
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 259 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 3
3. If the railway service cannot be continued anymore, railway undertakings shall organise as soon as possible alternative accessible transport services for passengers.
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 273 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Railway undertakings and station managers shall, with the active involvement of representative organisations of persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility, establish, or shall have in place, non- discriminatory access rules for the transport of persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility including their personal assistants. The rules shall allow the passenger to be accompanied by an assistance dog service animal in accordance with any relevant national rules, and shall ensure that rail transport for persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility is immediate and spontaneous wherever possible.
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 313 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) accept upon requestencourage actively the participation, in the training, of employeesstaff with disabilities, as well as passengers with disabilities and with reduced mobility, and/or organisations representing them.;
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 338 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. Without prejudice to the rights of consumers to seek alternative redress pursuant to Directive 2013/11/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council32 , after having complained unsuccessfully to the railway undertaking, ticket vendor, station or infrastructure manager pursuant to Article 28, the passenger may complain to an enforcement body. Enforcement bodies shall inform complainants about their right to complain to alternative dispute resolution bodies to seek individual redress. __________________Member States shall ensure that enforcement or complaint-handling bodies are recognised for the purposes of alternative redress schemes pursuant to Directive 2013/11/EU, and that where passengers seek alternative redress, the railway undertaking, ticket vendor, station or infrastructure manager concerned is required to participate and the outcome shall be binding on and effectively enforceable against them2a . __________________ 2aDirective 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 and Directive2009/22/EC (OJ L 165, 18.6.2013, p. 14). 32 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 and Directive 2009/22/EC (OJ L 165, 18.6.2013, p. 14).
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 340 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The body shall acknowledge receipt of the complaint within two weeks of receiving it. The complaint-handling procedure shall take a maximum of three months. For complex cases, the body may, at its discretion, extend this period to six months. In such a case, it shall inform the passenger or organisation representing passengers of the reasons for the extension and of the expected time needed to conclude the procedure. Only cases that involve legal proceedings may take longer than six months. Where the body is also an alternative dispute resolution body within the meaning of Directive 2013/11/EU, the time limits laid down in that Directive shall prevail and the use of online dispute resolution in accordance with Regulation 524/2013/EU2b may be made available with the agreement of all parties involved. __________________ 2bRegulation 524/2013/EU 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 (OJ L 165, 18.6.2013, p.1).
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 359 #

2017/0237(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part I – indent 1
- - General conditions applicable to the contract or contracts that form part of the journey or combined journey
2018/04/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 44 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
(2) Data value chains are built on different data activities: data creation and collection; data aggregation and organisation; data storage and processing; data analysis, marketing and distribution; use and re-use of data. The effective and efficient functioning of data storage and other processing is a fundamental building block in any data value chain. However, such effective and efficient functioning and the development of the data economy in the Union are hampered, in particular, by two types of obstacles to data mobility and to the internal market.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 47 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) The freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union apply to data storage or other processing services, including porting of data. However, the provision of those services is hampered or sometimes prevented by certain national requirements to locate data in a specific territory.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 50 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) Free flow of data within the European Union will play a leading role in realising data-driven growth and innovation. Like businesses and consumers, public administrations will also benefit from an increased freedom of choice regarding data-driven service providers. In order to stimulate the free flow of data, and given the large amount of data they handle, public administrations should lead by example by refraining from making data localisation restrictions and using data services all over Europe.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 52 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4) Such obstacles to the free movement of data storage or other processing services and to the right of establishment of data storage or other processing providers originate from requirements in the national laws of Member States to locate data in a specific geographical area or territory for the purpose of storage or other processing. Other rules or administrative practices have an equivalent effect by imposing specific requirements which make it more difficult to store or otherwise process data outside a specific geographical area or territory within the Union, such as requirements to use technological facilities that are certified or approved within a specific Member State. Legal uncertainty as to the extent of legitimate and illegitimate data localisation requirements further limits the choices available to market players and to the public sector regarding the location of data storage or other processing.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 56 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
(5) At the same time, data mobility in the Union is also inhibited by private restrictions: legal, contractual and technical issues hindering or preventing users of data storage or other processing services from porting their data from one service provider to another or back to their own IT systems, not least upon termination of their contract with a service provider.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 60 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
(7) In order to create a framework for the free movement of non-personal data in the Union and the foundation for developing the data economy and enhancing the competitiveness of European industry, it is necessary to lay down a clear, comprehensive and predictable legal framework for storage or other processing of data other than personal data in the internal market. A principle-based approach providing for cooperation among Member States as well as self-regulation should ensure that the framework is flexible so that it can take into account the evolving needs of users, providers and national authorities in the Union. In order to avoid the risk of overlaps with existing mechanisms and hence to avoid higher burdens both for Member States and businesses, detailed technical rules should not be established.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 62 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) This Regulation should apply to legal or natural persons who provide data storage or other processing services to users residing or having an establishment in the Union, including those who provide services in the Union without an establishment in the Union.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 73 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
(10) Under Article 16 of the Services Directive the prohibition of the free flow of services including data processing prevent data being localised for reasons other than public security. Under Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Member States may neither restrict nor prohibit the free movement of personal data within the Union for reasons connected with the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data. This Regulation establishes the same principle of free movement within the Union for non-personal data except when a restriction or a prohibition would be justified for security reasons. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and this Regulation provide a coherent set of rules that cater for the free movement of different types of data. In the case of mixed data sets, this Regulation should apply to the non- personal data part of the set. Where non- personal and personal data in a mixed data set are inextricably linked, this Regulation should, without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2016/679, apply to the whole set, in regard to localisation practices. Furthermore, this Regulation imposes neither an obligation to store the different types of data separately nor an obligation to unbundle mixed data sets.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 84 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
(11) This Regulation should apply to data storage or other processing in the broadest sense, encompassing the usage of all types of IT systems, whether located on the premises of the user or outsourced to a data storage or other processing service provider. It should cover data processing of different levels of intensity, from data storage (Infrastructure- as-a-Service (IaaS)) to the processing of data on platforms (Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS)) or in applications (Software-as-a- Service (SaaS)). These different services should be within the scope of this Regulation, unless data storage or other processing is merely ancillary to a service of a different type, such as providing an online marketplace intermediating between service providers and consumers or business users.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 92 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) Data localisation requirements represent a clear barrier to the free provision of data storage or other processing services across the Union and to the internal market. As such, they should be banned unless they are justified based on the grounds of public security, as defined by Union law, in particular Article 52 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and satisfy the principle of proportionality enshrined in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In order to give effect to the principle of free flow of non-personal data across borders, to ensure the swift removal of existing data localisation requirements and to enable for operational reasons storage or other processing of data in multiple locations across the EU, and since this Regulation provides for measures to ensure data availability for regulatory control purposes, Member States should not be able to invoke justifications other than public security.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 97 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) In order to ensure the effective application of the principle of free flow of non-personal data across borders, and to prevent the emergence of new barriers to the smooth functioning of the internal market, Member States should immediately notify to the Commission any draft act that contains a new data localisation requirement or modifies an existing data localisation requirement. Those notifications should be submitted and assessed in accordance with the procedure laid down in Directive (EU) 2015/153533. _________________ 33 Directive (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).
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 100 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
(14) Moreover, in order to eliminate potential existing barriers, during a transitional period of 12 months, Member States should carry out a review of existing national laws, regulations or administrative provisions of a general nature laying down data localisation requirements and notify to the Commission, together with a justification, any data localisation requirement that they consider being in compliance with this Regulation. These notifications should enable the Commission to assess the compliance of any remaining data localisation requirements.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 103 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) In order to ensure the transparency of data localisation requirements in the Member States for natural and legal persons, such as providers and users of data storage or other processing services, Member States should publishdetails of such requirements on a single online information point and regularly update the information on such measuresor should provide such details to a Union-level information point established under another Union act. Member States should regularly update this information. In order to appropriately inform legal and natural persons of data localisation requirements across the Union, Member States should notify to the Commission the addresses of such online points. The Commission should publish this information on its own website, along with a consolidated list of data localisation requirements in force in Member States.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 107 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16) Data localisation requirements are frequently underpinned by a lack of trust in cross-border data storage or other processing, deriving from the presumed unavailability of data for the purposes of the competent authorities of the Member States, such as for inspection and audit for regulatory or supervisory control. Therefore, this Regulation should clearly establish that it does not affect the powers of competent authorities to request and receive access to data in accordance with Union or national law, and that access to data by competent authorities may not be refused on the basis that the data is stored or otherwise processed in another Member State. Furthermore, this regulation should not affect the powers of competent authorities to adopt regulation that ensures authorities online access to data held abroad.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 108 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
(17) Natural or legal persons who are subject to obligations to provide data to competent authorities can comply with such obligations by providing and guaranteeing effective and timely electronic access to the data to competent authorities, regardless of the Member State in the territory of which the data is stored or otherwise processed. Such access may be ensured through concrete terms and conditions in contracts between the natural or legal person subject to the obligation to provide access and the data storage or other processing service provider.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 109 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) Where a natural or legal person subject to obligations to provide data fails to comply with them and provided that a competent authority has exhausted all applicable means to obtain access to data, the competent authority should be able to seek assistance from competent authorities in other Member States. In such cases, competent authorities should use specific cooperation instruments in Union law or international agreements, depending on the subject matter in a given case, such as, in the area of police cooperation, criminal or civil justice or in administrative matters respectively, Framework Decision 2006/96034, Directive 2014/41/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council35, the Convention on Cybercrime of the Council of Europe36, Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/200137, Council Directive 2006/112/EC38 and Council Regulation (EU) No 904/201039. In the absence of such specific cooperation mechanisms, competent authorities should cooperate with each other with a view to provide access to the data sought, through designated single points of contact, unless it would be contrary to the public order of the requested Member State. _________________ 34 Council Framework Decision 2006/960/JHA of 18 December 2006 on simplifying the exchange of information and intelligence between law enforcement authorities of the Member States of the European Union (OJ L 386, 29.12.2006, p. 89). 35 Directive 2014/41/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters (OJ L 130, 1.5.2014, p. 1). 36 Convention on Cybercrime of the Council of Europe, CETS No 185. 37 Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 of 28 May 2001 on cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters (OJ L 174, 27.6.2001, p. 1). 38 Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ L 347, 11.12.2006, p. 1). 39 Council Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 of 7 October 2010 on administrative cooperation and combating fraud in the field of value added tax (OJ L268, 12.10.2010, p.1).
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 110 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
(19) Where a request for assistance entails obtaining access to any premises of a natural or legal person including to any data storage or other processing equipment and means, by the requested authority, such access must be in accordance with Union or Member State procedural law, including any requirement to obtain prior judicial authorisation. Obtaining data from a private entity from another Member State through the central contact point cannot be used to circumvent the EU and international legal aid regulations.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 113 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
(20) The ability to port data without hindrance is a key facilitator of user choice and effective competition on markets for data storage or other processing services. The real or perceived difficulties to port data cross- border also undermine the confidence of professional users in taking up cross-border offers and hence their confidence in the internal market. Whereas natural persons and consumers benefit from existing Union legislation, the ability to switch between service providers is not facilitated for users in the course of their business or professional activities.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 117 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
(21) In order to take full advantage of the competitive environment, professional users should be able to make informed choices and easily compare the individual components of various data storage or other processing services offered in the internal market, including as to the contractual conditions of porting data upon the termination of a contract. In order to align with the innovation potential of the market and to take into account the experience and expertise of the providers and professional users of data storage or other processing services, the detailed information and operational requirements for data porting should be defined by market players through self- regulation, encouraged and, facilitated and monitored by the Commission, in the form of Union codes of conduct which may entail model contract terms. Nonetheless, if such codes of conduct are not put in placeThe Commission should evaluate the development and effectively implemented within a reasonable period of time, the Commission should review the situationation of these codes of conduct.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 121 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
(24) Enhancing trust in the security of cross-border data storage or other processing should reduce the propensity of market players and the public sector to use data localisation as a proxy for data security. It should also improve the legal certainty for companies on applicable security requirements when outsourcing their data storage or other processing activities, including to service providers in other Member States.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 122 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
(25) Any security requirements related to data storage or other processing that are applied in a justified and proportionate manner on the basis of Union law or national law in compliance with Union law in the Member State of residence or establishment of the natural or legal persons whose data is concerned should continue to apply to storage or other processing of that data in another Member State. These natural or legal persons should be able to fulfil such requirements either themselves or through contractual clauses in contracts with providers.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 125 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
(26) Security requirements set at national level should be necessary and proportionate to the risks posed to the security of data storage or other processing in the area in scope of the national law in which these requirements are set.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 126 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
(27) Directive 2016/114841 provides for legal measures to boost the overall level of cybersecurity in the Union. Data storage or other processing services constitute one of the digital services covered by that Directive. According to its Article 16, Member States have to ensure that digital service providers identify and take appropriate and proportionate technical and organisational measures to manage the risks posed to the security of network and information systems which they use. Such measures should ensure a level of security appropriate to the risk presented, and should take into account the security of systems and facilities, incident handling, business continuity management, monitoring, auditing and testing, and compliance with international standards. These elements are to be further specified by the Commission in implementing acts under that Directive. _________________ 41 Directive (EU) 2016/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 2016 concerning measures for a high common level of security of network and information systems across the Union (OJ L 194, 19.7.2016, p. 1).
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 129 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
(28) The Commission should periodically reviewsubmit a report on the implementation of this Regulation, in particular with a view to determining the need for modifications in the light of technological or market developments.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 138 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. This Regulation shall apply to the storage or other processing of electronic data other than personal data in the Union, which is
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 152 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2
2. ‘data storage’ means any storage of data in electronic format;deleted
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 153 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
2a. ‘processing’ means any operation or set of operations which is performed on data or on sets of data in electronic format, whether or not by automated means, such as collection, recording, organisation, structuring, storage, adaptation or alteration, retrieval, consultation, use, disclosure by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available, alignment or combination, restriction, erasure or destruction.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 154 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
4. ‘provider’ means a natural or legal person who provides data storage or other processing services;
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 155 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5
5. ‘data localisation requirement’ means any obligation, prohibition, condition, limit or other requirement provided for in the laws, regulations or administrative provisions of the Member States, which imposes the location of data storage or or practices of Member States and its emanations, including those related to public procurement, which imposes ther processing of data in the territory of a specific Member State or hinders storage or other processing of data in any other Member State;.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 156 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6
6. ‘competent authority’ means an authority of a Member State that has the power to obtain access to data stored or processed by a natural or legal person for the performance of its official duties, as provided for by national or Union law;
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 159 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7
7. ‘user’ means a natural or legal person, including a public authority or body, using or requesting a data storage or other processing service;
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 162 #

2017/0228(COD)

8. ‘professional user’ means a natural or legal person, including a public sector entity, using or requesting a data storage or other processing service for purposes related to its trade, business, craft, profession or task.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 163 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Location of data for storage or other processing within the Union shall not be restricted to the territory of a specific Member State, and storage or other processing in any other Member StateData localisation requirements shall not be prohibited or restricted, unless it isunless they are justified on grounds of public security, in compliance with the principle of proportionality.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 170 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall immediately notify to the Commission any draft act which introduces a new data localisation requirement or makes changes to an existing data localisation requirement in accordance with the procedures set out in the national law implementingArticles 5, and 7 of Directive (EU) 2015/1535.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 171 #

2017/0228(COD)

3. Within By ... [12 months after the start of applicationdate of entry into force of this Regulation], Member States shall ensure that any data localisation requirement that is not in compliance with paragraph 1 ishas been repealed. IBy ... [12 months after the date of entry into force of this Regulation] if a Member State considers that a data localisation requirement is in compliance with paragraph 1 and may therefore remain in force, it shall notify that measure to the Commission, together with a justification for maintaining it in force.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 172 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall make the details of any data localisation requirements applicable in their territory publicly available online via a single information point which they shall keep up-to-date, or via a Union-level information point established under another Union act if and when available.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 174 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall inform the Commission of the address of their single information point referred to in paragraph 4. The Commission shall publish the links to such points on its website, along with a consolidated list of all data localisation requirements referred to in paragraph 4, which it shall regularly update.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 181 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Where a competent authority has exhausted all applicable means to obtain access to the data, it may request the assistance of a competent authority in another Member State in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 7, and the requested competent authority shall provide assistancFor the purposes of paragraph 1 of this Article, where a competent authority does not receive access to data from a natural or legal persons, and if no specific cooperation mechanism exists under Union law or international agreements to exchange data between competent authorities of different Member States, that competent authority may request the assistance from a competent authority of another Member State in accordance with the procedure laid downset out in Article 7, unless it would be contrary to the public order of the requested Member State.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 184 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Where a request for assistance entails obtaining access to any premises of a natural or legal person including to any data storage or other processing equipment and means, by the requested authority, such access must be in accordance with Union or Member State procedural law.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 191 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission shall encourage and facilitate the development of self- regulatory codes of conduct at Union level, in ordwhich enables professional users to define guidelines on best practices in facilitating the switchengage with contractual information in a clear and informed manner, ing of providers and to ensure that they provide professional users with sufficiently detailed, clear andrder to contribute to a competitive data economy. The Code of Conduct should be based on principles of transparentcy of information before a contract for data storage and processing is concluded, as regards, interoperability, that take due account of open standards and that define guidelines covering inter alia the following issues:
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 196 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the processes, technical requirements, timeframes and charges that apply in case abest practices in facilitating the switching of providers, and minimum information requirements to ensure that professional user wants to ss are provided witch to another provider or port data back to its own IT systems, including the processes and location of any data back- up, the available data formats and supports, the required IT configuration and minimum network bandwidth; the time required prior to initiating the porting processsufficiently detailed, clear and transparent information before a contract for data processing is concluded, regarding the processes, technical requirements, timeframes and charges that apply in the event that a professional user wants to switch to and othe time during which the data will remain available for portingr provider or port data back to its own IT systems; and theclear guarantees for accessing data in the caseevent of the bankruptcy of the provider; and
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 199 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the operational requirements to switch or port data in a structured, commonly used and machine-readable format allowing sufficient time for the user to switch or port the data.deleted
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 206 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall encourage providers to effectively implement the codes of conduct referred to in paragraph 1 within one[two years after the startdate of apppublication of this Regulation].
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 214 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall review the development and effective implementation of such codes of conduct and the effective provision of information by providers no later than two[four years after the startdate of apppublication of this Regulation].
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 220 #

2017/0228(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. No later than [5four years after the date mentioned in Article 10(2)], the Commission shall carry out a review of this Regulation and present a reportof publication of this Regulation] the Commission shall submit a report evaluating the implementation onf the main findingsis Regulation to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee.
2018/04/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 58 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
(57) Recourse to European cybersecurity certification should remain voluntary, unless otherwise provided in Union or national legislation. However, with a view to achieving the objectives of this Regulation and avoiding the fragmentation of the internal market, national cybersecurity certification schemes or procedures for the ICT products and services covered by a European cybersecurity certification scheme should cease to produce effects from the date established by the Commission by means of the implementing act. Moreover, Member States should not introduce new national certification schemes providing cybersecurity certification schemes for ICT products and services already covered by an existing European cybersecurity certification scheme.
2018/02/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 59 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 62
(62) The Agency’s support to cybersecurity certification should also include liaising with the Council Security Committee and the relevant national body, regarding the cryptographic approval of products to be used in classified networks.deleted
2018/02/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 68 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
(28) The Agency should contribute towards raising the awareness of the public about risks related to cybersecurity and provide guidance on good practices for individual users aimed at citizens and organisations. The Agency should also contribute to promote best practices and solutions at the level of individuals and organisations by collecting and analysing publicly available information regarding significant incidents, and by compiling reports with a view to providing guidance to businesses and citizens and improving the overall level of preparedness and resilience. The Agency should furthermore organise, in cooperation with the Member States and the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies regular outreach and public education campaigns directed to end-users, aiming at promoting safer individual online behaviour and raising awareness of measures that can be taken to guard against potential threats in cyberspace, including cybercrimes such as phishing attacks, botnets, financial and banking fraud, as well as promoting basic authentication and data protection advice. The Agency should play a central role in accelerating end-user awareness on security of devices and secure use of services.
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 84 #

2017/0225(COD)

(47) Conformity assessment is the process demonstrating whether specified requirements relating to a product, process, service, system, person or body have been fulfilled. For the purposes of this Regulation, certification should be considered as a type of conformity assessment regarding the cybersecurity features ofand practices comprised in a product, process, service, system, or a combination of those (“ICT products and services”) by an independent third party, other than the product manufacturer or service provider. Certification cannot guarantee per se that certified ICT products and services are cyber secure. It is rather a procedure and technical methodology to attest that ICT products and services as well as the underlying processes and systems have been tested and that they comply with certain cybersecurity requirements laid down elsewhere, for example as specified in technical standards.
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 93 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) advise the Union and the Member States on research needs and priorities in the area of cybersecurity only, with a view to enabling effective responses to current and emerging risks and threats, including with respect to new and emerging information and communications technologies, and to using risk-prevention technologies effectively;
2018/02/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 97 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. The Permanent Stakeholders’ Group shall be consulted on the preparation of candidate schemes referred to in Article 44(1) as part of an official consultation process, alongside wider industry stakeholders.
2018/02/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 104 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
(56) The Commission should be empowered to request ENISA to prepare candidate schemes for specific ICT products or services. The Commission, based on the candidate scheme proposed by ENISA, should then be empowered to adopt the European cybersecurity certification scheme by means of implementing acts. Taking account of the general purpose and security objectives identified in this Regulation, European cybersecurity certification schemes adopted by the Commission should specify a minimum set of elements concerning the subject-matter, the scope and functioning of the individual scheme. These should include among others the scope and object of the cybersecurity certification, including the categories of ICT products and services covered, the detailed specification of the cybersecurity requirements, for example by reference to standards or technical specifications, the specific evaluation criteria and evaluation methods, as well as the intended level of assurance: basic, substantial and/or high. Consideration should be given in the scheme to the full lifecycle of the product, including any rules applicable to the de- commissioning of products or services.
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 104 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 2
2. When preparing candidate schemes referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, ENISA shall consult all relevant stakeholders, including industry through an official consultation process, and closely cooperate with the Group. The Group shall provide ENISA with the assistance and expert advice required by ENISA in relation to the preparation of the candidate scheme, including by providing opinions where necessary.
2018/02/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 107 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
A European cybersecurity certification scheme shall be so designed to take into account, as applicable in proportion to risks to their common operational environment, and where users take appropriate measures, the following security objectives:
2018/02/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 108 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1
1. A European cybersecurity certification scheme may specify one or more of the following assurance levels: basic, substantial and/or high, for ICT products and services issued under that scheme, including for their different individual use cases.
2018/02/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 111 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) assurance level basic shall refer to a certificate issued in the context of a European cybersecurity certification scheme, which provides a limited degree of confidence in the claimed or asserted cybersecurity qualities of an ICT product or service, and is characterised with reference to technical specifications, standards and procedures related thereto, including technical controls, the purpose of which is to decrease the risk of cybersecurity incidents, given appropriate measures are taken by users;
2018/02/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 113 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) assurance level substantial shall refer to a certificate issued in the context of a European cybersecurity certification scheme, which provides a substantial degree of confidence in the claimed or asserted cybersecurity qualities of an ICT product or service, and is characterised with reference to technical specifications, standards and procedures related thereto, including technical controls, the purpose of which is to decrease substantially the risk of cybersecurity incidents, given appropriate measures are taken by users;
2018/02/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 114 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
(57) Recourse to European cybersecurity certification should remain voluntary, unless otherwise provided in Union or national legislation. However, w. When specific need for certain products or services to demonstrate compliance with a set of harmonised cybersecurity requirements arises in Union law, the requirements and process of assessment and compliance verification should be set down in Union legislation in line with the New Approach. With a view to achieving the objectives of this Regulation and avoiding the fragmentation of the internal market, national cybersecurity certification schemes or procedures for the ICT products and services covered by a European cybersecurity certification scheme should cease to produce effects from the date established by the Commission by means of the implementing act. Moreover, Member States should not introduce new national certification schemes providing cybersecurity certification schemes for ICT products and services already covered by an existing European cybersecurity certification scheme.
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 115 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) assurance level high shall refer to a certificate issued in the context of a European cybersecurity certification scheme, which provides a higher degree of confidence in the claimed or asserted cybersecurity qualities of an ICT product or service than certificates with the assurance level substantial, and is characterised with reference to technical specifications, standards and procedures related thereto, including technical controls, the purpose of which is to prevent cybersecurity incidents, given appropriate measures are taken by users.
2018/02/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 118 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2
2. The certification shall be voluntary, unless otherwise specified in Union law.
2018/02/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 119 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 6
6. Certificates shall be issued for a maximum period of three yearsime as defined by the certification scheme and may be renewed, under the same conditions, provided that the relevant requirements continue to be met.
2018/02/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 124 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 a (new)
Article 48 a Baseline IT security requirements 1. The Agency shall, by ... [two years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation], propose to the Commission clear baseline IT security requirements for all IT devices sold in or exported from the Union, which industry should be encouraged to generally adhere to where appropriate, such as: (a) the vendor providing a written certification that the device does not contain any hardware, software or firmware component with any known security vulnerabilities; (b) the device relies on software or firmware components capable of accepting properly authenticated and trusted updates from the vendor; (c) the device does not include any unencrypted password or access code. However, the use of secure elements used for remote administration, the delivery of updates, or communication, is strongly encouraged; (d) an obligation of the vendor of the internet-connected device, software, or firmware component to notify the competent authority of any known security vulnerabilities; (e) an obligation of the vendor of the internet-connected device, software, or firmware component to provide a repair or replacement in respect to any new security vulnerability discovered; (f) an obligation of the vendor of the internet-connected device, software, or firmware component to provide information on how the device receives updates, the anticipated timeline for ending security support and a formal notification when such security support has ended. 2. The Agency shall review and, where necessary, amend the requirements referred to in paragraph 1 every two years, and submit any amendments as proposals to the Commission.
2018/02/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 136 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
(9) ‘European cybersecurity certification scheme’ means the comprehensive set of rules, technical requirements, standards and procedures defined at Union level applying to the certification of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) products and services falling under the scope of that specific scheme;
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 185 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) facilitate the establishment and take-up ofconsult international and European stand internationalardisation organisations on the development of standards for risk management and for the security of ICT products and services, as well as draw up, in collaboration with Member States, advice and guidelines regarding the technical areas related to the security requirements for operators of essential services and digital service providers, as well as regarding already existing standards, including Member States’ national standards, pursuant to Article 19(2) of Directive (EU) 2016/1148nd facilitate the establishment and take-up of relevant international and European standards;
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 187 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) draw up, in collaboration with Member States, advice and guidelines regarding the technical areas referred to in point (b), as well as regarding already existing standards, including Member States’ national standards, which would allow for those areas to be covered;
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 215 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 5
5. The Permanent Stakeholders’ Group shall advise the Agency in respect of the performance of its activities. It shall in particular advise the Executive Director on drawing up a proposal for the Agency’s work programme, and on ensuring communication with the relevant stakeholders on all issues related to the work programme. It may also propose that the Commission request the Agency to prepare candidate European cybersecurity certification schemes in accordance with Article 44, either on its own initiative or following submission of proposals from relevant stakeholders.
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 229 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 1
1. Following a request from the Commission, ENISA shall prepare a candidate European cybersecurity certification scheme which meets the requirements set out in Articles 45, 46 and 47 of this Regulation. Member States or, Permanent Stakeholders’ Group, either on its own initiative or following submission of proposals from relevant stakeholders, and the European Cybersecurity Certification Group (the ‘Group’) established under Article 53 may propose the preparation of a candidate European cybersecurity certification scheme to the Commission.
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 234 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 2
2. WThroughout then preparingation of candidate schemes 2. referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, ENISA shall consult all relevant stakeholders and closely cooperate with the Group. TRelevant stakeholders and the Group shall provide ENISA with the assistance and expert advice required by ENISA in relation to the preparation of the candidate scheme, including by providing opinions where necessary. Where relevant, ENISA may also set up a stakeholder expert group, composed of members of the Permanent Stakeholders’ Group and any other relevant stakeholders with specific expertise in the field of a given candidate scheme, in order to provide further assistance and advice.
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 250 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission, based shall consult all relevant stakeholders on the candidate scheme proposed by ENISA, and shall assess its suitability for meeting the objectives of the request and whether the scheme contributes to a high level of consumer and end-user protection and European competitiveness. Following a consultation and assessment, the Commission may adopt implementing acts, in accordance with Article 55(1), providing for European cybersecurity certification schemes for ICT products and services meeting the requirements of Articles 45, 46 and 47 of this Regulation.
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 259 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
A European cybersecurity certification scheme shall be so designed to take into account, as applicable,t least the following security objectives, insofar as they are relevant:
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 269 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) ensure that ICT products and services are provided with up to date software that does not contain known vulnerabilities critical to the assurance offered by the scheme, have been designed and implemented in such a way as to effectively limit the inclusion or introduction of vulnerabilities, and are provided mechanisms for secure software updates.
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 278 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1
1. A European cybersecurity certification scheme may specify one or more of the following assurance levels: basic, substantial and/or high, fordistinct assurance levels for ICT products and services issued under that scheme. Those levels shall be distinguished on the basis of the degree of confidence in the claimed or asserted cybersecurity qualities of an ICT products and or services issued under that scheme, characterised with reference to standards and procedures related thereto, including technical controls, the purpose of which is to decrease the risk of cybersecurity incidents.
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 289 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2
2. The assurance levels basic, substantial and high shall meet the following criteria respectively: (a) assurance level basic shall refer to a certificate issued in the context of a European cybersecurity certification scheme, which provides a limited degree of confidence in the claimed or asserted cybersecurity qualities of an ICT product or service, and is characterised with reference to technical specifications, standards and procedures related thereto, including technical controls, the purpose of which is to decrease the risk of cybersecurity incidents; (b) assurance level substantial shall refer to a certificate issued in the context of a European cybersecurity certification scheme, which provides a substantial degree of confidence in the claimed or asserted cybersecurity qualities of an ICT product or service, and is characterised with reference to technical specifications, standards and procedures related thereto, including technical controls, the purpose of which is to decrease substantially the risk of cybersecurity incidents; (c) assurance level high shall refer to a certificate issued in the context of a European cybersecurity certification scheme, which provides a higher degree of confidence in the claimed or asserted cybersecurity qualities of an ICT product or service than certificates with the assurance level substantial, and is characterised with reference to technical specifications, standards and procedures related thereto, including technical controls, the purpose of which is to prevent cybersecurity incidents.deleted
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 323 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) detailed specification of the cybersecurity requirements against which the specific ICT products and services are evaluated, for example by reference to Union or international or European standards or technical specifications;
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 358 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
(ma) the period of validity of issued certificates.
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 372 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2
2. The certification shall be voluntary, unless otherwise specified in Union law.
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 376 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 3
3. A European cybersecurity certificate pursuant to this Article shall be either subject to a declaration of conformity by a manufacturer or service provider or issued by the conformity assessment bodies referred to in Article 51 on the basis of criteria included in the European cybersecurity certification scheme, adopted pursuant to Article 44. Where a scheme offers more than one level of assurance, it may choose a combination of methods to determine compliance with the scheme.
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 378 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Where a European certification scheme requires a manufacturer or service provider to draw up a declaration of conformity, these shall be kept by the manufacturer or service provider and provided to the national certification supervisory authorities upon request. By drawing up the declaration of conformity, the manufacturer shall assume responsibility for compliance with the requirements of the Scheme.
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 382 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 6
6. Certificates shall be issued for a maximum period of three years andas deemed appropriate for each scheme, which shall not be less than 24 months where those are issued by a conformity assessment body. Certificates may be renewed, under the same conditions, provided that the relevant requirements continue to be met. Certificates shall not become invalid following the provision of updates or other changes in hardware or software versions where the requirements of Article 47(1)(j) are complied with.
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 392 #

2017/0225(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1
1. Without prejudice to paragraph 3, national cybersecurity certification schemes and the related procedures for the ICT products and services covered by a European cybersecurity certification scheme shall cease to produce effects from the date established in the implementing act adopted pursuant Article 44(4). Where a European cybersecurity certification has replaced a national scheme, certificates issued under the European scheme shall be accepted as valid in cases where certification under a national scheme was required. Existing national cybersecurity certification schemes and the related procedures for the ICT products and services not covered by a European cybersecurity certification scheme shall continue to exist.
2018/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 43 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) In view of different rules applying in the Member States regarding the entryimport of cultural goods into the customs territory of the Union, measures should be taken in particular to ensure that imports of cultural goods are subject to uniform controls upon their entry.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 46 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
(7) The legality of export should be examined based on the laws and regulations of the country where the cultural goods were discovered or created ('source country'). In order to avoid circumvention, when the cultural goods enter the Union from a different third country, the person who seeks to introduce them into the customs territory of the Union should demonstrate that they were exported from there legally, when the third country in question is a signatory State of the 1970 UNESCO Convention and thus a country committed to fighting against illicit trafficking of cultural property. In other cases, the person should prove lawful export from the source country.deleted
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 49 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) In order not to impede trade with goods across the external border disproportionately, this Regulation should only apply to goods meeting a certain age limit. For that purpose, it seems appropriate to set a 250 year minimum age threshold for all categories of cultural goods. That minimum agIn addition, a value threshold of 50,000 euro should also be applied, which would apply too for all categories of cultural goods. Those thresholds will ensure that the measures provided for in this Regulation focus on cultural goods most likely to be targeted by looters in conflict areas, without excluding other goods the control of which is necessary for ensuring protection of cultural heritage.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 58 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
(10) Since certain categories of cultural goods, namely archaeological objects, elements of monuments, rare manuscripts and incunabula are particularly vulnerable to pillage and destruction, it seems necessary to provide for a system of increased scrutiny before they may enter the customs territory of the Union. Such a system should require the presentation of a licence issued by the competent authority of the Member State of entry prior to the release for free circulation of those goods or their placement under a special customs procedure other than transit. Persons seeking to obtain such a licence should be able to prove licit export from the source country with the, where deemed necessary by the competent authority based upon the risk of illicit trade, type of cultural good, value and source and export countries. Persons seeking to obtain such a licence should submit appropriate supportive documents and evidence, in particular, export certificates or licences issued by the third country of export, ownership titles, invoices, sales contracts, insurance documents, transport documents and experts appraisals. Based on complete and accurate applications, the competent authorities of the Member States should decide whether to issue a licence without undue delay and within the timescales specified. Persons submitting an application should not be charged a fee in relation to their application.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 62 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) Instances of looting connected to terrorist financing or money laundering have historically been connected to specific source countries or regions. It is therefore necessary that the Commission prepares a list of those states most in danger so that the efforts of customs authorities can be focused on the consignments at greatest risk. In order to compile this list, the Commission shall consider states currently in conflict or internal strife. Where the Commission considers that there is a risk to the preservation of cultural goods as a consequence of active conflict or a breakdown of state institutions, it should submit to add the country affected to a list of countries contained in Annex II. Cultural goods whose source country appears in Annex II should be subject to an import licence, where the other thresholds of the Regulation are also met.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 68 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) Temporary admission of cultural goods for educational, scientific or academic research purposes should not be subject to the presentation of a licence or of a statement.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 71 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) Storage of cultural goods from countries affected by armed conflict or suffering a natural disaster should also be permitted without the presentation of a licence or a statement in order to ensure their safety and preservation.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 74 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
(14) In order to take account of experience with the implementation of this Regulation and of changing geopolitical and other circumstances which place cultural goods at risk, while not impeding trade with third countries disproportionally, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of modifications to the minimum age threshold criterion for the different categories of cultural goods. That delegation should also allow the Commission to update the Annex following amendments to the Combined Nomenclature. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 201627 . 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. __________________ 27 OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 78 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission to adopt specific modalities for the temporary admission and storage of cultural goods into the customs territory of the Union, the templates for import licence applications and forms, as well as for importer statements and their accompanying documents, as well as further procedural rules on their submission and processing. Implementing powers should also be conferred on the Commission to make arrangements for the establishment of an electronic database for the storage and exchange of information between Member States. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council28. __________________ 28 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 84 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Regulation sets out the conditions and procedure for the entryimport of cultural goods into the customs territory of the Union.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 88 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) 'cultural goods' means any object which is of importance for archaeology, prehistory, history, literature, art or science and which belongs to the categories listed in the table in Annex I and meets the minimum age and value threshold specified therein;
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 89 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) 'source country' means the country in the current territory of which the cultural goods were created or discovered or which has such a close connection with the cultural goods that this country protects them as national cultural property and regulates their export from its territory upon their lawful removal from the country in which the cultural goods were created or discovered;
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 98 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. The releaseimport of cultural goods for free circulation and the placing of cultural goods under a special procedure other than transitinto the customs territory of the Union shall only be permitted upon the presentation of an import licence issued in accordance with Article 4 or of an importer statement, where such a licence is required, or of an extended description made out in accordance with Article 5.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 100 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The successful import of cultural goods shall not be construed to be evidence of lawful provenance or ownership.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 107 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. The release for free circulation and the placing under a special procedure other than transit inimport into the customs territory of the Union of the cultural goods referred to in points (c), (d) and (h) of the Annex shallI may be subject to the presentation of an import licence to the customs authorities.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 109 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. The holder of the goods shall apply for an import licencesubmit a notification to the competent authority of the Member State of entry. The application shall be accompanied by any supporting documents and information substantiating that the cultural goods in question have been exported from the source country in accordance with its laws and regulations. However, where the export country is a Contr 10 days prior the intended date of release or placting Party to the UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property signed in Paris on 14 November 1970 ('the 1970 UNESCO Convention'), the application shall be accompanied by any supporting documents and information substantiating that the cultural goods have been exported from thatunder a special procedure. The notification shall country in accordance with its laws and regulations.ain:
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 112 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
In cases where the source country is not known, the notification may designate a geographical region as relevant to the provenance of the goods.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 113 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Within 10 days of receipt of the notification, the competent authority of the Member State shall take a decision as to whether the good or goods should require an import licence. This decision shall be based upon risk of illicit trade and shall take into account the type of cultural good, the export and source countries involved, including whether those countries are signatories to the UNESCO Convention on Cultural Property, and the value of the goods.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 115 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 b (new) – introductory wording and point a (new)
2b. It shall include: (a) a short description of the goods, including the number of goods using the applicable supplementary unit;
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 116 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 b (new) – point b (new)
(b) the category under Annex I to which the goods belong;
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 117 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 b (new) – point c (new)
(c) the name of the export country; and
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 118 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 b (new) – point d (new)
(d) the name of the source country.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 121 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The competent authority of the Member State of entry shall verify whether the application is complete. It shall request any missing information or document from the applicant within 307 days of receipt of the application.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 123 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. The competent authority shall, within 9014 days of the submission of the complete application, examine the application and decide to issue the import licence or reject the application. It may reject the application on the following grounds:
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 128 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new)
(ca) This Article shall not apply to goods whose source country is not listed in Annex II. For goods without a known source country, this paragraph shall not apply where the geographical region deemed relevant is based upon historical territories or regions of control and substantially includes countries listed in Annex II.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 129 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4 – point c b (new)
(cb) The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 12 to amend Annex II to amend the list of source countries to which this Article applies, in order to take account of political developments or other events which may have a serious detrimental effect on the capacity for national cultural institutions to ensure the preservation of cultural goods in those countries.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 138 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – title
Importer statementExtended description of goods
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 140 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. The release for free circulation and the placing under a special procedure other than transit in the Unionimport of the cultural goods referred to in points (a), (b), (e), (f), (g), (i), (j), (k) and (l) of the Annex I shall be subject to the submission of an importer statementan extended description of goods to be supplied to the customs authorities of the Member State of entry.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 145 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The importer statement shall contain a declaration signed by the holder of the goods that the goods have been exported from the source country in accordance with its laws and regulations. However, where the export country is a Contracting Party to the UNESCO Convention on Cultural Property, the importer statement shall contain a declaration signed by the holder of the goods that the goods have been exported from that country in accordance with its laws and regulationhall, within the description of goods supplied in the customs declaration in accordance with Articles 162 to 169 of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013, identify the name of the source country of the goods. In cases where the source country is not known, the extended description may designate a geographical region as relevant to the goods.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 147 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The importer statement shall include a standardised document describing the cultural goods in question in sufficient detail for them to be identified by the customs authorities.Where deemed necessary by the customs authorities of the Member State of entry due to the risk of illicit trade, taking into account the type of cultural good, the export and source countries involved, including whether those countries are signatories to the UNESCO Convention on Cultural Property, and the value of the goods, the customs authorities shall have recourse to the provisions of Article 188 of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 to verify import of the goods is in accordance with the requirements of that Regulation
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 154 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission may adopt, by means of implementing acts, the template for the importer statement as well as the procedural rules on the submission and processing of the importer statement. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 13.deleted
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 159 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. The import licence referred to in Article 4 or the importer statementextended description of goods referred to in Article 5, as the case may be, shall be submitted to the customs office competent to release the cultural goods for free circulation or for placing them under a special procedure other than transit.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 163 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. With regard to cultural goods requiring the submission of an importer statementextended description of goods to enter the customs territory of the Union, the customs authorities shall check whether the importer statement complies with the requirements provided for in or on the basis of Article 5 and corresponds to the goods presented. For that purpose, they may require additional information from the declarant and physically examine the cultural goods, including by conducting an expertise. They shall register the importer statement by attributing to it a serial number and a registration date and, upon release of the goods, provide the declarant with a copy of the registered importer statement.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 174 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. The administrative decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall be accompanied by a statement of reasons, be communicated to the declarant and shall be subject to an effective remedy in accordance with procedures provided for in national lawsubject to the provisions of Article 22(7) of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 177 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3
3. The period of temporary retention shall be strictly limited to the time required for the customs authorities or other law enforcement authorities to determine whether the circumstances of the case warrant retention under other provisions of Union or national law. The maximum period of temporary retention under this Article shall be 63 months. If no determination is made regarding further retention of the cultural goods within that period or if a determination is made that the circumstances of the case do not warrant further retention, the cultural goods shall be made available to the declarant.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 180 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. For the purposes of implementing this Regulation, Member States shall ensure co-operation between their competent authorities referred to in Article 3(44(5).
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 182 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. An electronic system mayshall be developed for the storage and the exchange of information between the authorities of the Member States, within the framework of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013. Any such system shall address the receipt, processing, storage and exchange of in particular regarding importer statements and import licences.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 191 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 13by... [six months from the date of entry into force of this Regulation].
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 197 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
The Member States shall lay down the rules on penalties applicable to infringements of Articles 3, 4 and 5 and in particular, to the making of false statements and the submission of false information to obtain entryimport of cultural goods into the customs territory of the Union, and the making available of economic resources to prescribed terrorist groups as a result of the entry of cultural goods into customs territory of the Union contrary to provisions of this Regulation on their import. Member States shall take all measures necessary to ensure that theyse rules on penalties are implemented. The penalties provided for shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Member States shall notify the Commission of those rules and of those measures within 18 months of the entry into force of the Regulation and shall notify it, without delay, of any subsequent amendment affecting them.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 204 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
In their preparatory works for the implementation of this Regulation, the Commission and the Member States shall cooperate with international organisations, such as the UNESCO, the Interpol, EUROPOL, World Customs Organization (WCO) and the International Council of Museums, to ensure effective training, capacity building activities and awareness rising campaigns.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 208 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) statistical information on importer statements registerdeleted;
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 216 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall present a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of this Regulation threewo years after the date of application of this Regulation and, after that, every fiveour years.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 218 #

2017/0158(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
It shall apply from 1 January 20219.
2018/05/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 165 #

2017/0144(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. As soon as this becomes technically possible, facial images mayshall also be used to identify a third country national on the basis of this biometric identifier. Before this functionality is implemented in the ECRIS-TCN system, the Commission shall present a report by [three years after the entry into force of this Regulation] on the availability and readiness of the required technology, on which the European Parliament shall be consulted.
2017/11/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 57 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
The European Parliament rejects the Commission proposal.
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 61 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Citation 1
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 43(2), 91, 100, 114, 192, 194(2) and 337 thereof,
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 67 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
(2) Article 337 TFEU provides for the Commission's power, within the limits and under the conditions, which the Council may lay down acting by a simple majority, to collect any information required for the performance of its tasks. However, in Case C-490/10 European Parliament v Council, the Court has clarified that where the collection of information contributes directly to the achievement of the objectives of a given European Union policy, the act laying down the conditions for such collection must be based on the legal basis which relates to that policy. This Regulation provides not only for a framework in which the Commission can collect information from undertakings and associations of undertakings, but also for measures to enforce the requests for information. Therefore, while taking fully into account the fact that the Commission derives its power to collect information directly from the Treaty, this Regulation should be based, in addition to Article 337 TFEU, on the provisions of Articles 43(2), 91, 100, 192 and 194(2) TFEU and also of Article 114 TFEU, which provides for the adoption of measures necessary for the establishment and functioning of the internal market, including where differences between national rules are such as to obstruct the fundamental freedoms or where it is necessary to prevent the emergence of difficulties in the establishment and functioning of the internal market.
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 74 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) Undertakings and associations of undertakings recognize the importance of the well-functioning internal market, which has been proved by their willingness to cooperate with the Commission. As evidenced by numerous cases, undertakings and associations of undertakings respond to the requests of the Commission to provide also information on a voluntary basis. Nevertheless, it shall be noted, that such tool may prove useful in case when well- targeted and timely information is needed in order to prove the existence of infringement vis-à-vis à Member States.
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 75 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 b (new)
(3b) The introduction of the Single Market Information Tool does not aim to gather confidential business-related information from undertakings and association of undertakings for the purpose of creating new policies.
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 81 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) Where detailed, comparable, up- to-date, and often confidential market information could only be obtained from market players in a timely manner, it appears therefore appropriate, as a last resort, to empower the Commission, within the limits and under the conditions laid down in this Regulation, to request undertakings and associations of undertakings to directly provide it, in a timely manner, with comprehensive, accurate and reliable quantitative and qualitative market information where other sources of information have proven unavailable, insufficient or inadequate. To this effectBefore requesting information, the Commission should first adopt a decision stating why other means to obtain the necessary information have proven ineffective. It is understood that the notion of undertaking has the same meaning as in other areas of EU law, in particular competition law.
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 90 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
(11) For this investigative tool to be effective, theIn order to minimise costs of replying to requests for information, sought should relate to the application of relevant Union law. This may consist, for example, of factual market data, including cost structure, pricing policy, products or services characteristics or geographical distribution of customers and suppliers. It may also consist ofuch requests should only cover information that is likely to be at the disposal of the undertakings’ or associations of undertakings’ fact-based analysis of the functioning of the internal market, such as in relation to perceived regulatory and entry barriers or to costs of cross-border operations. In order to minimise costs of replying to requests for information, such requests should only cover information that is likely to be concerned (its ‘raw data’). The Commission cannot request information that needs to be aggregated according to specific criteria, spans a long period of time or goes significantly back in time, ats the disposal of the undertaking or association of undertakings concernedis may prove unduly burdensome.
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 97 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) The Commission should only be allowed to request undertakings and associations of undertakings to deliver pre-existing documents and the answers to purely factual questions.
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 98 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 b (new)
(11b) As enshrined in Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and confirmed by the Court of Justice of the European Union, undertakings and association of undertakings have right for the protection against self-incrimination. Therefore, the right not to give evidence against oneself or the right of silence shall be granted to all undertakings and the associations of undertakings without exception, regardless the area of the internal market and the nature of information requested by the Commission.
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 100 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) When issuing requests for information to undertakings and associations of undertakings, the Commission is required to undertake a careful selection of addressees of the requests, so that requests are only addressed to undertakings and associations of undertakings that are capable of providing sufficiently relevant information, notably larger undertakings in the relevant Member States. These requests for information are aimed at solving a presumed, i.e. based on the available information, serious problem with the application of Union law in the areas of the internal market, agriculture and fisheries (excluding the conservation of marine biological resoupporting the Commission´s actual findings in infringement procedurces), transport, environment and energy. Their aim is not to prosecute undertakings for the underpinning behaviour, if any. Accordingly, sanctions provided for in the instrument are designed to address exclusively two instances. They only cover an intentional or through gross negligence lack of a response to a request for information and an intentionally or through gross negligence incorrect, incomplete, or misleading reply. The collected information, if relevant, could also be used to provide insight into situations where undertakings find it difficult to comply with the legislation, with a view to improving the proper application of the internal market rules. With a view to avoid disproportionate administrative burden for micro- undertakings, which are anyway unlikely to be in a position to provide sufficiently relevant information, the Commission should be precluded from issuing requ against Member States in pending cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union. Their aim is not to prosecute undertakings for the underpinning behaviour, if any. With a view to avoid disproportionate administrative burden for micro, small and medium-sized undertakings unlests for information to this category of undertakings. When issuing requests for information to small and medium-sized undertakings, the Commission should take due account of the principle of proportionality. While SMEs are unlikely to operatethey are part of a group of undertakings which qualifies at least ats a larger scale enabling them to significantly affect market outcomes, the information gathered from SMEs could prove valuable in informing the Commission on difficulties in establishment and functioning of the internal market. Information readily available to SMEs might be of anecdotal nature but it could still alert the Commission about single market difficulties SMEs might suffer from. SMEs would normally not and should not incur any significant additional costs of data gathering in response to this tool. Given their relatively weaker bargaining position in value chains, SMEs might be more forthcoming with information when granted a procedure duly respecting confidentiality and anonymity. Resolving a difficulty in the single market establishment and functioning could in particular benefit SMEs as it is often the small innovative firms which face the greatest bar group under Article 3(7) of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council29, and which are anyway unlikely to be in a position to provide sufficiently relevant information, the Commission should be precluded from issuing requests for information to these categoriers when trying to start up and scale up across the single marketof undertakings. For reasons of consistency and legal certainty, the definitions of ‘micro-undertaking’, ‘small undertaking’ and ‘medium-sized undertaking’ of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council29 should apply. __________________ 29 Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p.19).
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 108 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
(14) The investigative tool provided for in this Regulation is particularly useful for ensuring the application of Union law in the area of the internal market by the Commission. It is also useful, for any subsequent enforcement action by the Member States concerned that would require the use of the relevant information collected using this power and disclosed by the Commission to the Member States concerned. Moreover, where difficulties in the application of existing rules are experienced, including situations where undertakings are not able to comply with the legislation due to lack of legal clarity, this investigative tool could also be useful after the use of other tools and sources of relevant information have proven inadequate, for contributing to the conception or design of regulatory solutions. It is also appropriate not to allow the use of such information for other purposes, in particular the application of the competition rules of the TFEU, without prejudice to the reuse of information made public.deleted
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 113 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) The Commission should be able to enforce compliance with the requests for information it addresses to any undertaking or association of undertakings, as appropriate, by means of proportionate fines and periodic penalty payments imposed by way of decision. In setting the amounts of fines and periodic penalty payments, the Commission should take due account of the principle of proportionality (including the aspects of appropriateness), in particular as regards small and medium-sized undertakings. The rights of the parties requested to provide information should be safeguarded by giving them the opportunity to make known their views before any decision imposing fines or periodic penalty payments is taken.deleted
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 119 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16) Taking due account of the principle of proportionality (including the aspects of appropriateness), the Commission should be able to reduce the periodic penalty payments or waive them entirely, when addressees of requests provide the information requested, albeit after the expiry of the deadline. For reasons of legal certainty, it is also appropriate to provide for limitation periods for the imposition and enforcement of fines and periodic penalty payments.deleted
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 121 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
(17) The Court of Justice should, in accordance with Article 261 TFEU, have unlimited jurisdiction in respect of decisions by which the Commission imposes fines or periodic penalty payments under this Regulation, which means that it may cancel, reduce or increase the fine or periodic penalty payment imposed by the Commission.deleted
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 129 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
(19) The disclosure of information about an undertaking’s business activity could result in a serious harm to the same undertaking. Therefore, the Commission should take due account of the legitimate interests of undertakings, in particular the protection of their business secrets. To ensure that business secrets and other confidential information provided to the Commission are treated in compliance with Article 339 TFEU, any undertaking or association of undertaking submitting information should clearly identify which information it considers to be confidential and why it is confidential. The Commission should not be able to disclose confidential information provided by such respondents to the Member State concerned by the request unless it has previously obtained their agreement to disclose that information to that effect. The respondent concerned should be required to provide the Commission with a separate non-confidential version of the information that could be disclosed to the relevant Member State. In cases where information marked as confidential does not seem to be covered by obligations of professional secrecy, it is appropriate to have a mechanism in place according to which the Commission can decide the extent to which such information can be disclosed. Any such decision to reject a claim that a piece of information is confidential should indicate a period at the end of which it may be disclosed, so that the respondent can make use of any judicial protection available to it, including any interim measure. The rights of the respondent should be safeguarded by giving it the opportunity to make known its views before any decision to reject the confidentiality claim is takenEven if the Commission considers that a confidentiality claim is ill- founded, it should not decide that the relevant information is to be disclosed.
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 137 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
(21) This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In particular, this Regulation seeks to ensure full respect for the right to respect for private and family life, the right to protection of personal data, the right to good administration, in in particular the access to files, while respecting business secrecy, the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, the right of defence and the principles of legality and proportionality of penalties.
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 138 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
(22) Where the measures provided for in this Regulation entail the processing of personal data, they should be carried out in accordance with Union law on the protection of personal data, in particular Directive 95/46/EC30 . With regard to the processing of persona data by the Commission and within the framework of this Regulation, it shall comply with the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council31 . __________________ 30Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, (OJ L 281, 23.11.1995). 31Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data, (OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1).
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 160 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) agriculture and fisheries, other thanexcluding the conservation of marine biological resources;
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 225 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The Commission shall take due account of the principle of proportionality, in particular with regard to small and medium-sized undertakings.deleted
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 232 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
In the cases provided for in Article 4 and under the conditions laid down in Article 5, the Commission may, by simple request or by decision, requireest undertakings and associations of undertakings to provide information on a voluntary basis.
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 242 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
The Commission shall not issue requests for information in accordance with this Regulation to micro-undertakings, small undertakings and medium-size undertakings unless they are part of a group of undertakings which qualifies at least as small group as defined ina large group under Article 6(53(7) of Directive 2013/34/EU.
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 252 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. The simple request referred to in paragraph 1 shall state the legal basis and its purpose, specify what information is required and prescribe a proportionate time limit within which the information is tomay be provided. It shall also refer to the fines provided for in Article 9(1) for supplying incorrect or misleading information.
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 264 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall state the legal basis, the purpose of the request, specify what information is required and prescribe a proportionate time limit within which the information is to be provided. It shall also indicate the fines provided for in Article 9(1) and the periodic penalties payments provided for in Article 9(2), as appropriatemay be provided.
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 302 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
The Commission shall verify whethernot be entitled to object the confidentiality claim of the information transmitted made by the respondent undertakings or associations of undertakings under subparagraph 2 of paragraph 2 is well-founded and proportionate.
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 303 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
After giving the undertaking or association of undertakings concerned the opportunity of making known its views, the Commission may take a decision finding that the information claimed to be confidential is not protected, and setting a date after which the information is to be disclosed. That period shall not be less than 1 month.deleted
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 307 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
That decision shall be notified to the undertaking or association of undertakings concerned without delay.deleted
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 329 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9
1. where deemed necessary and proportionate, impose on undertakings or association of undertakings fines not exceeding 1 % of their total turnover in the preceding business year where they intentionally or through gross negligence: (a) supply incorrect or misleading information in response to a request made pursuant to Article 6(2); (b) supply incorrect, incomplete or misleading information in response to a decision adopted pursuant to Article 6(3) or do not supply the information within the prescribed time limit. 2. The Commission may, by decision, impose on undertakings or associations of undertakings periodic penalty payments where an undertaking fails to supply complete, accurate and not misleading information within the prescribed deadline as requested by the Commission by a decision adopted pursuant to Article 6(3). The periodic penalty payments shall not exceed 5 % of the average daily turnover of the undertaking or association concerned in the preceding business year for each working day of delay, calculated from the date established in the decision, until it supplies the information requested or required by the Commission. 3. association of undertakings provides no or incomplete information, the Commission shall prior the imposition of a fine or penalty, set a final deadline of two weeks to receive the missing information. 4. account the nature, gravity and duration of the breach of Article 6(1), as well as the principle of proportionality in particular with regard to small and medium-sized undertakings when fixing the amount of the fine or periodic penalty payment. 5. associations of undertakings have satisfied the obligation which the periodic penalty payment was intended to enforce, the Commission may reduce or waive the amount of the periodic penalty payment. 6. accordance with paragraph 1 or 2, the Commission shall give the concerned undertakings or associations of undertakings the opportunity of making known their views.Article 9 deleted Fines and periodic penalty payments The Commission may, by decision, Where the undertaking or The Commission shall take into Where the undertakings or Before adopting any decision in
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 358 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10
Limitation period for the imposition of 1. Commission by Article 9 shall be subject to a limitation period of three years. 2. paragraph 1 shall start on the day on which the infringement referred to in Article 9 is committed. However, in the case of continuing or repeated breaches of Article 6(1), the period shall begin on the day on which the breach ceases. 3. Commission for the purpose of investigating or pursuing a possible breach of Article 6(1) shall interrupt the limitation period for the imposition of fines or periodic penalty payments, with effect from the date on which the action is notified to the undertaking or association of undertakings concerned. 4. limitation period shall start running afresh. However, the limitation period shall expire at the latest on the day on which a period of six years has elapsed without the Commission having imposed a fine or a periodic penalty payment. That period shall be extended by the time during which the limitation period is suspended in accordance with paragraph 5. 5. imposition of fines or periodic penalty payments shall be suspended for as long as the decision of the Commission is the subject of proceedings pending before the Court of Justice of the European Union.Article 10 deleted fines and periodic penalty payments The powers conferred on the The period provided for in Any action taken by the After each interruption, the The limitation period for the
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 367 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11
Limitation period for the enforcement of fines and periodic penalty payments 1. enforce decisions adopted pursuant to Article 9 shall be subject to a limitation period of five years. 2. paragraph 1 shall startArticle 11 deleted The powers onf the day on which the decCommission taken pursuant to Article 9 becomes final. 3. The limitation period provided for in paragraph 1 shall be interrupted: (a) modifying the original amount of the fine or periodic penalty payment or refusingo The period provided for in by notification of a decision by any application for modification; (b) acting at the request of the Commission, or of the Commission, intended to enforce payment of the fine or periodic penalty payment. 4. limitation period shall start running afresh. 5. in paragraph 1 shall be suction of a Member State, After each interruption, the The limitation period provided for the respeonded for so long as: (a) pay; (b) suspended pursuant to a decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union.nt is allowed time to the enforcement of payment is
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 376 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12
The decisions taken pursuant to Article 9(1) and (2) shall be addressed to the undertaking or association of undertakings concerned. The Commission shall notify the decision to the addressee without delay.Article 12 deleted Addressees of decisions
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 380 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13
Review by the Court of Justice The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have unlimited jurisdiction within the meaning of Article 261 TFEU to review fines or periodic penalty payments imposed by the Commission. It may cancel, reduce or increase the fine or periodic penalty payment imposed.Article 13 deleted
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 386 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Union the decisions which it takes pursuant to Article 9(1) and (2).deleted
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 390 #

2017/0087(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
With regard to the processing of personal data within the framework of this Regulation, Member States shall carry out their tasks for the purposes of this Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2016/6791a and in accordance with the national laws, regulations or administrative provisions transposing Directive 95/46/EC implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/679. With regard to the processing of personal data by the Commission within the framework of this Regulation, it shall comply with the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001. __________________ 1aRegulation (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)
2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 33 #

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
(18) NCAs should have the necessary resources, in terms of staff, expertise, financial means and technical equipment, to ensure they can effectively perform their tasks when applying Articles 101 and 102 TFEU. In case their duties and powers under national law are extended, the resources that are necessary to perform those tasks should still be sufficient. The independence of NCAs will be enhanced if they have autonomy in the implementation of the budgets allocated to them. Autonomy in the implementation of allocated budgets should be implemented within the framework of national budgetary rules and procedures.
2017/09/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 46 #

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that national competition authorities have the human, financial and technical resources that are necessary for the effective performance of their duties and exercise of their powers when applying Articles 101 and 102 TFEU as defined in paragraph 2. Member States shall ensure that the NCA is granted autonomy in the implementation of the allocated budget. This budgetary autonomy shall be exercised without prejudice to national budgetary rules and procedures.
2017/09/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 51 #

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the maximum amount of the fine a national competition authority may impose on each undertaking or association of undertakings participating in an infringement of Articles 101 or 102 TFEU should not be seis set at least at a level belowof 10% of its total worldwide turnover in the business year preceding the decision. This should not prevent Member States from maintaining or introducing a higher maximum level for the fine.
2017/09/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 53 #

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. Where an infringement by an association of undertakings relates to the activities of its members, the maximum amount of the fine shall not be set at least at a level belowof 10 % of the sum of the total worldwide turnover of each member active on the market affected by the infringement of the association. This should not prevent Member States from maintaining or introducing a higher maximum amount of the fine. However, the financial liability of each undertaking in respect of the payment of the fine shall not exceed the maximum amount set in accordance with paragraph 1.
2017/09/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 58 #

2017/0063(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that current and former employees and directors of applicants for immunity from fines to competition authorities are protected from any criminal and administrative sanctions and from sanctions imposed in non- criminal judicial proceedings for their involvement in the secret cartel covered by the application, if these employees and directors actively cooperate with the competition authorities concerned and the immunity application predates the starttime when the employees and directors were made aware by the competent authorities of the Member States of the criminal proceedings.
2017/09/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 46 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
(2) The content of electronic communications may reveal highly sensitive information about the natural persons involved in the communication, from personal experiences and emotions to medical conditions, sexual preferences and political views, the disclosure of which could result in personal and social harm, economic loss or embarrassment. Similarly, metadata derived from electronic communications may also reveal very sensitive and personal information. These metadata includes the numbers called, the websites visited, geographical location, the time, date and duration when an individual made a call etc., allowing precise conclusions to be drawn regarding the private lives of the persons involved in the electronic communication, such as their social relationships, their habits and activities of everyday life, their interests, tastes etc.
2017/07/03
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 50 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) Electronic communications data may also reveal information concerning legal entities, such as business secrets or other sensitive information that has economic value. Therefore, the provisions of this Regulation should apply to both natural and legal persons. Furthermore, this Regulation should ensure that provisions of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council21 , also apply to end-users who are legal persons. This includes the definition of consent under Regulation (EU) 2016/679. When reference is made to consent by an end-user, including legal persons, this definition should apply. In addition, legal persons should have the same rights as end-users that are natural persons regarding the supervisory authorities; furthermore, supervisory authorities under this Regulation should also be responsible for monitoring the application of this Regulation regarding legal persons. _________________ 21Regulation (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. 1–88).deleted
2017/07/03
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 57 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
(5) The provisions of this Regulation particularise and complement the general rules on the protection of personal data laid down in Regulation (EU) 2016/679 as regards electronic communications data that qualify as personal data and do not go beyond or contradict the high level of protection set down in Regulation (EU) 2016/679. This Regulation therefore does not lower the level of protection enjoyed by natural persons under Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Processing of electronic communications data by providers of electronic communications services should only be permitted in accordance with this Regulation.
2017/07/03
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 74 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) Connected devices and machines increasingly communicate with each other by using electronic communications networks (Internet of Things). The transmission of machine-to-machine communications involves the conveyance of signals over a network and, hence, usually constitutes an electronic communications service. In order to ensure full protection of the rights to privacy and confidentiality of communications, and to promote a trusted and secure Internet of Things in the digital single market, it is necessary to clarify that this Regulation should apply to the transmission of machine-to- machine communications. Therefore, the principle of confidentiality enshrined in this Regulation should also apply to the transmission of machine-to-machine communications. Specific safeguards could also be adopted under sectorial legislation, as for instance Directive 2014/53/EU.deleted
2017/07/03
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 79 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) The development of fast and efficient wireless technologies has fostered the increasing availability for the public of internet access via wireless networks accessible by anyone in public and semi- private spaces such as 'hotspots' situated at different places within a city, department stores, shopping malls and hospitals. To the extent that those communications networks are provided to an undefined group of end-users, the confidentiality of the communications transmitted through such networks should be protected. The fact that wireless electronic communications services may be ancillary to other services should not stand in the way of ensuring the protection of confidentiality of communications data and application of this Regulation. Therefore, this Regulation should apply to electronic communications data using electronic communications services and public communications networks. In contrast, tis Regulation should apply to electronic communications data using publically available electronic communications services and public communications networks. In this context, publicly available means only services intended for consumers. It should not include services intended for business users, nor should the means of the delivery of the service in question, whether obtained over the public internet or not have any bearing on the interpretation of whether the service is publicly available or not. This Regulation should not apply to closed groups of end- users such as corporate networks, access to which is limited to members of the corporation.
2017/07/03
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 82 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
(14) Electronic communications data should be defined in a sufficiently broad and technology neutral way so as to encompass any information concerning the content transmitted or exchanged (electronic communications content) and the information concerning an end-user of electronic communications services processed for the purposes of transmitting, distributing or enabling the exchange of electronic communications content; including data to trace and identify the source and destination of a communication, geographical location and the date, time, duration and the type of communication. Whether such signals and the related data are conveyed by wire, radio, optical or electromagnetic means, including satellite networks, cable networks, fixed (circuit- and packet-switched, including internet) and mobile terrestrial networks, electricity cable systems, the data related to such signals should be considered as electronic communications metadata and therefore be subject to the provisions of this Regulation. Electronic communications metadata may include information that is part of the subscription to the service when such information is processed for the purposes of transmitting, distributing or exchanging electronic communications content.
2017/07/03
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 91 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16) The prohibition of storage of communications during transmission is not intended to prohibit any automatic, intermediate and transient storage of this information insofar as this takes place for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission in the electronic communications network. The processing of pseudonymised data, should be incentivized as the act of psedonymisation dramatically reduces any privacy and security risk associated with processing of data related to transmission. It should not prohibit either the processing of electronic communications data to ensure the security and continuity of the electronic communications services, including checking security threats such as the presence of malware or the processing of metadata to ensure the necessaryappropriate quality of service requirements, such as latency, jitter etc.
2017/07/03
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 97 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
(17) The processing of electronic communications metadata can be useful for businesses, consumers and society as a whole. Vis-à-vis Directive 2002/58/EC, this Regulation broadens the possibilities for providers of electronic communications services to process electronic communications metadata, based on end- users consentin accordance with Article 6(1) and 6(4) of Regulation (EU) No 2016/679. However, end-users attach great importance to the confidentiality of their communications, including their online activities, and that they want to control the use of electronic communications data for purposes other than conveying the communication. Therefore, this Regulation should require providers of electronic communications services to comply with Regulation (EU) No 2016/679 when processing electronic communications metadata, which should include data on the location of the device. As an exception from obtaining end- users' consent, tohe processing of electronic communications metadata, which should include data on the location of the device for purposes other than those for which the personal data were initially collected should be allowed in cases where further processing is compatible in accordance with Article 6(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. generated for the purposes of granting and maintaining access and connection to the service. Location data that is generated other than in the context of providing electronic communications services should not be considered as metadata. Examples of commercial usages of electronic communications metadata by providers of electronic communications services may include the provision of heatmaps; a graphical representation of data using colours to indicate the presence of individuals. To display the traffic movements in certain directions during a certain period of time, an identifier is necessary to link the positions of individuals at certain time intervals. This identifier would be missing if anonymous data were to be used and such movement could not be displayed. Therefore, whenever the purpose(s) of further processing cannot be achieved by processing data that is made anonymous, pseudonymisation of data should be allowed. Such usage of electronic communications metadata could, for example, benefit public authorities and public transport operators to define where to develop new infrastructure, based on the usage of and pressure on the existing structure. Where a type of processing of electronic communications metadata, in particular using new technologies, and taking into account the nature, scope, context and purposes of the processing, is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, a data protection impact assessment and, as the case may be, a consultation of the supervisory authority should take place prior to the processing, in accordance with Articles 35 and 36 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
2017/07/03
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 117 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
(21) Exceptions to the obligation to obtain consent to make use of the processing and storage capabilities of terminal equipment or to access information stored in terminal equipment should be limited to situations that involve no, or only very limited, intrusion of privacy. For instance, consent should not be requested for authorizing the technical storage or access which is strictly necessary and proportionate for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the end-user. This may include the storing of cookies for the duration of a single established session on a website to keep track of the end-user’s input when filling in online forms over several pages. This may also cover situations where end-users use a service across devices for the purpose of service personalisation and content recommendation. Cookies can also be a legitimate and useful tool, for example, in measuring web traffic to a website. Information society providers that engage in configuration checking to provide the service in compliance with the end-user's settings and the mere logging of the fact that the end-user’s device is unable to receive content requested by the end- user should not constitute access to such a device or use of the device processing capabilities.
2017/07/03
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 118 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
(22) The methods used for providing information and obtaining end-user's consent should be as user-friendly as possible. Given the ubiquitous use of tracking cookies and other tracking techniques, end-users are increasingly requested to provide consent to store such tracking cookies in their terminal equipment. As a result, end-users are overloaded with requests to provide consent. The use of technical means to provide consent, for example, through transparent and user-friendly settings, may address this problem. Therefore, this Regulation should provide for the possibility to express consent by using the appropriate settings of a browser or other application. The choices made by end- users when establishing its general privacy settings of a browser or other application should be binding on, and enforceable against, any third parties. Web browsers are a type of software application that permits the retrieval and presentation of information on the internet. Other types of applications, such as the ones that permit calling and messaging or provide route guidance, have also the same capabilities. Web browsers mediate much of what occurs between the end-user and the website. From this perspective, they are in a privileged position to play an active role to help the end-user to control the flow of information to and from the terminal equipment. More particularly web browsers may be used as gatekeepers, thus helping end-users to prevent information from their terminal equipment (for example smart phone, tablet or computer) from being accessed or storedtechnical settings.
2017/07/03
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 126 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
(23) The principles of data protection by design and by default were codified under Article 25 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Currently, the default settings for cookies are set in most current browsers to ‘accept all cookies’. Therefore providers of software enabling the retrieval and presentation of information on the internet should have an obligation to configure the software so that it offers the option to prevent third parties from storing information on the terminal equipment; this is often presented as ‘reject third party cookies’. End-users should be offered a set of privacy setting options, ranging from higher (for example, ‘never accept cookies’) to lower (for example, ‘always accept cookies’) and intermediate (for example, ‘reject third party cookies’ or ‘only accept first party cookies’)Therefore providers of software enabling publically available electronic communications services and permitting the retrieval and presentation of information on the internet should have an obligation to configure the software so that it offers end-users a set of privacy setting options in order that end-users may actively select a preferred option after being given the necessary information to make the choice. Such privacy settings should be presented in a an easily visible and intelligible manner.
2017/07/03
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 137 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
(24) For web browsers to be able to obtain end-users’ consent as defined under Regulation (EU) 2016/679, for example, to the storage of third party tracking cookies, they should, among others, require a clear affirmative action from the end-user of terminal equipment to signify his or her freely given, specific informed, and unambiguous agreement to the storage and access of such cookies in and from the terminal equipment. Such action may be considered to be affirmative, for example, if end-users are required to actively select ‘accept third party cookies’ to confirm their agreement and are given the necessary information to make the choice. To this end, it is necessary to require providers of software enabling access to internet that, at the moment of installation, end-users are informed about the possibility to choose the privacy settings among the various options and ask them to make a choice. Information provided should not dissuade end-users from selecting higher privacy settings and should include relevant information about the risks associated to allowing third party cookies to be stored in the computer, including the compilation of long-term records of individuals' browsing histories and the use of such records to send targeted advertising. Web browsers are encouraged to provide easy ways for end-users to change the privacy settings at any time during use and to allow the user to make exceptions for or to whitelist certain websites or to specify for which websites (third) party cookies are always or never allowed.deleted
2017/07/03
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 139 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
(2) The content of electronic communications may reveal highly sensitive information about the natural persons involved in the communication, from personal experiences and emotions to medical conditions, sexual preferences and political views, the disclosure of which could result in personal and social harm, economic loss or embarrassment. Similarly, metadata derived from electronic communications may also reveal very sensitive and personal information. These metadata includes the numbers called, the websites visited, geographical location, the time, date and duration when an individual made a call etc., allowing precise conclusions to be drawn regarding the private lives of the persons involved in the electronic communication, such as their social relationships, their habits and activities of everyday life, their interests, tastes etc.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 141 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) Electronic communications data may also reveal information concerning legal entities, such as business secrets or other sensitive information that has economic value. Therefore, the provisions of this Regulation should apply to both natural and legal persons. Furthermore, this Regulation should ensure that provisions of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council21, also apply to end-users who are legal persons. This includes the definition of consent under Regulation (EU) 2016/679. When reference is made to consent by an end-user, including legal persons, this definition should apply. In addition, legal persons should have the same rights as end-users that are natural persons regarding the supervisory authorities; furthermore, supervisory authorities under this Regulation should also be responsible for monitoring the application of this Regulation regarding legal persons. _________________ 21 Regulation (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. 1–88).deleted
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 151 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
(5) The provisions of this Regulation particularise and complement the general rules on the protection of personal data laid down in Regulation (EU) 2016/679 as regards electronic communications data that qualify as personal data and do not go beyond or contradict the high level of protection set down in Regulation (EU) 2016/679. This Regulation therefore does not lower the level of protection enjoyed by natural persons under Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Processing of electronic communications data by providers of electronic communications services should only be permitted in accordance with this Regulation.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 154 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
(6) While the principles and main provisions of Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council22 remain generally sound, that Directive has not fully kept pace with the evolution of technological and market reality, resulting in insufficient clarity and inconsistent or insufficient effectivenforcement of the protection of privacy and confidentiality in relation to electronic communications. Those developments include the entrance on the market of electronic communications services that from a consumer perspective are substitutable to traditional services, but do not have to comply with the same set of rules. Another development concernsor new techniques that allow for tracking of online behaviour of end-users, both of which are not covered by Directive 2002/58/EC. Directive 2002/58/EC should therefore be repealed and replaced by this RegulationRegulation (EU) 2016/679. _________________ 22 Directive 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).
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 156 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
(30) Publicly available directories of end-users of electronic communications services are widely distributed. Publicly available directories means any directory or service containing end-users information such as phone numbers (including mobile phone numbers), email address contact details and includes inquiry services. The right to privacy and to protection of the personal data of a natural person acting out of their business capacity requires that end-users that are natural persons are asked for consprovided, upon request, with transparent beinfore their personalmation about the data arebeing included in athe directory and the means to verify, correct, update, supplement and delete data relating to them free of charge. The legitimate interest of legal entities requires that end-users that are legal entities have the right to object to the data related to them being included in a directory.
2017/07/03
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 159 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
(31) If end-users that are natural persons give their consent to their data being included in suchdo not object to the inclusion of their data by providers of number-based interpersonal communication services and electronic communication providers in public directories, they should be able to determine on a consent basis which categories of personal data are included in the directory (for example name, email address, home address, user name, phone number). In addition, providers of publicly available directories should inform the end-users of the purposes of the directory and of the search functions of the directory before including them in that directory. End-users should be able to determine by consent on the basis of which categories of personal data their contact details can be searched. The categories of personal data included in the directory and the categories of personal data on the basis of which the end-user's contact details can be searched should not necessarily be the same.
2017/07/03
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 167 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
(9) This Regulation should apply to electronic communications data processed in connection with the provisionoffering and use of electronic communications services in the Union, regardless of whether or not the processing takes place in the Union. Moreover, in order not to deprive end-users in the Union of effective protection, this Regulation should also apply to electronic communications data processed in connection with the provision of electronic communications services from outside the Union to end-users in the Union. The mere accessibility of the electronic communication service in the Union is not sufficient to ascertain such intention.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 176 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) Connected devices and machines increasingly communicate with each other by using electronic communications networks (Internet of Things). The transmission of machine-to-machine communications involves the conveyance of signals over a network and, hence, usually constitutes an electronic communications service. In order to ensure full protection of the rights to privacy and confidentiality of communications, and to promote a trusted and secure Internet of Things in the digital single market, it is necessary to clarify that this Regulation should apply to the transmission of machine-to- machine communications. Therefore, the principle of confidentiality enshrined in this Regulation should also apply to the transmission of machine-to-machine communications. Specific safeguards could also be adopted under sectorial legislation, as for instance Directive 2014/53/EU.deleted
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 181 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation lays down rules regarding the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of natural and legal persons in the provision and use of electronic communications services, and in particular, the rights to respect for private life and communications and the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data.
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 184 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) The development of fast and efficient wireless technologies has fostered the increasing availability for the public of internet access via wireless networks accessible by anyone in public and semi- private spaces such as ‘hotspots’ situated at different places within a city, department stores, shopping malls and hospitals. To the extent that those communications networks are provided to an undefined group of end-users, the confidentiality of the communications transmitted through such networks should be protected. The fact that wireless electronic communications services may be ancillary to other services should not stand in the way of ensuring the protection of confidentiality of communications data and application of this Regulation. Therefore, this Regulation should apply to electronic communications data using electronic communications services and public communications networks. In contrast, tis Regulation should apply to electronic communications data using publicly available electronic communications services and public communications networks. In this context, publicly available means only services intended for consumers. It should not include services intended for business users, nor should the means of the delivery of the service in question, whether obtained over the public internet or not have any bearing on the interpretation of whether the service is publicly available or not. This Regulation should not apply to closed groups of end- users such as corporate networks, access to which is limited to members of the corporation.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 186 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. This Regulation ensures, in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 2016/679, free movement of electronic communications data and electronic communications services within the Union, which shall be neither restricted nor prohibited for reasons related to the respect for the private life and communications of natural and legal persons and the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data.
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 189 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
(14) Electronic communications data should be defined in a sufficiently broad and technology neutral way so as to encompass any information concerning the content transmitted or exchanged (electronic communications content) and the information concerning an end-user of electronic communications services processed for the purposes of transmitting, distributing or enabling the exchange of electronic communications content; including data to trace and identify the source and destination of a communication, geographical location and the date, time, duration and the type of communication. Whether such signals and the related data are conveyed by wire, radio, optical or electromagnetic means, including satellite networks, cable networks, fixed (circuit- and packet-switched, including internet) and mobile terrestrial networks, electricity cable systems, the data related to such signals should be considered as electronic communications metadata and therefore be subject to the provisions of this Regulation. Electronic communications metadata may include information that is part of the subscription to the service when such information is processed for the purposes of transmitting, distributing or exchanging electronic communications content.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 190 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3
3. The provisions of this Regulation particularise and complement Regulation (EU) 2016/679 by laying down specific rules for the purposes mentioned in paragraphs 1 and 2.deleted
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 194 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation applies to the processing of electronic communications data carried out in connection with the provision and the use of electronic communications services and to information related to the terminal equipment of end-users.
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 195 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) Electronic communications data should be treated as confidential. This means that any interference with the transmission of electronic communications data, whether directly by human intervention or through the intermediation of automated processing by machines, without the consent of all the communicating parties should be prohibited. The prohibition of interception of communications data should apply during their conveyance, i.e. until receipt of the content of the electronic communication by the intended addressee. Interception of electronic communications data may occur, for example, when someone other than the communicating parties, listens to calls, reads, scans or stores the content of electronic communications, or the associated metadata for purposes other than the exchange of communications. Interception also occurs when third parties monitor websites visited, timing of the visits, interaction with others, etc., without the consent of the end-user concerned. As technology evolves, the technical ways to engage in interception have also increased. Such ways may range from the installation of equipment that gathers data from terminal equipment over targeted areas, such as the so-called IMSI (International Mobile Subscriber Identity) catchers, to programs and techniques that, for example, surreptitiously monitor browsing habits for the purpose of creating end-user profiles. Other examples of interception include capturing payload data or content data from unencrypted wireless networks and routers, including browsing habits without the end-users’ consent.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 199 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16) The prohibition of storage of communications during transmission is not intended to prohibit any automatic, intermediate and transient storage of this information insofar as this takes place for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission in the electronic communications network. The processing of pseudonymised data, should be incentivised as the act of psedonymisation dramatically reduces any privacy and security risk associated with processing of data related to transmission. It should not prohibit either the processing of electronic communications data to ensure the security and continuity of the electronic communications services, including checking security threats such as the presence of malware or the processing of metadata to ensure the necessaryappropriate quality of service requirements, such as latency, jitter etc.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 203 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) electronic communications services which are not publicly availableintended for closed groups or are not publicly available pursuant to Article 2 (2) (c) of Regulation (EU) No 2016/679;
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 205 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
(17) The processing of electronic communications metadata can be useful for businesses, consumers and society as a whole. Vis-à-vis Directive 2002/58/EC, this Regulation broadens the possibilities for providers of electronic communications services to process electronic communications metadata, based on end- users consentin accordance with Article 6(1) and 6(4) of Regulation (EU) No 2016/679. However, end-users attach great importance to the confidentiality of their communications, including their online activities, and that they want to control the use of electronic communications data for purposes other than conveying the communication. Therefore, this Regulation should require providers of electronic communications services to comply with Regulation (EU) No 2016/679 when processing electronic communications metadata, which should include data on the location of the device. As an exception from obtaining end- users’ consent, tohe processing of electronic communications metadata, which should include data on the location of the device for purposes other than those for which the personal data were initially collected should be allowed in cases where further processing is compatible in accordance with Article 6 (4) and Article 6 (1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 generated for the purposes of granting and maintaining access and connection to the service. Location data that is generated other than in the context of providing electronic communications services should not be considered as metadata. Examples of commercial usages of electronic communications metadata by providers of electronic communications services may include the provision of heatmaps; a graphical representation of data using colors to indicate the presence of individuals. To display the traffic movements in certain directions during a certain period of time, an identifier is necessary to link the positions of individuals at certain time intervals. This identifier would be missing if anonymous data were to be used and such movement could not be displayed. Therefore, whenever the purpose(s) of further processing cannot be achieved by processing data that is made anonymous, pseudonymisation of data should be allowed. Such usage of electronic communications metadata could, for example, benefit public authorities and public transport operators to define where to develop new infrastructure, based on the usage of and pressure on the existing structure. Where a type of processing of electronic communications metadata, in particular using new technologies, and taking into account the nature, scope, context and purposes of the processing, is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, a data protection impact assessment and, as the case may be, a consultation of the supervisory authority should take place prior to the processing, in accordance with Articles 35 and 36 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 217 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) End-users may consent to the processing of their metadata to receive specific services such as protection services against fraudulent activities (by analysing usage data, location and customer account in real time). In the digital economy, services are often supplied against counter-performance other than money, for instance by end-users being exposed to advertisements. For the purposes of this Regulation, consent of an end-user, regardless of whether the latter is a natural or a legal person, should have the same meaning and be subject to the same conditions as the data subject’s consent or another basis for processing under Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Basic broadband internet access and voice communications services are to be considered as essential services for individuals to be able to communicate and participate to the benefits of the digital economy. Consent for processing data from internet or voice communication usage will not be valid if the data subject has no genuine and free choice, or is unable to refuse or withdraw consent without detriment.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 221 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
(19) The content of electronic communications pertains to the essence of the fundamental right to respect for private and family life, home and communications protected under Article 7 of the Charter. Any interference with the content of electronic communications should be allowed only under very clear defined conditions, for specific purposes and be subject to adequate safeguards against abuse provided in Regulation (EU) 2016/679. This Regulation provides for the possibility of providers of electronic communications services to process electronic communications data in transit, with the informed consent of all the end- users concernedlectronic communication service provider’s end- user. For example, providers may offer services that entail the scanning of emails to remove certain pre-defined material. Given the sensitivity of the content of communications, this Regulation sets forth a presumption that the processing of such content data will result in high risks to the rights and freedoms of natural persons. When processing such type of data, the provider of the electronic communications service should always consult the supervisory authority prior to the processing. Such consultation should be in accordance with Article 36 (2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. The presumption does not encompass the processing of content data to provide a service requested by the end-user where the end-user has consented to such processing and it is carried out for the purposes and duration strictly necessary and proportionate for such service, for example text to voice service, organization of the mailbox or spam filter services. After electronic communications content has been sent by the end-user and received by the intended end-user or end-users, it may be recorded or stored by the end-user, end- users or by a third party entrusted by them to record or store such data. Any processing of such data must comply with Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 225 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) ‘electronic communications content’ means the content exchangtransmitted by means of publically available electronic communications services, such as text, voice, videos, images, and sound;
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 229 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
(20) Terminal equipment of end-users of electronic communications networks and any information relating to the usage of such terminal equipment, whether in particular is stored in or emitted by such equipment, requested from or processed in order to enable it to connect to another device and or network equipment, are part of the private sphere of the end-users requiring protection under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Given that such equipment contains or processes information that may reveal details of an individual’s emotional, political, social complexities, including the content of communications, pictures, the location of individuals by accessing the device’s GPS capabilities, contact lists, and other information already stored in the device, the information related to such equipment requires enhanced privacy protection. Furthermore, the so-called spyware, web bugs, hidden identifiers, tracking cookies and other similaand other unwanted tracking tools can enter end- user’s terminal equipment without their knowledge in order to gain access to information, to store hidden information and to trace the activities. Information related to the end-user’s device may also be collected remotely for the purpose of identification and tracking, using techniques such as the so-called ‘device fingerprinting’, often without the knowledge of the end-user, and may seriously intrude upon the privacy of these end-users. Techniques that surreptitiously monitor the actions of end-users, for example by tracking their activities online or the location of their terminal equipment, or subvert the operation of the end-users’ terminal equipment pose a serious threat to the privacy of end-users. Therefore, any such interference with the end-user’s terminal equipment should be allowed only with the end-user’s consent and for specific and transparent purposes.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 236 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
(21) Exceptions to the obligation to obtain consent to make use of the processing and storage capabilities of terminal equipment or to access information stored in terminal equipment should be limited to situations that involve no, or only very limited, intrusion of privacy. For instance, consent should not be requested for authorizing the technical storage or access which is strictly necessary and proportionate for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the end-user. This may include the storing of cookies for the duration of a single established session on a website to keep track of the end-user’s input when filling in online forms over several pages. This may also cover situations where end-users use a service across devices for the purpose of service personalisation and content recommendation. Cookies can also be a legitimate and useful tool, for example, in measuring web traffic to a website. Information society providers that engage in configuration checking to provide the service in compliance with the end-user’s settings and the mere logging of the fact that the end-user’s device is unable to receive content requested by the end- user should not constitute access to such a device or use of the device processing capabilities.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 240 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
(22) The methods used for providing information and obtaining end-user’s consent should be as user-friendly as possible. Given the ubiquitous use of tracking cookies and other tracking techniques, end-users are increasingly requested to provide consent to store such tracking cookies in their terminal equipment. As a result, end-users are overloaded with requests to provide consent. The use of technical means to provide consent, for example, through transparent and user-friendly settings, may address this problem. Therefore, this Regulation should provide for the possibility to express consent by using the appropriate settings of a browser or other application. The choices made by end- users when establishing its general privacy settings of a browser or other application should be binding on, and enforceable against, any third parties. Web browsers are a type of software application that permits the retrieval and presentation of information on the internet. Other types of applications, such as the ones that permit calling and messaging or provide route guidance, have also the same capabilities. Web browsers mediate much of what occurs between the end-user and the website. From this perspective, they are in a privileged position to play an active role to help the end-user to control the flow of information to and from the terminal equipment. More particularly web browsers may be used as gatekeepers, thus helping end-users to prevent information from their terminal equipment (for example smart phone, tablet or computer) from being accessed or storedtechnical settings.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 247 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Electronic communications data shall be confidential. Any interference with electronic communications data during transmission, such as by listening, tapping, storing, monitoring, scanning or other kinds of interception, or surveillance or processing of electronic communications data, by persons other than the end-users, shall be prohibited, except when permitted by this Regulation.
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 254 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
(23) The principles of data protection by design and by default were codified under Article 25 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Currently, the default settings for cookies are set in most current browsers to ‘accept all cookies’. Therefore providers of software enabling the retrieval and presentation of information on the internet should have an obligation to configure the software so that it offers the option to prevent third parties from storing information on the terminal equipment; this is often presented as ‘reject third party cookies’. End-users should be offered a set of privacy setting options, ranging from higher (for example, ‘never accept cookies’) to lower (for example, ‘always accept cookies’) and intermediate (for example, ‘reject third party cookies’ or ‘only accept first party cookies’)Therefore providers of software enabling publically available electronic communications services and permitting the retrieval and presentation of information on the internet should have an obligation to configure the software so that it offers end-users a set of privacy setting options in order that end-users may actively select a preferred option after being given the necessary information to make the choice. Such privacy settings should be presented in an easily visible and intelligible manner.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 257 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
(24) For web browsers to be able to obtain end-users’ consent as defined under Regulation (EU) 2016/679, for example, to the storage of third party tracking cookies, they should, among others, require a clear affirmative action from the end-user of terminal equipment to signify his or her freely given, specific informed, and unambiguous agreement to the storage and access of such cookies in and from the terminal equipment. Such action may be considered to be affirmative, for example, if end-users are required to actively select ‘accept third party cookies’ to confirm their agreement and are given the necessary information to make the choice. To this end, it is necessary to require providers of software enabling access to internet that, at the moment of installation, end-users are informed about the possibility to choose the privacy settings among the various options and ask them to make a choice. Information provided should not dissuade end-users from selecting higher privacy settings and should include relevant information about the risks associated to allowing third party cookies to be stored in the computer, including the compilation of long-term records of individuals’ browsing histories and the use of such records to send targeted advertising. Web browsers are encouraged to provide easy ways for end-users to change the privacy settings at any time during use and to allow the user to make exceptions for or to whitelist certain websites or to specify for which websites (third) party cookies are always or never allowed.deleted
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 275 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
(26) When the processing of electronic communications data by providers of electronic communications services falls within its scope, this Regulation should provide for the possibility for the Union or Member States under specific conditions to restrict by law certain obligations and rights when such a restriction constitutes a necessary and proportionate measure in a democratic society to safeguard specific public interests, including national security, defence, public security and the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, including the safeguarding against and the prevention of threats to public security and other important objectives of general public interest of the Union or of a Member State, in particular an important economic or financial interest of the Union or of a Member State, or a monitoring, inspection or regulatory function connected to the exercise of official authority for such interests. Therefore, this Regulation should not affect the ability of Member States to carry out lawful interception of electronic communications or take other measures, if necessary and proportionate to safeguard the public interests mentioned above, in accordance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union and of the European Court of Human Rights. Providers of electronic communications services should provide for appropriate procedures to facilitate legitimate requests of competent authorities, where relevant also taking into account the role of the representative designated pursuant to Article 3(3)27 of regulation (EU) 2016/679.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 281 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(b a) processing is allowed pursuant to Articles 6(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 283 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
(30) Publicly available directories of end-users of electronic communications services are widely distributed. Publicly available directories means any directory or service containing end-users information such as phone numbers (including mobile phone numbers), email address contact details and includes inquiry services. The right to privacy and to protection of the personal data of a natural person acting out of their business capacity requires that end-users that are natural persons are asked for consprovided, upon request, with transparent beinfore their personalmation about the data arebeing included in athe directory and the means to verify, correct, update, supplement and delete data relating to them free of charge. The legitimate interest of legal entities requires that end-users that are legal entities have the right to object to the data related to them being included in a directory.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 288 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
(31) If end-users that are natural persons give their consent to their data being included in suchdo not object to the inclusion of their data from providers of number-based interpersonal communication services and electronic communication providers in public directories, they should be able to determine on a consent basis which categories of personal data are included in the directory (for example name, email address, home address, user name, phone number). In addition, providers of publicly available directories should inform the end-users of the purposes of the directory and of the search functions of the directory before including them in that directory. End-users should be able to determine by consent on the basis of which categories of personal data their contact details can be searched. The categories of personal data included in the directory and the categories of personal data on the basis of which the end-user’s contact details can be searched should not necessarily be the same.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 299 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) if all end-users concerned have given theirthe service provider's end-user has consented to the processing of their electronic communications content for one or more specified purposes that cannot be fulfilled by processing information that is made anonymous, and the provider has consulted the supervisory authority. Points (2) and (3) of Article 36 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall apply to the consultation of the supervisory authoritypursuant to Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 305 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
(34) When end-users have provided their consent to receiving unsolicited communications for direct marketing purposes, they should still be able to withdraw their consent at any time in an easy manner. To facilitate effective enforcement of Union rules on unsolicited messages for direct marketing, it is necessary to prohibit the masking of the identity and the use of false identities, false return addresses or numbers while sending unsolicited commercial communications for direct marketing purposes. Unsolicited marketing communications should therefore be clearly recognizable as such and should indicate the identity of the legal or the natural person transmitting the communication or on behalf of whom the communication is transmitted and provide the necessary information for recipients to exercise their right to oppose to receiving further written and/or oral marketing messages.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 307 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
(35) In order to allow easy withdrawal of consent, legal or natural persons conducting direct marketing communications by email should present a link, or a valid electronic mail address, which can be easily used by end-users to withdraw their consent. Legal or natural persons conducting direct marketing communications through voice-to-voice calls and through calls by automating calling and communication systems should display their identity line on which the company can be called or present a specific code identifying the fact that the call is a marketing call.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 314 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
(37) Service providers who offer electronic communications services should inform end- users of measures they can take to protect the security of their communications for instance by using specific types of software or encryption technologies. The requirement to inform end-users of particular security risks does not discharge a service provider from the obligation to take, at its own costs, appropriate and immediate measures to remedy any new, unforeseen security risks and restore the normal security level of the service. The provision of information about security risks to the subscriber should be free of charge. Security is appraised in the light ofall comply with the security obligations prescribed in Article 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 322 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
(41) In order to fulfil the objectives of this Regulation, namely to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons and in particular their right to the protection of personal data and to ensure the free movement of personal data within the Union, 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 the information to be presented, including by means of standardised icons in order to give an easily visible and intelligible overview of the collection of information emitted by terminal equipment, its purpose, the person responsible for it and of any measure the end-user of the terminal equipment can take to minimise the collection. Delegated acts are also necessary to specify a code to identify direct marketing calls including those made through automated calling and communication systems. 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 201625 . 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. Furthermore, in order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission when provided for by this Regulation. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. _________________ 25 Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016 (OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1–14).
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 325 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation lays down rules regarding the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of natural and legal persons in the provision and use of electronic communications services, and in particular, the rights to respect for private life and communications and the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 327 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. This Regulation ensures, in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 2016/679, free movement of electronic communications data and electronic communications services within the Union, which shall be neither restricted nor prohibited for reasons related to the respect for the private life and communications of natural and legal persons and the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 330 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3
3. The provisions of this Regulation particularise and complement Regulation (EU) 2016/679 by laying down specific rules for the purposes mentioned in paragraphs 1 and 2.deleted
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 331 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) it is necessary for providing an information society service requested by the end-user; particularly to preserve or restore the security of electronic communication services, or to detect technical faults for the duration necessary for that purpose; or
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 334 #

2017/0003(COD)

1. This Regulation applies to the processing of electronic communications data carried out in connection with the provision and the use of electronic communications services and to information related to the terminal equipment of end-users.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 340 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) if it is necessary for web audience measuring, provided that such measurement is carried out by, or on behalf of, the provider of the information society service requested by the end-user, including measurement of indicators for the use of information society services in order to calculate a payment due.
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 341 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) electronic communications services which are not publicly availableintended for closed groups or are not publicly available pursuant to Article 2 (2) (c) of Regulation (EU) No 2016/679;
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 347 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the provisionoffering of electronic communications services to end-users in the Union, irrespective of whether a payment of the end-user is required;
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 348 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(d a) it occurs for the purpose of recording, for the undertaking as a whole, anonymous indicators concerning the use of information society services; or
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 353 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
(d b) in order to mark terminal equipment for advertising purposes, on condition that the person responsible has clearly informed the end-user of this at the beginning of the data processing and has provided an opportunity for objection that is easy to exercise.
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 353 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the protection of information related to the terminal equipment of end- users locatedplaced on the market in the Union.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 357 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d c (new)
(d c) it is necessary to protect against unauthorised use of a service; or
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 357 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. Where the provider of an electronic communications service is not established in the Union it shall designate in writing athe party identified pursuant to Article 27 of Regulation (EU) No 2016/679 shall act as its representative in the Union.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 358 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d d (new)
(d d) it is necessary to meet mandatory quality of service requirements pursuant to [Directive establishing the European Electronic Communications Code].
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 359 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. The representative shall be established in one of the Member States where the end-users of such electronic communications services are locadeleted.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 366 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. For the purposes of point (b) of paragraph 1, the definition of ‘interpersonal communications service’ shall include services which enable interpersonal and interactive communication merely as a minor ancillary feature that is intrinsically linked to another service.deleted
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 374 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The collection of such information shall be conditional on the application of appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure a level of security appropriate to the risks, as set out in Article 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, have been applied, for example by means of pseudonymisation of information collected pursuant to Article 4 (5) of Regulation (EU) No 2016/679..
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 379 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) 'electronic communications content' means the content exchangtransmitted by means of publically available electronic communications services, such as text, voice, videos, images, and sound;
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 386 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. The definition of and conditions for consent provided for under Articles 4(11) and 7 (1), (2), and 7(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679/EU shall apply.
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 390 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, where technically possible and feasible, for the purposes of point (b) of Article 8(1), consent may be expressed by using the appropriate technical settings of a software application enabling access to the internet.deleted
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 404 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Electronic communications data shall be confidential. Any interference with electronic communications data during transmission, such as by listening, tapping, storing, monitoring, scanning or other kinds of interception, or surveillance or processing of electronic communications data, by persons other than the end-users, shall be prohibited, except when permitted by this Regulation.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 408 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10
1. Software placed on the market permitting electronic communications, including the retrieval and presentation of information on the internet, shall offer the option to prevent third parties from storing information on the terminal equipment of an end-user or processing information already stored on that equipment. 2. Upon installation, the software shall inform the end-user about the privacy settings options and, to continue with the installation, require the end-user to consent to a setting. 3. In the case of software which has already been installed on 25 May 2018, the requirements under paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be complied with at the time of the first update of the software, but no later than 25 August 2018.Article 10 deleted Information and options for privacy settings to be provided
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 432 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a Article 25 of Regulation (EU) No 2016/679 shall apply.
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 434 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) it is necessary to maintain or restore the security or availability of electronic communications networks and services, or detect technical faults and/or errors in the transmission of electronic communications, for the duration necessary for that purpose.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 446 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. The providers of publicly available directories shall obtain the consentelectronic information, communication and telecommunication services shall collect the data of end- users who are natural persons in order to include their personal data in the directory and, consequently, shall obtain consent from these end-users for inclusion of data per category of personal data, to the extent that such data are relevapublicly accessible directories. Upon the request of an end-user who is natural person the directory providers shall provide the end-user with transparent infor the purpose of the directory as determined by the provider of the directory. Providers shall give end-users who are natural personsmation about the data being included in the directory and the means to verify, correct, update, supplement and delete such data.
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 452 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. The providers of a publicly available directory shall inform end-users who are natural persons and acting out of their business capacity whose personal data are in the directory of the available search functions of the directory and obtain end-users’ consent before enabling such. Providers of number-based interpersonal communications services and electronic communications service providers shall inform end-users when new search functions arelated to their own data made available.
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 456 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. The providers of publicly available directories shall provide end-users that are legal personselectronic information, communication and telecommunication services shall provide end-users that are legal persons or natural persons acting in their business capacity with the possibility to object to data related to them being included in the directory. Providers shall give such end-users that are legal persons the means to verify, correct, update, supplement and delete such data.
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 457 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. The possibility for end-users not to be included in a publicly available directory, or to verify, correct, update, supplement and delete any data related to them shall be provided free of charge.
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 461 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. The provisions of paragraphs 1 to 4 shall not apply to data and information published in other publicly accessible sources and data provided by end-users themselves.
2017/07/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 475 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) processing is allowed pursuant to Articles 6(1) or 6(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 487 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) for the sole purpose of the provision of a specific service to an end- user, if the end-user orservice provider's end-users concerned haves given their consent to the processing of his or her electronic communications content and the provision of that service cannot be fulfilled without the processing of such content; or
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 491 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) if all end-users concerned have given theirthe service provider's end-user has consented to the processing of their electronic communications content for one or more specified purposes that cannot be fulfilled by processing information that is made anonymous, and the provider has consulted the supervisory authority. Points (2) and (3) of Article 36 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall apply to the consultation of the supervisory authoritypursuant to Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 498 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7
1. Without prejudice to point (b) of Article 6(1) and points (a) and (b) of Article 6(3), the provider of the electronic communications service shall erase electronic communications content or make that data anonymous after receipt of electronic communication content by the intended recipient or recipients. Such data may be recorded or stored by the end- users or by a third party entrusted by them to record, store or otherwise process such data, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679. 2. Without prejudice to point (b) of Article 6(1) and points (a) and (c) of Article 6(2), the provider of the electronic communications service shall erase electronic communications metadata or make that data anonymous when it is no longer needed for the purpose of the transmission of a communication. 3. Where the processing of electronic communications metadata takes place for the purpose of billing in accordance with point (b) of Article 6(2), the relevant metadata may be kept until the end of the period during which a bill may lawfully be challenged or a payment may be pursued in accordance with national law.Article 7 deleted Storage and erasure of electronic communications data
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 536 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) it is necessary for providing an information society service requested by the end-user; particularly to preserve or restore the security of the information society service and of the users, or to detect technical faults; or
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 543 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) if it is necessary for web audience measuring, provided that such measurement is carried out by, or on behalf of, the provider of the information society service requested by the end-user., including measurement of indicators for the use of information society services in order to calculate a payment due; or
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 559 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(d a) it occurs for the purpose of recording, for the undertaking as a whole, anonymous indicators concerning the use of information society services;or
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 566 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
(d b) in order to mark terminal equipment for advertising purposes, on condition that the person responsible has clearly informed the end-user of this at the beginning of the data processing and has provided an opportunity for objection that is easy to exercise.;or
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 571 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d c (new)
(d c) it is necessary to protect against unauthorised use of a service;or
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 573 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d d (new)
(d d) it is necessary to meet mandatory quality of service requirements pursuant to [Directive establishing the European Electronic Communications Code].;or
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 574 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d e (new)
(d e) it is necessary for compliance with a legal obligation.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 576 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Wherever a clearly formulated declaration of consent is presented before use of a service or access to online content, and if absence of consent for processing prevents a provider from collecting remuneration through their usual means, the provider shall not be obliged to provide the full access to the service or content.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 587 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) the end-user has given their consent;or
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 596 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The collection of such information shall be conditional on the application of appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure a level of security appropriate to the risks, as set out in Article 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, have been applied, for example by means of pseudonymisation of information collected pursuant to Article 4 (5) of Regulation (EU) No 2016/679.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 607 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 27 determining the information to be presented by the standardized icon and the procedures for providing standardized icons.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 613 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. The definition of and conditions for consent provided for under Articles 4(11) and 7 (1), (2), and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679/EU shall apply.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 617 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, where technically possible and feasible, for the purposes of point (b) of Article 8(1), consent may be expressed by using the appropriate technical settings of a software application enabling access to the internet.deleted
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 629 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. End-users who have consented to the processing of electronic communications data as set out in point (c) of Article 6(2) and points (a) and (b) of Article 6(3) shall be given the possibility to withdraw their consent at any time as set forth under Article 7(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and be reminded of this possibility at periodic intervals of 6 months, as long as the processing continues.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 637 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10
1. Software placed on the market permitting electronic communications, including the retrieval and presentation of information on the internet, shall offer the option to prevent third parties from storing information on the terminal equipment of an end-user or processing information already stored on that equipment. 2. Upon installation, the software shall inform the end-user about the privacy settings options and, to continue with the installation, require the end-user to consent to a setting. 3. In the case of software which has already been installed on 25 May 2018, the requirements under paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be complied with at the time of the first update of the software, but no later than 25 August 2018.Article 10 deleted Information and options for privacy settings to be provided
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 667 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a Article 25 of Regulation (EU) No 2016/679 shall apply.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 673 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. Union or Member State law may restrict by way of a legislative measure the scope of the obligations and rights provided for in Articles 5 to 8 where such a restriction respects the essence of the fundamental rights and freedoms and is a necessary, appropriate and proportionate measure in a democratic society to safeguard one or more of the general public interests referred to in Article 23(1)(a) to (e) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 or a monitoring, inspection or regulatory function connected to the exercise of official authority for such interests.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 704 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. The providers of publicly available directories shall obtain the consentelectronic information, communication and telecommunication services shall collect the data of end- users who are natural persons in order to include their personal data in the directory and, consequently, shall obtain consent from these end-users for inclusion of data per category of personal data, to the extent that such data are relevapublicly accessible directories. Upon the request of an end-user who is natural person the directory providers shall provide the end-user with transparent infor the purpose of the directory as determined by the provider of the directory. Providers shall give end-users who are natural personsmation about the data being included in the directory and the means to verify, correct, update, supplement and delete such data.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 706 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. The providers of a publicly available directory shall inform end-users who are natural persons and acting out of their business capacity whose personal data are in the directory of the available search functions of the directory and obtain end-users’ consent before enabling such. Providers of number-based interpersonal communications services and electronic communications service providers shall inform end-users when new search functions arelated to their own data made available.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 718 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. The providers of publicly available directories shall provide end-users that are legal personselectronic information, communication and telecommunication services shall provide end-users that are legal persons or natural persons acting in their business capacity with the possibility to object to data related to them being included in the directory. Providers shall give such end-users that are legal persons the means to verify, correct, update, supplement and delete such data.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 725 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. The possibility for end-users not to be included in a publicly available directory, or to verify, correct, update, supplement and delete any data related to them shall be provided free of charge.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 729 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. The provisions of paragraphs 1 to 4 shall not apply to data and information published in other publicly accessible sources and data provided by end-users themselves.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 740 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. Where a natural or legal person obtains electronic contact details for electronic mail or phone number from its customer, in the context of the sale of a product or a service, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679, that natural or legal person may use these electronic contact details for direct marketing of its own similar products or services only if customers are clearly and distinctly given the opportunity to object, free of charge and in an easy manner, to such use. The right to object shall be given at the time of collection and each time a message is sent.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 744 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Without prejudice to paragraphs 1 and 2, natural or legal persons using electronic communications services for the purposes of placing direct marketing calls shall: present the identity of a line on which the can be contacted.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 745 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) present the identity of a line on which they can be contacted; ordeleted
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 750 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) present a specific code/or prefix identifying the fact that the call is a marketing call.deleted
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 763 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 7
7. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt implementing measures in accordance with Article 26(2) specifying the code/or prefix to identify marketing calls, pursuant to point (b) of paragraph 3.deleted
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 768 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – title
Information about detected security risks and personal data breaches
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 774 #

2017/0003(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
In the case of a particular risk that may compromise the security of networks and electronic communications services, the provider of an electronic communications service shall inform end-users concerning such risk and, where the risk lies outside the scope of the measures to be taken by the service provider, inform end-users of any possible remedies, including an indication of the likely costs involved or of a personal data breach, Article 40 of [Electronic Communications Code] and Article 34 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall apply.
2017/07/14
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 65 #

2016/2908(RSP)


Paragraph 19
19. Calls, in the interests of consumer and environmental protection, for the swift adoption of the proposal for a Regulation on the approval and market surveillance of motor vehicles and their trailers (2016/0014(COD)), replacing the current framework directive on type- approval; considers the preservation of the level of ambition of the original Commission proposal, in particular as regards the introduction of EU oversight of the system, to be the bare minimum objective to be achief what is required to improve the EU system; considers that a more comprehensive and coordinated system of type approval and market surveillance, involving EU oversight, peer review and cooperation with and between national authorities should be the objectived during the interinstitutional negotiations on the dossier;
2017/01/24
Committee: EMIS
Amendment 73 #

2016/2908(RSP)


Paragraph 20
20. Calls for a drastic strengthening of market surveillance in the new EU type- approval framework, on the basis of clearly defined rules and a clearer distribution of responsibilities; between national authorities clearly obligated to undertake significant market surveillance in their own territory, and EU market surveillance to identify weaknesses in the national systems;
2017/01/24
Committee: EMIS
Amendment 86 #

2016/2908(RSP)


Paragraph 23
23. Draws attention to the US type- approval system – whereby fees collected from manufacturers to cover the cost of certification and compliance programmes are sent to the US Treasury, and the US Congress in turn allocates funds to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to implement its programmes – as a paradigm that may be useful for improving the independence of the EU system;deleted
2017/01/24
Committee: EMIS
Amendment 94 #

2016/2908(RSP)


Paragraph 24
24. Points out the need for systematic enforcement of conformity of production and in-use conformity of vehicles by the national authorities responsible, further coordinated and supervised at EU level; urges the Member States to clarify once and for all which authority is in charge of market surveillance in their territory and to notify the Commission accordingly; believes that much closer cooperation and information sharing between Member States' market surveillance authorities and the Commission, including on national market surveillance plans, will enhance the overall quality of market surveillance in the EU and enable the Commission to identify weaknesses in national market surveillance systems;
2017/01/24
Committee: EMIS
Amendment 104 #

2016/2908(RSP)


Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Believes that greater coordination and discussion between type approval authorities and the European Commission, in the form of a Forum chaired by the Commission, will contribute to the promotion of good practices aimed at ensuring effective and harmonised implementation of the type approval and market surveillance regulation;
2017/01/24
Committee: EMIS
Amendment 132 #

2016/2908(RSP)


Paragraph 31 a (new)
31a. Believes that the resources levied by these fines should be held by the Member States for purposes of redress to persons negatively affected by the infringement and other such activities to the benefit of consumers or, where appropriate, environmental protection within the Member States;
2017/01/24
Committee: EMIS
Amendment 8 #

2016/2325(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Calls for the Commission, through the structural and investment funds and by other fiscally neutral financial and non- financial means, to give generous and forward-looking support and encouragement not just to space research activities in the field of industrial and applied science but also to fundamental research in this field, because fundamental space research not only has a direct impact on applied technology but also provides the sector with highly- qualified staff, who are the most important innovation factor of all;
2017/05/04
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 12 #

2016/2325(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Stresses the benefits of space research and development for both the public and private sectors, and encourages publically funded research results to be available for further application by wider society;
2017/05/04
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 18 #

2016/2325(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that all space systems are based on information technology, which ishas been increasingly exposed to unauthorised software access that can severely jeopardise the reliability of data, including satellite pictures, geo-positioning information and satellite communications;
2017/05/04
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 25 #

2016/2325(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that the economic use of remote sensing satellites and systems has become an everyday reality, with significant benefits to society;
2017/05/04
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 28 #

2016/2325(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the need to ensure that the marketing of remote sensing systems creates benefits for consumers and businesses, particularly SMEs, in the EU, and with this in mind calls for the Commission to investigate the potential need for the creation of a legal framework to enable the data thus obtained to be protected against unauthorised access.
2017/05/04
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 11 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas digitalisation and new technologies havecontinue to changed forms of communication and the behaviour of consumers and companies;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 18 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas the evolving use of the internet and mobile devices has created new business opportunities and business models for all sizes of businesses;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 27 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas the evolving development and use of internet platforms for a wide set of activities, including commercial activities and sharing goods and services, have changed the ways in which consumers, traders and other users interact with content providers;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 33 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas the e-Commerce Directive exempts intermediaries from liability for content only if they play a neutral, merely technical and passive role in relation to the hosted contentwhere they have neither control nor knowledge in relation to the hosted content; whereas the preceding consultation showed broad support for the existing principles of the e-Commerce Directive;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 35 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E
E. whereas numerous online platforms not only provide access to goods and services, but also play a more active role in relation to consumers and other actors;deleted
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 71 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Acknowledges that online platforms benefit today's digital economy and society by increasing the choices available to consumers and creating and shaping new markets; points out, howevconsider,s that existing and emerging online platforms can present newpolicy and regulatory challenges, just as existing and emerging business practices elsewhere in their respective sectors can present policy and regulatory challenges;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 85 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that, although many pieces of EU legislation apply to online platforms, it is frequently the case that they are not enforced properly or have not been adapted to the online worldparts of the acquis could benefit from being updated for developments of the online world, including opportunities for deregulation;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 97 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that there is currently no consensus on the definition ofit is impossible to define online platforms due to the multitude of different types of platforms, which may lead to fragmentation of the EU’s internal market and the variety of areas of activity they engage in;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 99 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Considers that, in view of the rapidly evolving markets and the diversity of platforms ranging from non-profit platforms to B2B platforms and encompassing different services, sectors and a vast variety of actors, there is no clear definition of platforms, and a 'one- size-fits-all' approach could seriously impede innovation and put European companies at a competitive disadvantage in the global economy;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 104 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the Commission’s ongoing work on online platforms, including consultations of stakeholders and carrying out an impact assessment; believes that an evidence-based approach to assessing the role of online platforms is essential;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 108 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that, although online platforms operate within a highly diverse range of activities, such as e-commerce, the media, search engines, the distribution of cultural content, the collaborative economy and social networks, certain common features which can be used to identify these entities exist neverthelessnevertheless which negates the usefulness of a single definition, which could seriously impede innovation;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 111 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that certain features often characterise online platforms, such as operating in multi-sided markets, enabling parties belonging to two or more distinct user groups to enter into direct contact by electronic means, offering online services based on the classification or referencing of content, goods or services proposed or put on-line by third parties, the bringing together of several parties with a view to the sale of a good, the provision of a service or the exchange or sharing of content, goods or services;deleted
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 126 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3
Facilitating the sustainable growth of European online platforms in Europe
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 131 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Notes that online platforms use the internet as a means of interaction and act as facilitators between the demand and supply sides, to the benefit of users, consumers and businesses, particularly SMEs;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 135 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that online platforms take advantage of the enormous and ever- increasing number of mobile deviceare increasingly available on mobile devices; emphasises that the necessary infrastructure investment should be incentivised to ensure connectivity across the Member States for current and future applications;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 144 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Underlines that the increasingly widespread use of smartphones and tablets has further extended access to online platforms, thereby enhancing their role in the economy and society, particularly among young peoplusers and consumers wish to have access to online platforms and benefit from such access; considers this important for all citizens and businesses, not just those who are already active online, which requires a committed approach towards digital skills development at the national level, supported by European development assistance where appropriate;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 157 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Urges the Commission to continue to promote the growth of European online platforms and strengthenin the European market and facilitate their ability to compete globally; regrets the EU’s low share of market capitalisation on online platformsof European start-ups to scale up and compete globally via an effective and attractive regulatory environment in Europe; stresses the importance of removing obstacles that hamper the smooth operation of online platforms across borders and disrupt the functioning of the European digital internal market;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 168 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Recognises the significant benefits that online platforms offer for SMEs; notwelcomes the trading opportunities that online platforms encourage by allowing SMEs to access global markets without excessive investments in costly digital infrastructure;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 175 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Urges the Commission to prioritise actions that allow European start-ups and new European online platforms to emerge and to scale up; stresses that facilitating investments in start-ups is vital to the development of online platforms originating in Europe;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 182 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that some online platforms realise the collaborative economy; welcomes the Commission communication on the collaborative economy, which supports the development of new business models; stresses that these new business models offer new services and, greater choice and empowerment for consumers as well as provideing flexibility for employees, bringing people back into employment who have found less flexible working impractical;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 195 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Notes that the current intermediary liability is one of the main concerns in the ongoing debateregime contained in the E- Commerce Directive received broad support in the public consultation on online platforms;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 210 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Believes that a clear-cut and level playing field is needed in order to allowguidance from the Commission on intermediary liability may assist online platforms to continue to comply with their responsibilities and the rules on liability;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 216 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Notes that certain stakeholders are dissatisfied with the current rules on liability and welcomesConsiders that the Commission's undertaking to publish guidelines on intermediary liability; calls onn help to guarantee that the E-Commission to draw attention to the differences between the online and offline world and to create a level playing field for comparable services online and offlineerce Directive provisions remain future-proof and technologically neutral; expresses caution that the Commission should not use guidelines to address perceived differences between the online and offline world which may, prima facie, appear comparable but in practical and technical terms may be very different situations;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 226 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Considers that the liability rules for online platforms should allow the tackling of issues related to illegal and harmful content in an efficient manner, for instance by respecting the duty of ca and notes with interest the intention of the Commission to prepare guidance on voluntary measures taken to address such content and the interaction of those measure,s while maintaining a balanced and business- friendly approachith liability rules, including cooperation between online platforms and law enforcement authorities;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 246 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Stresses the need for online platforms to prevent illegal and inappropriate content and unfair practicesreact promptly to illegal content through regulatory, effective self- regulatory or hybrid measures; stresses the importance of online platforms playing a proaccomplimentary and cooperative role in tackling illegal and inappropriate content and taking immediate action to remove illegal or inappropriate content if such content slips through preventive monitoringcontent;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 259 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Considers that online platforms shouldmay develop more effective voluntary measures and technical means of identifying and eliminating harmful content, in particular in implementation of the Code of Conduct on illegal online hate speech agreed in 2016 and other voluntary and self- regulation measures; underlines that online platforms cannot substitute for effective enforcement of national or European laws addressing illegal content, particularly as private entities' actions cannot replace proper due process and the protections afforded for the free exercise of citizens fundamental rights; expresses concern that increasingly invasive obligations placed on online platforms may impinge on individuals rights of privacy and freedom of expression;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 276 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5
CreatEncouraging a level playing field
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 283 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
24. Urges the Commission to ensure a level playing field for online platforms; stresses that regulatory certainty is essential to creating a thriving digital economy; notes that competitive pressures vary between different sectors and different actors within sectors, therefore ‘one-size-fits-all’ solutions are rarely appropriate;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 286 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
24. UrEncourages the Commission to help ensure a level playing field for online platforms; stresses that regulatory certainty is essential to creating a thriving digital economy; notes that competitive pressures vary between different sectors and therefore ‘one-size-fits-all’ solutions are rarely appropriate;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 297 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Draws attention to the fact that the size of online platforms varies from global giants to micro-enterprises; stresses the importance of fair and effective competition between online platforms to promote consumer choice and avoid the creation of monopolies that distort the markets; stresses that facilitating the switching between online platforms or online services is an essential measure in preventing market failures;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 300 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Underlines that possible reforms of the existing regulatory framework should concentrate on the harmonisation of rulessimplification, modernisation and reducing regulatory fragmentation; emphasises the need to avoid over-regulation, and where regulation proves necessary, to enforce rigorously principles of better regulation; stresses the importance of technology neutrality and having the samecoherence between rules that apply online and offline in equivalent situations;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 307 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26 a. Cautions against creating market distortions or barriers to market entry for online services by introducing new obligations to cross-subsidise particular legacy business models;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 311 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
27. Underlines the importance of investments in infrastructure in both urban and rural areas; stresses that reliable high- speed networks are the precondition of offering and using online platform services; stresses the need for net neutrality and fair and non-discriminatory access to online platforms;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 317 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
28. Underlines that the Internet of the future cannot succeed without users’ trust in online platforms, greater transparency, better control of ranking systems and advertising,; welcomes therefore the response to recent Eurobarometer studies which show the large majority of consumers understand how personalisation may affect the content they are served and the extent to which advertising is integrated into and online platform's respecting all applicable legislationservice;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 331 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
29. Stresses the importance of transparency in relation to data collection and considers that online platforms must respond to users’ concerns by informing them more effectively about what personal data is collected and how it is shared and used, within the framework of the applicable European data regulations;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 340 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
30. Underlines that the cross-border nature of online platforms represents a huge advantage in developing the Digital Single Market, but also requires better cooperation between national public authorities; asks the Commission to make better use of existing consumer protection services, which could provide identical andto collaborate and provide efficient consumer protection in relation to online platforms activities where those activities present true cross- border issues of concern; further notes the importance of the Cross-border Enforcement and Cooperation Regulation in this regard;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 350 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
31. Encourages online platforms to provide clear, comprehensive and user- friendly ways of presenting their terms and conditions in order to enhance consumer protection and bolster trust, upon which platforms depend for survival;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 354 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
32. Calls for an assessment of current legislation and self-regulation mechanisms to determine whether they provide adequate protection to consumers against the backdrop of the increasing number of complaints against and investigations opened by the Commission into several platforms;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 364 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
33. Calls on the Commission to evaluBelieves thate platforms' review systems and to put an end to certainre an aid to consumers and should not be misused by online platforms; considers that practices, such as fake reviews and the deletion of negative reviews in order to make platforms comply with existing obligationsmay mislead consumers and encourages platforms to be vigilant against such practices; notes that already only a minority of consumers believe online reviews to be reliable, which is to the disadvantage of the online platform and the products available on those platforms and does not contribute to consumer satisfaction; considers actions by platforms to build trust in those systems would enhance consumer protections and support growth in ecommerce;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 371 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
34. Calls on the Commission to assess the need for and the principles in relation to criteria, which could set the conditions under which online platforms may be made subject to further monitoring and assisted in order for them to comply with existing obligations and guidelines in a timely manner, in particular in the realm of consumer protection,;deleted
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 410 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
38. Stresses that a fair and innovation- friendly environment as well as investments in research and development are vital for generating new ideas and innovations; underlines the importance of open data for the development of new online platforms which benefit citizens and consumers; in this regard recalls the adoption of the revision of the Directive on Re-use of Public Sector Information in 2013 and the review of the implementation of this Directive which is due in 2018;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 417 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
39. Stresses that, in relation to this specific business model, the traditional reasoning inherent in EU competition law may no longer be fit for purpose;deleted
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 420 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
39. Stresses that, in relation to this specific business model, the traditional reasoning inherent in EU competition law may no longer be fit for purpose EU competition law is based on sound and established principles which are fit for purpose for the digital economy when applied rigorously;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 430 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 a (new)
40 a. Notes the intention of the Commission to study the B2B relationship between online platforms and their clients and awaits with interest the conclusions from this investigation; considers that adequate protections should be guaranteed to guard against unfair practices, in particular where these close down innovation or hinder competitive market entry;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 433 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
41. Underlines that EU competition law and authorities need to guarantee a level playing field where appropriate, including in respect of consumer protection and tax issuand notes ongoing investigations into alleged anti- competitive practices;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 438 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
42. Welcomes the efforts made by the Commission to fight tax avoidance and harmful competition and calls on the Member States and the Commission to propose further reforms to prevent tax avoidance practices in the EU;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 439 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
43. Points to the differences in the legal landscape in the 28 Member States and the specificities of the digital sector in which the physical presence of a company in the country of the market is often not needed and calls on the Member States to adjust the value-added tax (VAT) system according to the country-of-destination principle7 ; _________________ 7European Parliament resolution of 24 November 2016 on towards a definitive VAT system and fighting VAT fraud, P8_TA(2016)0453.deleted
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 453 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
44. Regrets that the EU’s presence in the world market is barely felt, in particular due to the current fragmentation of the digital market, legal uncertainty and the lack of financing and capacity to market technological innovations, which make it difficult for European companies to become world leaders in this new economy compared to their rivals based in other jurisdictions;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 456 #

2016/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
45. Calls for the European institutions to ensure a level playing field betweenwork together to implement an effective and attractive regulation environment benefitting both European and non- European operators, in respect of taxation and similar questions, for examplewhich acts to the ultimate benefit of consumers through increased choice and greater competition;
2017/03/27
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 6 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas a usage-based economic model has emerged which can help to reduce the adverse environmental and social consequences of a model based largely on the ownership of goods;deleted
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 15 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E
E. whereas jobs have been lost in many industrial sectors in Europe, and whereas there is a need, on the one hand, for some production to be relocated, and, on the other, to promote the repair sector in order to generate non-relocatablew jobs;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 21 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H
H. whereas, in a Eurobarometer survey conducted in June 2014, 77 % of EU consumers said that they would prefer to be able to have their goods repaired, rather than being forced to buy new ones; but notes that consumers also prefer replacement products to be provided if a faulty good is repeatedly unsuccessfully repaired;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 50 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission to establishncourage minimum resistance criteria for each product category from the design stage, by working in the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardisation (CENELEC) to lay down standardset out guidelines which cover product robustness, reparability, upgradeability, etc.;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 62 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Calls on the Commission to develop the right tofurther guidelines on product reparability:
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 66 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – indent 1
- by urging that priority be given to repairing goods which are still under guarantee, except where the repair is not expedient or would come at a proven additional cost,
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 81 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – indent 5
- by standardising, where practicable, the spare parts and tools necessary for repair, in order to improve the performance of repair services,
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 89 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that, whilst promoting repair in order to reduce waste and pollution is an important option, consumers should not be trapped by suppliers and/or manufacturers in an endless cycle of repair and maintenance of faulty products;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 90 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Stresses the importance of the consumer's automatic right to reject or receive a price reduction after one failed attempt at repair or replacement;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 106 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – indent 3
- by developing a clear and harmonised labelling system which provides information as to whether spare parts for goods are available or not, and for how long;deleted
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 115 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Points out that the option of going to an independent repairer should always be safeguarded, for example by banning technical or software-relatedwhilst complying with EU law on confidentiality of intellectual property, for example by banning schemes which prevent repairs from being performed other than by approved firms or bodies;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 137 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – indent 3
- to support local and regional authorities that are investing in the functional and collaborative economies, given the value of these two sectors of the economy which encourage more efficient use of resources;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 143 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Encourages Member States and the Commission to support the collaborative economy in their public policies given the benefits it provides in utilising spare resources and capacity, for example in the transport and accomodation sectors;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 154 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – indent 1
- the promotion of a European label covering, in particular, the product’s durability, ecodesign features, upgradeability in line with technical progress and reparability,deleted
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 159 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – indent 2
- mandatory labelling to indicate a product’s expected useful life, on the basis of standardised criteria set by selected stakeholders,deleted
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 183 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Calls for a definition to be drawn up of planned obsolescence, in consultation with consumer organisations and other stakeholders, for hardware and software, so that products whose lifespan is deliberately shortened can be banned; calls, in that connection, for better legal protection for ‘whistle-blowers’;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 192 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – indent 1
- by maintaining the 24-month legal guarantee as a minimum threshold, whilst leaving Member States free to lay down or retain existing more protective national provisions,
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 198 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 – indent 2
- by extending the legal guarantee of conformity beyond the current two-year minimum for families of energy-using products on the basis of the product life cycle study carried out as part of the ecodesign process, and introducing a minimum period of five years for large household appliances and movable fixed assets gradually, so that companies can comply, and leaving Member states free to lay down or retain longer national provisions;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 214 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Expects standards to be laid down for a minimum lifespan for software, and cCalls for greater transparency regarding the software upgradeability of equipment;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 217 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Proposes the definition of a reasonable period of use during which the provision ofEncourages transparency from suppliers and manufacturers on the minimum period for which security updates on operating systems is mandatorywill be provided;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 223 #

2016/2272(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Calls for the introduction of an eco-contribution penalty in cases where software updates essential to the operation of a device are not provided, and calls for these updates to be reversible and accompanied by information on the consequences for the operation of the device;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 34 #

2016/2248(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses that despite the abolition of tariff barriers in the single market, a vast number of various non-tariff barriers still exist; highlights that strengthening the single market requires urgent action at both EU and national levels in order to address those non-tariff barriers (NTBs); recalls the Parliament's request to the Commission to present in 2016 a comprehensive overview of NTBs in the single market and an analysis of the means for tackling them, making a clear distinction between an NTB and regulations for implementing a legitimate public policy objective of a Member State in a proportionate manner, including an ambitious proposal to eliminate these NTBs as soon as possible in order to unleash the still untapped potential of the single market;
2016/11/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 24 #

2016/2244(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F
F. whereas there is a lack of information on the functioning of franchising in the retailacross sectors, since relevant information is not written down or can often only be found in the side letters accompanying a franchise agreement, which are confidential, therefore not public, and at EU-level there is no mechanism for collecting information on potentially unfair contract terms or unfair implementation of contracts;
2017/02/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 34 #

2016/2244(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that for the completion of the single market in the retail sector, franchising can play an important role, provided given its current under-utilisation in the EU in comparison to other developed economies; considers that effective protection of both franchisors and franchisees against unfair trading practices is offered throughout the EU will encourage further growth in franchising;
2017/02/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 45 #

2016/2244(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. EmphasisNotes that franchisees are often the weaker contracting party, as the franchise formula has normally been developed by the franchisor and franchisees tend to be financially weaker and can be less well- informed than the franchisor and therefore heavily dependent on the expertise of the franchisor;
2017/02/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 60 #

2016/2244(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission and Member States to promotencourage the creation of associations representing franchisees, and to make sure that their voices are heard, whenever policies or legislation are prepared that may affect them;
2017/02/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 72 #

2016/2244(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to actively examine the functioning of franchising in the retail sector, and, in particular,including the existence of unfair contract terms or other unfair trading practices, and to request Eurostat to devote specialpay attention to this model when collecting statistical information on the sector;
2017/02/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 75 #

2016/2244(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Takes note of the European Code of Ethics for Franchising, developed by the European Franchise Federation, but also notes that the Code has been unilaterally drawn up by franchisors and has met with fundamental criticism from franchisees pointing, inter alia, to the fact that the code preceding the 2016 revision of the Code was worded more strongly in respect of the commitments of themet with significant criticism from many franchisorees;
2017/02/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 83 #

2016/2244(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Expresses itsNotes there are concern withs about the lack of an independent enforcement mechanism accompanying the European Code of Ethics and recallnotes that in some Member States this lack of independent enforcement prompted the introduction of legislation preventing and addressing unfair trading practices in franchising;
2017/02/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 99 #

2016/2244(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission to examine complaints it receives through a contact point or otherwise and to draw up a non-exhaustive list of unfair trading practices based and to report on how the relevant self-regulation and applicable legislation this informationbeing enforced;
2017/02/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 101 #

2016/2244(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Points, in particular, to the need for correct and comprehensive pre- contractual information, including information on the franchise formula’s performance, both general and targeted towards the franchisee’s envisaged location, to be available in writing at least 15 working days prior to the signing of the agreement, and the introduction of a five- day cooling-off period after execution to be available in writing prior to the signing of the agreement;
2017/02/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 107 #

2016/2244(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. EmphasRecognises there is usually a need for specialised initial training and appropriate guidance by the franchisor for franchisees during the term of the agreement;
2017/02/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 113 #

2016/2244(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Adds, however, that sometimes franchisors require franchisees to purchase products and services that are not related to the franchise formula; such a requirement should not be seen as part of the obligation of franchisees relating to the maintenance and common identity and reputation of the franchise network, but can easily constitute an unfair trading practice;deleted
2017/02/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 115 #

2016/2244(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Emphasises that non-competition clauses should be clearly formulated, reasonable and proportionate and should not apply for a longer duration than what is strictly necessary, considering, in particular, the potential need for franchisees to change their franchise formula, if their neighbourhood and therefore the demand for products or services changes;
2017/02/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 119 #

2016/2244(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Notes with concern the disputes arising about internet sales, as they are vital in the digital market, whereas traditional franchise agreements do not take into account the effect internet sales may have on exclusivity clauses, thus making it possible that in the area for which the franchisee has the right of exclusivity, customers may buy their products from the franchisor, even if they pick up the goods in the franchisee’s shop;deleted
2017/02/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 122 #

2016/2244(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Notes with concern the disputthe issues arising abroutnd internet sales, as they are vital in the digital market, whereas traditional franchise agreements often do not take into account the effect internet sales may have on exclusivity clauses, thus making it possible that in thean area for which the franchisee has the right of exclusivity, customers may buy their products from the franchisor, even if they pick up the goods in the franchisee’s shop;
2017/02/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 900 #

2016/2114(REG)

Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 15 – paragraph 1
The President, Vice-Presidents and Quaestors shall be elected by secret ballot, in accordance with Rule 182. Nominations shall be with consent. They may only be made by a political group or by at least 40 Members. However, if the number of nominations does not exceed the number of seats to be filled, the candidates may be elected by acclamation. Members shall be permitted to serve a maximum of two terms in the office of President pursuant to Rule 19(1), regardless of whether they are served consecutively or not.
2016/09/27
Committee: AFCO
Amendment 45 #

2016/2064(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Acknowledges that the most important effect of EFSI activities is shifting of resources as every euro the EFSI lends for the investments it supports is a euro that was taken from the hands of a private lender; stresses that, if a private entrepreneur makes an investment that EFSI is willing to support, he will not realize an investment that he could otherwise accomplish without the help from EFSI;5a __________________ 5aEvery investment inevitably carries a level of risk and therefore investing is a natural role for the private sector. When people invest their own capital, they carefully consider potential profits and losses of their investments as well as the credibility of the borrower. Risks (and thus both profits and losses) stay in private hands. If the EFSI applies high standards set by professional investors from the private sector, there will be no reason for its existence, as its role will already be fulfilled by the private sector. The very existence of the EFSI is therefore problematic: the EFSI uses public resources to incite investments that are too risky for private lenders to take, while the private sector and taxpayers bear the risks of failing EFSI investments.
2016/09/07
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 8 #

2016/2047(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recognises the importance of the role of the Commission and its associated programmes in discharging duties relating to the single market, and therefore considers sufficient budgetary allocation should be made to execute these tasks; stresses that such allocations should not entail an increase in the overall budget allocated under the MFF, but should be made through reallocation and rationalisation of existing budget lines, across the Budget 2017; further considers that some areas of Single Market spending may benefit from consolidation, including the single market tools;
2016/07/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 9 #

2016/2047(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the fact that, in the 2017 budgetary procedure, most of IMCO's main priorities in the areas of the single market, the customs union and consumer protection have been properly taken into account with adequate levels of appropriations allocated; whilst stressing that such allocations should not entail an increase in the overall budget allocated under the MFF, but should be made through reallocation and rationalisation of existing budget lines, across the Budget 2017; further considers that some areas of Single Market spending may benefit from consolidation, including the single market tools;
2016/07/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 24 #

2016/2047(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
13. Asks for the financing of the pilot projects proposed by IMCO on key issues such as the development of the Digital Single Market, cross-border cooperation in the interest of consumers or awareness- raising in respect of consumer rights; whilst recognising that such financing should not entail an increase in the overall budget allocated under the MFF, but should be made through reallocation and rationalisation of existing budget lines, across the Budget 2017;
2016/07/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 11 #

2016/2031(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital C
C. whereas the 2014 World Bank evaluation of the EU-Turkey Customs Union suggeshighlights among other things that services be included and thatome major sectors such as specific long-term and multiple-entry visa category for pre-qualified Turkish professionals travelling to the EU be establishedervices, agriculture, public procurement and energy, remain excluded from the CU;
2017/01/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 12 #

2016/2031(INI)

C a. whereas the Union launched the Visa Liberalisation Dialogue with Turkey on 16 December 2013, which is based on the Visa Liberalisation Roadmap, a document setting out the requirements that Turkey needs to meet in order to enable the Commission to propose to the European Parliament and the Council an amendment to Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 which would allow Turkish citizens to travel without a visa for short stays of 90 days within any 180-day period for business, touristic or family purposes, in the Schengen area;
2017/01/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 15 #

2016/2031(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital D
D. whereas the Fourth Report on the Progress made on the Implementation of the EU- - Turkey Statement notes that seven benchmarks of the Visa Liberalisation Roadmap still need to be met, including issuing biometric travel documents fully compatible with EU standards, revising legislation and practices on terrorism in line with EU standards, aligning legislation on personal data protection and implementing the EU-Turkey Readmission agreement; and that EU Member States issued a total of 862 184 uniform visas to Turkish nationals in 2015, 508 589 of which were multiple-entry uniform visas;
2017/01/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 43 #

2016/2031(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that the free movement of technical and management professionals is essential for deeper economic integration in the CU; recognises that the need for visas for business travellers is perceived as being restrictive on trade in goods, and even more so in the potential event of inclusion of the provision of services in the CU;deleted
2017/01/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 47 #

2016/2031(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Considers the inclusion of services in the CU as an important element of the trade negotiations, and underlines that the issue of visa for business travellers should be dealt with separately within the framework of the Visa Liberalisation Dialogue with Turkey;
2017/01/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 50 #

2016/2031(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that visa-free travel or the creation of a long-term multiple-entry visa for business travellers wcould have a positive impact on bilateral trade. Stresses that this issue should be dealt with within the framework of the Visa Liberalisation Dialogue with Turkey as a separate exercise to the trade negotiations;
2017/01/26
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 27 #

2016/2010(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Urges the Commission to take full account of the occurrence, and further risk, of downgrading of job security and terms and conditions for workers in the postal sector, and to make specific provision to mitigate and avoid this in any proposed new legislationlook in detail into the development of postal services in relation to new emerging digital operators and assess the potential implications and opportunities for existing postal services and their employees;
2016/03/22
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 61 #

2016/2010(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the importance of providing a high-quality universal service under affordable conditions, comprising at least five delivery and five collection days a week for every EU citizen; notes that in some Member States national regulation exceeds the flexibility provided for in the Postal Services Directive; calls on the Commission to reaffirm that low population densitythe Universal Service Obligation is applied very differently across Member States, reflecting certain flexibility for Member States to define the USO to fit their domes not constitute grounds for reducing the frequency of delivery within the universal service obligationtic circumstances and ensure its long-term sustainability;
2016/06/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 116 #

2016/2010(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that VAT exemption for postal services has to be applied in a way that minimises distortions of competition between former monopolies and market entrants so as to ensure, whilst guaranteeing the USO's long-term sustainability, so that all operators enjoy the freedomcan continue to provide postal services across Europe;
2016/06/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 133 #

2016/2010(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Asks the Commission to lay dowsupport innovation minimum standards for the sector in order to promote value-added services such as track-and-trace, pick- up/drop-off locations, the ability to choose a delivery time, and suitable return procedures;
2016/06/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 140 #

2016/2010(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that service quality should be assessed on the basis of minimum Europe-wide standards with a view to creating a fully integrated European postal sector;deleted
2016/06/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 189 #

2016/2010(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Asks the Member States and the Commission to improve transparency as regards pricing conditionsublic pricing and service performance (delivery options, final delivery, reliability), especially when it comes to e-commerce; stresses the importance of affordable cross-border delivery prices in closing the gap between domestic and cross-border prices; calls on the Commission to explore why prices on some cross-border routes are higher in one direction than the other, calls on the NRAs to explore why the multiples between domestic and cross-border public prices on some cross-border routes are considerably higher than the EU average; this should be done in accordance with the principle of proportionality;
2016/06/08
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 93 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) One of the key concepts used by this Regulation is that of ‘cash’, which should be defined as comprising fourthree categories: currency, bearer-negotiable instruments, and commodities used as highly liquid stores of value and certain types of prepaid cards. Given their characteristics, certain bearer-negotiable instruments, commodities used as highly liquid stores of value, as well as prepaid cards which are not linked to a bank account are likely to be used in place of currency as anonymous means of transfer of value across the external borders which are not traceable using the classic system of supervision by the public authorities. This Regulation should lay down the essential components of the definition of 'cash' while at the same time enabling the Commission to amend the non-essential components in response to the efforts by criminals and their associates to circumvent a measure which controls only one type of highly liquid store of value by bringing across external borders another type. If evidence of such behaviour on an appreciable scale is detected, it is essential that measures be taken swiftly to remedy the situation.
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 98 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) Prepaid cards are non-nominal cards storing monetary value or funds which can be used for payment transactions, for acquiring goods or services or for redemption of currency and which are not linked to a bank account. They are widely used for a variety of legitimate purposes and some of these instruments also present a clear social interest. As such prepaid cards are easily transferrable and can be used to transfer considerable value across external borders. It is therefore necessary to include prepaid cards in the definition of cash. This will allow for the possibility to extend the measures to certain types of prepaid cards if the evidence justifies it and with due regard to proportionality and practical enforceability.deleted
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 103 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
(16) For the prevention of money laundering and the financing of terrorism, an obligation to declare should be imposed on natural persons entering or leaving the Union. In order not to restrict free movement unduly or overburden citizens and authorities with administrative formalities, the obligation should be subject to a threshold of EUR 10 000 or its equivalent in commodities used as a highly liquid store of value, bearer-negotiable instruments, pre-paid cards' worth or other currencies. It should apply to natural persons carrying such amounts on their person, in their luggage or in the conveyance in which they cross the external border. They should be required to make the cash available to the competent authorities for control.
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 116 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
(21) That information should be passed on to the Financial Intelligence Unit of the Member State in question. Those units are designated as the hub elements in the fight against money-laundering and terrorist financing who receive and process information from various sources such as financial institutions and analyse it in order to determine if there are grounds for further investigation that may not be apparent to the competent authorities who collect the declarations and perform controls under this Regulation. The Commission should assess ways in which to strengthen cooperation between Financial Intelligence Units through existing mechanisms.
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 126 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
(29) In order to encourage compliance and deter circumvention, Member States should introduce penalties for non- compliance with the obligations to declare or disclose. The penalties should apply only to the failure to declare or disclose under this Regulation and should not take into account the criminal activity potentially associated with the cash, which may be the object of further investigation and measures falling outside the scope of this Regulation. They should be effective, proportionate and dissuasive, and not go beyond what is required to encourage compliance. They should be decided by Member States in accordance with national law.
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 134 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
(31) In order to be able to quickly take account of future modifications of international standards such as established by the Financial Action Task Force or to address circumvention of this Regulation through reliance on liquid stores of value which are not covered by the definition of 'cash', the power to adopt implementing acts in accordance with Article 2901 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of modifications to that definition. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016.24 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. __________________ 24 Ref. to OJ [L 123/1]Annex I to this Regulation.
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 143 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a – indent 4
- prepaid cards referred to in Annex I;deleted
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 152 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) 'prepaid card' means a non- nominal card storing monetary value or funds which can be used for payment transactions, for acquiring goods or services or for redemption of currency and which is not linked to a bank account;deleted
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 156 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegatedimplementing acts in accordance with Article 14 in order to amend Annex I to take account of new trends in money laundering or terrorist financing, as defined in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 of Article 1 of Directive (EU) 2015/849, or best practices in preventing money laundering or terrorist financing or to prevent the use by criminals of bearer- negotiable instruments, commodities used as highly liquid stores of value or prepaid cards to circumvent the obligations laid down in Articles 3 and 4.
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 220 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The period of retention may be extended once with another period which shall not exceed five additional years if - after they have carried out a thorough assessment of the necessity and proportionality of such further retention and consider it to be justified for the fulfilment of their tasks with respect to the fight against money laundering or terrorist financing, the Financial Intelligence Unit determines that further retention is required or; - after they have carried out a thorough assessment of the necessity and proportionality of such further retention and consider it to be justified for the fulfilment of their tasks with respect to providing effective controls as regards the obligation to declare laid down under this Regulation, competent authorities determine that further retention is required.
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 227 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Each Member State shall introduce penalties to apply in the event of failure to comply with the obligation to declare laid down in Articles 3 and 4. Such penalties shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. These penalties are to be decided by Member States in accordance with national law. Each Member State shall introduce penalties to apply in the event of failure to comply with the obligation to declare laid down in Articles 3 and 4. Such penalties shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 229 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – title
Exercise of the delegimplementation
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 230 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. The power to adopt delegatedimplementing acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article.
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 231 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2 The power to adopt delegatedimplementing acts referred to in Article 2(2) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from ….26 __________________ 26 * Date of entry into force of the basic legislative act or any other date set by the legislator.
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 232 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. The delegimplementation of power referred to in Article 2(2) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegimplementation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegatedimplementing acts already in force.
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 233 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4
4. Before adopting a delegatedn implementing act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by each Member State in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016.
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 234 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5
5. As soon as it adopts a delegatedn implementing act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council.
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 235 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6
6. A delegatedn implementing act adopted pursuant to Article 2(2) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of two 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 two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 240 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the technical rules for the exchange of information under Articles 8 and 9, including the establishment of an appropriate electronic systemvia the Customs Information System, as laid down in Article 23 of Regulation (EC) No 515/97;
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 247 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a report on the application of this Regulation five years after its entry into force and every five years thereafter. The scope of the report should not include an evaluation of an introduction of a mandatory declaration, or legislative proposal.
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 257 #

2016/0413(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 2 – point b
(b) bullion such as bars, nuggets or clumps with a gold content of at least 99,5 %.deleted
2017/10/26
Committee: ECONLIBE
Amendment 184 #

2016/0404(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that before introducing new legislative, regulatory or administrative provisions restricting access to or pursuit of regulated professions, or amending existing ones, the relevant competent authorities undertake an assessment of their proportionality in accordance with the rules laid down in this Directiveundertake an assessment of proportionality in accordance with the rules laid down in this Directive before introducing new, or amending existing, legislative, regulatory or administrative provisions restricting access to or pursuit of regulated professions.
2017/09/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 186 #

2016/0404(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. Any provision referred to in paragraph 1 shall be accompanied by a detailed written statement in accordance with Article 5 making it possible to appraise justification on grounds of public interest objectives and in accordance with the criteria defined in article 6 making it possible to appraise compliance with the principle of proportionality.
2017/09/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 214 #

2016/0404(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. The relevant competent authoritiMember States shall consider in particular whether those provisions are objectively justified on the basis of public policy, public security or public health, or by overriding reasons in the public interest, such as preserving the financial equilibrium of the social security system, the protection of consumers, recipients of services and workers, the safeguarding of the proper administration of justice, fairness of trade transactions, combating fraud and prevention of tax evasion and avoidance, road safety, the protection of the environment and the urban environment, the health of animals, intellectual property, the safeguarding and conservation of the national historic and artistic heritage, social policy objectives and cultural policy objectives.
2017/09/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 227 #

2016/0404(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. When assessing the necessity and the proportionality of the provisions, the relevant competent authoritiMember States shall consider in particular:
2017/09/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 292 #

2016/0404(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. For the purposes of paragraph 2(k), the relevant competent authoritiMember States shall assess in particular the cumulative effect of imposing any of the following requirements:
2017/09/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 327 #

2016/0404(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. The reasons for considering that provisions, assessed in accordance with this Directive, are justified, necessary and proportionate, and which are communicated to the Commission pursuant to paragraphs 5 and 6 of Article 59 of Directive 2005/36/EC, shall be recorded by th, without undue rdelevant competent authoritiay, by the Member States in the database of regulated professions, referred to in Article 59 paragraph 1 of Directive 2005/36/EC and thereafter made publicly available by the Commission.
2017/09/08
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 44 #

2016/0398(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) Directive 2006/123/EC is a horizontal legal instrument affecting a significant number of laws, regulations and administrative provisions at different levels within a Member State's governance structures. In order to facilitate the competent authorities' compliance with this Directive and to maximise the efficiency of the notification procedure and reduce the administrative burden of that procedure, the Commission should provide guidance regarding the practical aspects of the notification procedure, in particular for municipal and local authorities. Notwithstanding their obligation to notify, to ensure that the notification obligations of such authorities are proportionate, draft measures implementing authorisation schemes or requirements which have already been notified to the Commission and adopted by the Member State concerned at national level and do not extend the scope, content or are more restrictive schemes or requirements than the earlier adopted measure, should not be subject to notification.
2017/09/07
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 74 #

2016/0398(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) This Directive should allow Member States to act rapidly when urgent matters arise regarding serious and unforeseeable circumstances relating to the protection of public order, public safety, public health or the protection of the environment. This exception to the notification procedure for urgent matters should be temporary and not be used to circumvent the implementation of the notification procedure laid down by this Directive. Therefore the adopted measure should be notified to the Commission.
2017/09/07
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 113 #

2016/0398(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
(17) IA further objective of this Directive is to promote transparency between Member States and interested third parties. The latter should be given access to notifications sent by Member States in order to make them aware of planned authorisation schemes or certain requirements related to services in markets in which they actually or potentially operate and to enable them to provide comments thereon. The Commission should facilitate the possibility for interested third parties to comment on the notifications made by the Member States within the consultation period.
2017/09/07
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 133 #

2016/0398(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. Where a Member State substantially modifies a notified draft measure with the effect of significantly extendthat is subject to an ongoing notification procedure, altering its scope or content, or shortening the timetable originally envisaged for implementation, or adding requirements or authorisation schemes, or making thoseor tightening requirements or authorisation schemes more restrictive, for the establishment, or the cross-border provision of services, ithe Member State shall notmodify the modified draft measure previously notified under paragraph 1 again, including an explanation of the objective and content of the modifications. In such a case, the previous notification shall be deemed to be withdrawninitial notification, including an explanation of the objective and content thereof.
2017/09/07
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 136 #

2016/0398(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Member States shall not be obliged to notify the changes made during the parliamentary procedure to a draft measure that has been already notified. However, Member States shall notify the draft measure containing those changes to the Commission without delay and at the latest within two weeks from the date of the adoption of the measure.
2017/09/07
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 142 #

2016/0398(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Member States shall not be obliged to notify draft measures implementing authorisation schemes or requirements which have already been notified to the Commission and adopted by the Member State concerned at national level and that do not alter the scope, content or are more restrictive schemes or requirements than the earlier adopted measure.
2017/09/07
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 152 #

2016/0398(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. The breach of one of the obligations set out in Article 3(1), (2), and (2a), (3) and (3a) or in Article 6(2) shall constitute a substantial procedural defect of a serious nature as regards its effects vis-à- vis individuals.
2017/09/07
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 164 #

2016/0398(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
That information shall identify the overriding reason relating to the public interest pursued and give the reasons why the notified authorisation scheme or requirementprovide an assessment why the measure is non-discriminatory on grounds of nationality or residence and why it is proportionate with regard to the objective being pursued.
2017/09/07
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 170 #

2016/0398(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Paragraphs (3) and (3a) shall not apply when a Member State has to adopt urgent measures related to the protection of public order, public safety, public health or the protection of the environment. In principle, any urgent measure is temporary and shall expire after a maximum of 12 months. The Member State shall notify the Commission of the content of an urgent measure and the reasons for the urgency that triggered its adoption not later than the day on which that urgent measure is adopted. The Commission may take a Decision in accordance with Article 7 following the notification of the urgent measure.
2017/09/07
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 183 #

2016/0398(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. As from the date of the Commission informing the notifying Member State of the completeness of a notification receivOnce the draft measure has been notified, a consultation of maximum three months shall take place among the notifying Member State, other Member States and the Commission from the date of receipt of the notification by the Commission.
2017/09/07
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 196 #

2016/0398(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. An amended notification made in accordance with Article 3(2a) shall be subject to a consultation period of no less than one month from the date of that amendment being notified, during which the Commission and Member States may issue comments that the notified measure may be incompatible with Directive 2006/123/EC and/or other observations. This provision does not apply to a notification made in accordance with Article 3(2b).
2017/09/07
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 204 #

2016/0398(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. Before the closure of the consultation period referred to in Article 5 (2) and (5a), the Commission may alert the notifying Member State of its concerns about the compatibility with Directive 2006/123/EC of the draft measure notified and of its intention to adopt a Decision referred to in Article 7. The Commission may issue a notice, within three months of the modification of the notification provided for in Article 3, paragraph (2b).
2017/09/07
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 211 #

2016/0398(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. In case a Member State receives an alert from the Commission regarding a notification of a substantial modification referred to in Article 3 (3a new) it shall refrain from adopting the draft measure for a period of 1 month.
2017/09/07
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 225 #

2016/0398(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Where the Commission has issued an alert in accordance with Article 6(1), it may, within a period of three m and it still has serious concerns on ths after the date of the closure of the consultation period referred to in Article 5(2), adopt a Decision finding the draft measure to be incompatible with Directive 2006/123/EC ande measure notified in accordance with Article 3, it may, within a period of three months from the date of such notice adopt a Decision requiresting the Member State concerned to refrain from adopting the draft measure or, if such measure has been adopted in breach of Article 3(3) or Article 6(2),notified measure or to repeal it.
2017/09/07
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 241 #

2016/0398(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. By [36 months after the date for transposition of this Directive] and at the latest every five years thereafter, the Commission shall present a report to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee on the application of this Directive, including an assessment of any improper use to circumvent the application of the notification procedure established in this Directive.
2017/09/07
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 721 #

2016/0288(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 102 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Member States shall ensure, through the use of electronic communications networks, the establishment of an efficient 'Reverse- 112' communication system for warning and alerting citizens, in case of imminent or developing natural and/or man-made major emergencies and disasters, taking into account existing national and regional systems and without hindering privacy.
2017/05/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 27 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
(2) The development of digital technologies and internet has transformed the distribution of and access to television and radio programmes. Users increasingly expect to have access to television and radio programmes both live and on- demand, using traditional channels such as satellite or cable and also through online services. Broadcasting organisations are therefore increasingly offering, in addition to their own broadcasts of television and radio programmes, online services ancillary to their broadcast, such as simulcasting and catch-up services. Retransmission services operators, which aggregate broadcasts of television and radio programmes into packages and provide them to users simultaneously to the initial transmission of the broadcast, unaltered and unabridged, use various techniques of retransmission such as cable, satellite, digital terrestrial, closed circuit IP-based or mobile networks as well as the open internet. On the part of users, there is a growing demand for access to broadcasts of television and radio programmes, including catch-up services, not only originating in their Member State but also in other Member States of the Union, including from members of linguistic minorities of the Union as well as from persons who live in another Member State than their Member State of origin. This is a positive development and geo-blocking should not be the default position for all audiovisual content produced in the European Union and transmitted online; however the territorial funding model for European content is vital to the success of the European audiovisual media sector.
2017/02/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 31 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) A number of barriers hinder the provision of online services which are ancillary to broadcasts and the provision of retransmission services and thereby the free circulation of television and radio programmes within the Union. Broadcasting organisations transmit daily many hours of news, cultural, political, documentary or entertainment programmes. These programmes incorporate a variety of content such as audiovisual, musical, literary or graphic works, which is protected by copyright and/or related rights under Union law. That results in a complex process to clear rights from a multitude of right holders and for different categories of works and other protected subject matter. Often the rights need to be cleared in a short time-frame, in particular when preparing programmes such as news or current affairs. In order to make their online services available across borders, broadcasting organisations need to have the required rights to works and other protected subject matter for all the relevant territories which further increases the complexity of the rights' clearance, potentially to the detriment of meeting consumer demand.
2017/02/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 36 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
(6) Council Directive 93/83/EEC17 facilitates cross-border satellite broadcasting and retransmission by cable of television and radio programmes from other Member States of the Union. However, the provisions of that Directive on transmissions of broadcasting organisations are limited to satellite transmissions and therefore do not apply to online services, whether ancillary to broadcast or not, while the provisions concerning retransmissions of television and radio programmes from other Member States are limited to simultaneous, unaltered and unabridged retransmission by cable or microwave systems and do not extend to such retransmissions by means of other technologies. _________________ 17 Council Directive 93/83/EEC of 27 September 1993 on the coordination of certain rules concerning copyright and rights related to copyright applicable to satellite broadcasting and cable retransmission OJ L 248, 6.10.1993, p. 15– 21.
2017/02/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 38 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
(7) Therefore, cross-border provision of online services of broadcasters, in particular those ancillary to broadcast and retransmissions of television and radio programmes originating in other Member States should be facilitated by adapting the legal framework on the exercise of copyright and related rights relevant for those activities.
2017/02/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 47 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
(10) Since the provision of, the access to or the use of an ancillary online service is deemed to occur solely in the Member State in which the broadcasting organisation has its principal establishment, while de facto the ancillary online service can be provided across borders to other Member States upon contractual agreement, it is necessary to ensure that in arriving at the amount of the payment to be made for the rights in question, the parties should take into account all aspects of the ancillary online service such as the features of the service, the audience, including the audience in the Member State in which the broadcasting organisation has its principal establishment and in other Member States in which the ancillary online service is accessed and used, and the language version.
2017/02/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 49 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
(11) Through the principle of contractual freedom it will be possible to continue limiting the exploitation of the rights affected by the principle of country of origin laid down in this Regulation, especially as far as certain technical means of transmission or certain language versions and the necessarily territorial nature of certain contracts are concerned, provided that any such limitations of the exploitation of those rights are in compliance with Union law.
2017/02/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 72 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) AIn line with the principles of better regulation, a review of the Regulation should be undertaken after the Regulation has been in force for a period of time, in order to assess, among others the impact of the Regulation, and primarily, to what extent the cross-border provision of ancillary online services has increased to the benefit of European consumers and hence also to the benefit of improved cultural diversity in the Union.
2017/02/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 87 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
(1) The acts of communication to the public and of making available occurring when providing an ancillary online service by or under the control and responsibility of a broadcasting organisation as well as the acts of reproduction which are necessary for the provision of, the access to or the use of the ancillary online service shall, for the purposes of exercising copyright and related rights relevant for these acts, be deemed to occur solely in the Member State in which the broadcasting organisation has its principal establishment. Any disputes over the exercise of these rights shall fall under the jurisdiction of that Member State.
2017/02/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 94 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2
(2) When fixing the amount of the payment to be made for the rights subject to the country of origin principle as set out in paragraph 1, the parties shall take into account all aspects of the ancillary online service such as the features of the ancillary online service, the audiencepotential audience in the principal Member State and any other Member States concerned, and the language version.
2017/02/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 107 #

2016/0284(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2a) This review shall consider the potential need to extend this Regulation to other online services in light of technological and market developments.
2017/02/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 51 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Where information society service providers store and provide accessare actively involved in the making available, promoting and curating to the public to copyright protected works or other subject-matterdigital content uploaded by their users, thereby going beyond the mere provision of physical facilities and performing an act of communication to the public, they are obliged to conclude licensing agreements with rightholders, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 . __________________ 34 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 (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1–16).
2017/06/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 61 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
In respect of Article 14, it is necessary to verify whether the service provider has playsed an active role with knowledge of the copyright protected work in question, including by optimising the presentation of the uploaded works or subject-matter or promoting them, irrespective of the nature of the means used therefor.
2017/06/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 72 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
In order to ensure the functioning of any licensing agreement, information society service providers storing and providing accessactively involved in the making available to the public to large amounts of copyright protected works or other subject- matter uploaded by their users should take appropriate and proportionate measures to their value and size to ensure protection of works or other subject-matter, such as implementing effective technologies. This obligation should also apply when the information society service providers are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/ECin accordance with technological developments.
2017/06/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 73 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
(3) Rapid technological developments continue to transform the way works and other subject-matter are created, produced, distributed and exploited, and relevant legislation must be future proof so as to not restrict technological development. New business models and new actors continue to emerge. The objectives and the principles laid down by the Union copyright framework remain sound. However, legal uncertainty remains, for both rightholders and users, as regards certain uses, including cross-border uses, of works and other subject-matter in the digital environment. As set out in the Communication of the Commission entitled ‘Towards a modern, more European copyright framework’26 , in some areas it is necessary to adapt and supplement the current Union copyright framework. This Directive provides for rules to adapt certain exceptions and limitations to digital and cross-border environments, as well as measures to facilitate certain licensing practices as regards the dissemination of out-of- commerce works and the online availability of audiovisual works on video- on-demand platforms with a view to ensuring wider access to content. In order to achieve a well-functioning marketplace for copyright, there should also be rules on rights in publications, on the use of works and other subject-matter by online service providers storing and giving access to user uploaded content and on the transparency of authors' and performers' contracts. _________________ 26 COM(2015) 626 final. COM(2015) 626 final.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 80 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
(39) Collaboration between information society service providers storing and providing accessactively involved in the making available to the public tof large amounts of copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users and rightholders is essential for the functioning of technologies, such as content recognition technologies. In such cases, rightholders should provide the necessary data to allow the services to identify their content and the services should be transparent towards rightholders with regard to the deployed technologies, to allow the assessment of their appropriateness. The services should in particular provide rightholders with information on the type of technologies used, the way they are operated and their success rate for the recognition of rightholders' content. Those technologies should also allow rightholders to get information from the information society service providers on the use of their content covered by an agreement.
2017/06/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 82 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
(5) In the fields of research, innovation, education and preservation of cultural heritage, digital technologies permit new types of uses that are not clearly covered by the current Union rules on exceptions and limitations. In addition, the optional nature of exceptions and limitations provided for in Directives 2001/29/EC, 96/9/EC and 2009/24/EC in these fields may negatively impact the functioning of the internal market. This is particularly relevant as regards cross- border uses, which are becoming increasingly important in the digital environment. Therefore, the existing exceptions and limitations in Union law that are relevant for innovation, scientific research, teaching and preservation of cultural heritage should be reassessed in the light of those new uses. Mandatory exceptions or limitations for uses of text and data mining technologies in the field of scientific research, illustration for teaching in the digital environment and for preservation of cultural heritage should be introduced. In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, such exceptions or limitations should complement, rather than replace, existing TDM exceptions in Member States. For uses not covered by the exceptions or the limitation provided for in this Directive, the exceptions and limitations existing in Union law should continue to apply. Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC should be adapted.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 83 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
(3) Rapid technological developments continue to transform the way works and other subject-matter are created, produced, distributed and exploited. New business models and new actors continue to emerge. The objectives and the principles laid down by the Union copyright framework remain sound. However, legal uncertainty remains, for both rightholders and users, as regards certain uses, including cross-border uses, of works and other subject-matter in the digital environment. As set out in the Communication of the Commission entitled ‘Towards a modern, more European copyright framework’26 , in some areas it is necessary to adapt and supplement the current Union copyright framework. This Directive provides for rules to adapt certain exceptions and limitations to digital and cross-border environments, as well as measures to facilitate certain licensing practices as regards the dissemination of out-of- commerce works and the online availability of audiovisual works on video- on-demand platforms with a view to ensuring wider access to content. In order to achieve a well-functioning marketplace for copyright, there should also be rules on rights in publications, on the use of works and other subject-matter by online service providers storing and giving access to user uploaded content and on the transparency of authors' and performers' contracts. _________________ 26 COM(2015) 626 final. COM(2015) 626 final.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 97 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
(9) Union law already provides certain exceptions and limitations covering uses for scientific research purposes which may apply to acts of text and data mining. However, those exceptions and limitations are optional and not fully adapted to the use of technologies in scientific research. Moreover, where researchers have lawful access to content, for example through subscriptions to publications or open access licences, the terms of the licences may exclude text and data mining. As research is increasingly carried out with the assistance of digital technology, there is a risk that the Union's competitive position as a research area will suffer unless steps are taken to address the legal uncertainty for text and data mining in Union law, while ensuring that well-functioning text and data mining exceptions in Member States may continue to be applied.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 104 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
(10) This legal uncertainty should be addressed by providing for a mandatory exception to the right of reproduction and also to the right to prevent extraction from a database. The new exception should be without prejudice to the existing mandatory exception on temporary acts of reproduction laid down in Article 5(1) of Directive 2001/29, which should continue to apply to text and data mining techniques which do not involve the making of copies going beyond the scope of that exception, and should complement, rather than replace, existing TDM exceptions in Member States. Research organisations should also benefit from the exception when they engage into public-private partnerships.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 109 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
(11) Research organisations across the Union encompass a wide variety of entities which carry out research, including the public sector and cultural heritage institutions, the primary goal of which is to conduct scientific research or to do so together with the provision of educational services. Due to the diversity of such entities, it is important to have a common understanding of the beneficiaries of the exception. Despite different legal forms and structures, research organisations across Member States generally have in common that they act either on a not for profit basis or in the context of a public- interest mission recognised by the State. Such a public-interest mission may, for example, be reflected through public funding or through provisions in national laws or public contracts. At the same time, organisations upon which commercial undertakings have a decisive influence allowing them to exercise control because of structural situations such as their quality of shareholders or members, which may result in preferential access to the results of the research, should not be considered research organisations for the purposes of this Directive.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 113 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users shall, in cooperwhose users upload copyright protected content without the authorisation withof rightholders, take measures to ensure the functioning ofif that authorisation is required, shall endeavour to achieve, where appropriate, agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-mattergoverning this content, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC. The implementation of such agreements shall respect users' fundamental rights and Article 15 of Directive 2000/31/EC. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the implementation of such agreements.
2017/06/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 120 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
(14) Article 5(3)(a) of Directive 2001/29/EC allows Member States to introduce an exception or limitation to the rights of reproduction, communication to the public and making available to the public for the sole purpose of, among others, illustration for teaching. In addition, Articles 6(2)(b) and 9(b) of Directive 96/9/EC permit the use of a database and the extraction or re-utilization of a substantial part of its contents for the purpose of illustration for teaching. The scope of those exceptions or limitations as they apply to digital uses is unclear. In addition, there is a lack of clarity as to whether those exceptions or limitations would apply where teaching is provided online and thereby at a distance. Moreover, the existing framework does not provide for a cross-border effect. This situation may hamper the development of digitally- supported teaching activities and distance learning. Therefore, the introduction of a new mandatory exception or limitation is necessary to ensure that educational establishments benefit from full legal certainty when using works or other subject-matter in digital teaching activities, including online and across borders.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 124 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the service providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case of disputes over the application of the measureimplementation of agreements referred to in paragraph 1.
2017/06/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 125 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
(15) While distance learning, e-learning and cross- border education programmes are mostly developed at higher education level, digital tools and resources are increasingly used at all education levels, in particular to improve and enrich the learning experience. The exception or limitation provided for in this Directive should therefore benefit all educational establishments in primary, secondary, vocational and higher education to the extent they pursue their educational activity for a non-commercial purpose. The organisational structure and the means of funding of an educational establishment are not the decisive factors to determine the non-commercial nature of the activity.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 128 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
(16) The exception or limitation should cover digital uses of works and other subject-matter such as the use of parts or extracts of works to support, enrich or complement the teaching, including the related learning activities to the extent justified by the non-commercial purpose to be achieved. The amount of a work that can be copied may vary according to the type of work and its use. Member States should be able therefore to set out appropriate limits in their national law to address this variation, as long as these limits strike a fair balance between the needs of users and rightholders. The use of the works or other subject-matter under the exception or limitation should be only in the context of teaching and learning activities carried out under the responsibility of educational establishments, including during examinations, and be limited to what is necessary for the purpose of such activities. The exception or limitation should cover both uses through digital means in the classroom and online uses through e- learning and the educational establishment's secure electronic network, the access to which should be protected, notably by authentication procedures. The exception or limitation should be understood as covering the specific accessibility needs of persons with a disability in the context of illustration for teaching.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 130 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall facilitate, where appropriate, the cooperation between the information society service providers, user representatives and rightholders through stakeholder dialogues to define best practices for the implementation of paragraph 1 in a manner that is proportionate and efficient, such as appropriate and proportionate content recognition technologies, taking into account, among others, the nature of the services, the availability of the technologies and their effectiveness in light of technological developments.
2017/06/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 134 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Hyperlinking to an already publicly available content does not constitute a communication to the public of that source, where the hyperlink only contains information necessary to find and/or request the source's contents.
2017/06/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 138 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
(17) Different arrangements, based on the implementation of the exception provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC or on licensing agreements covering further uses, are in place in a number of Member States in order to facilitate educational uses of works and other subject-matter. Such arrangements have usually been developed taking account of the needs of educational establishments and different levels of education. Whereas it is essential to harmonise the scope of the new mandatory exception or limitation in relation to digital uses and cross- border teaching activities, the modalities of implementation may differ from a Member State to another, to the extent they do not hamper the effective application of the exception or limitation or cross-border uses. This should allow Member States to build on the existing arrangements concluded at national level. In particular, Member States could decide to subject the application of the exception or limitation, fully or partially, to the availability of adequate licences, covering at least the same uses as those allowed under the exception. This mechanism would, for example, allow giving precedence to licences for materials which are primarily intended for the educational market. In order to avoid that such mechanism results in legal uncertainty or administrative burden for educational establishments, Member States adopting this approach should take concrete measures to ensure that licensing schemes allowing digital uses of works or other subject-matter for the purpose of illustration for teaching are easily available and that educational establishments are aware of the existence of such licensing schemes.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 172 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
(31) A free and pluralist press is essential to ensure quality journalism and citizens' access to information. It provides a fundamental contribution to public debate and the proper functioning of a democratic society. In the transition from print to digital, publishers of press publications are facing problems in licensing the online use of their publications and recouping their investments. In the absence of recognition of publishers of press publications as rightholders, licensing and enforcement in the digital environment is often complex and inefficient.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 179 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
(32) The organisational and financial contribution of publishers in producing press publications needs to be recognised and further encouraged to ensure the sustainability of the publishing industry. It is therefore necessary to provide at Union level a harmonised legal protection for press publications in respect of digital uses. Such protection should be effectively guaranteed through the introduction, in Union law, of rights related to copyright for the reproduction and making available to the public of press publications in respect of digital uses.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 185 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
(33) For the purposes of this Directive, it is necessary to define the concept of press publication in a way that embraces only journalistic publications, published by a service provider, periodically or regularly updated in any media, for the purpose of informing or entertaining. Such publications would include, for instance, daily newspapers, weekly or monthly magazines of general or special interest and news websites. Periodical publications which are published for scientific or academic purposes, such as scientific journals, should not be covered by the protection granted to press publications under this Directive. This protection does not extend to acts of hyperlinking which do not constitute communication to the public.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 199 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
(34) The rights granted to the publishers of press publications under this Directive should have the same scope as the rights of reproduction and making available to the public provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC, insofar as digital uses are concerned. They should also be subject to the same provisions on exceptions and limitations as those applicable to the rights provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC including the exception on quotation for purposes such as criticism or review laid down in Article 5(3)(d) of that Directive.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 208 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
(35) The protection granted to publishers of press publications under this Directive should not affect the rights of the authors and other rightholders in the works and other subject-matter incorporated therein, including as regards the extent to which authors and other rightholders can exploit their works or other subject-matter independently from the press publication in which they are incorporated. Therefore, publishers of press publications should not be able to invoke the protection granted to them against authors and other rightholders. This is without prejudice to contractual arrangements concluded between the publishers of press publications, on the one side, and authors and other rightholders, on the other side.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 241 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 1
Where information society service providers store and provide accessare actively involved in the making available, promoting and curating to the public to copyright protected works or other subject-matterdigital content uploaded by their users, thereby going beyond the mere provision of physical facilities and performing an act of communication to the public, they are obliged to conclude licensing agreements with rightholders, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 . _________________ 34 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European 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 (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1–16).
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 254 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 2
In respect of Article 14, it is necessary to verify whether the service provider has playsed an active role with knowledge of the copyright protected work in question,, including by optimising the presentation of the uploaded works or subject-matter or promoting them, irrespective of the nature of the means used therefor.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 259 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 – paragraph 3
In order to ensure the functioning of any licensing agreement, information society service providers storing and providing accessactively involved in the making available to the public to large amounts of copyright protected works or other subject- matter uploaded by their users should take appropriate and proportionate measures to their value and size to ensure protection of works or other subject-matter, such as implementing effective technologies. This obligation should also apply when the information society service providers are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/ECin accordance with technological developments.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 273 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
(39) Collaboration between information society service providers storing and providing accesactively involved in the making available of copyright protected works to the public to large amounts of copyright protected works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users and rightholders is essential for the functioning of technologies, such as content recognition technologies. In such cases, rightholders should provide the necessary data to allow the services to identify their content and the services should be transparent towards rightholders with regard to the deployed technologies, to allow the assessment of their appropriateness. The services should in particular provide rightholders with information on the type of technologies used, the way they are operated and their success rate for the recognition of rightholders' content. Those technologies should also allow rightholders to get information from the information society service providers on the use of their content covered by an agreement.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 281 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
(31) A free and pluralist press is essential to ensure quality journalism and citizens' access to information. It provides a fundamental contribution to public debate and the proper functioning of a democratic society. In the transition from print to digital, publishers of press publications are facing problems in licensing the online use of their publications and recouping their investments. In the absence of recognition of publishers of press publications as rightholders, licensing and enforcement in the digital environment is often complex and inefficient.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 288 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
(40) Certain rightholders such as authors and performers need information to assess the economic value of their rights which are harmonised under Union law. This is especially the case where such rightholders grant a licence or a transfer of rights in return for remuneration. As authors and performers tend to be in a weaker contractual position when they grant licences or transfer their rights, they need information to assess the continued economic value of their rights, compared to the remuneration received for their licence or transfer, but they often face a lack of transparency. Therefore, the sharing of adequate information by their direct contractual counterparts or their successors in title is important for the transparency and balance in the system that governs the remuneration of authors and performers.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 295 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
(32) The organisational and financial contribution of publishers in producing press publications needs to be recognised and further encouraged to ensure the sustainability of the publishing industry. It is therefore necessary to provide at Union level a harmonised legal protection for press publications in respect of digital uses. Such protection should be effectively guaranteed through the introduction, in Union law, of rights related to copyright for the reproduction and making available to the public of press publications in respect of digital uses.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 298 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
(42) Certain contracts for the exploitation of rights harmonised at Union level are of long duration, offering few possibilities for authors and performers to renegotiate them with their contractual counterparts or their successors in title. Therefore, without prejudice to the law applicable to contracts in Member States, there should bMember States may decide to introduce a remuneration adjustment mechanism for cases of unexpected success where the remuneration originally agreed under a licence or a transfer of rights is disproportionately low compared to the relevant net revenues and the benefits derived from the exploitation of the work or the fixation of the performance, including in light of the transparency ensured by this Directive. The assessment of the situation should take account of the specific circumstances of each case as well as of the specificities and practices of the different content sectors. Where the parties do not agree on the adjustment of the remuneration, the author or performer should be entitled to bring a claim before a court or other competent authority.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 301 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 43
(43) Authors and performers are often reluctant to enforce their rights against their contractual partners before a court or tribunal. Member States should therefore provide for an efficient alternative dispute resolution procedure that addresses claims related to obligations of transparency and the contract adjustment mechanism.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 307 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(1a) 'educational establishment' means a school, college, university, or any other organisation the primary goal of which is to provide educational services: (a) on a not-for-profit basis or by reinvesting all the profits in such provision; or (b) pursuant to a public interest mission recognised by a Member State.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 312 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 3
(3) ‘cultural heritage institution’ means a publicly accessible library or, museum, gallery or educational establishment, an archive or a film or audio heritage institution or public broadcaster;
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 312 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
(33) For the purposes of this Directive, it is necessary to defineclarify the sconceptpe of press publication in a way that embraces only journalistic publications, published by a service provider, periodically or regularly updated in any media, for the purpose of informing or entertaining. Such publications would include, for instance, daily newspapers, weeklotection set out in Article s2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC. In order to improve legal certainty for all concerned parties, and to ensure the freedom to carry out certain acts necessary for monthly magazines of general or special ithe normal functioning of the Internest and news websites. Periodical publications which are published for scientific or academic purposes, such as scientific journals, should not be covered by the protection granted to press publications under this Directive. This protection doess well as to take account of certain fundamental rights, these Articles should not extend to acts of hyperlinking, which do not constitute communication to the public.
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 316 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4
(4) ‘press publication’ means a fixation of a collection of literary works of a journalistic nature, which may also comprise other works or subject-matter and constitutes an individual item within a periodical or regularly-updated publication under a single title, such as a newspaper or a general or special interest magazine, having the purpose of providing information related to news or other topics and published in any media under the initiative, editorial responsibility and control of a service provider.deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 322 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall provide for an exception to the rights provided for in Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC and Article 11(1) of this Directive for reproductions and extractions made by research organisations in order to carry out text and data mining of works or other subject-matter to which they have lawful access for the purposes of scientific research. Member States may continue to apply existing well- functioning exceptions.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 326 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
(34) The rights granted to the publishers of press publications under this Directive should have the same scope as the rights of reproduction and making available to the public provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC, insofar as digital uses are concerned. They should also be subject to the same provisions on exceptions and limitations as those applicable to the rights provided for in Directive 2001/29/EC including the exception on quotation for purposes such as criticism or review laid down in Article 5(3)(d) of that Directive.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 334 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Rightholders shall be allowed to apply targeted, proportionate, reasonable and non-discriminatory measures to ensure the security and integrity of the networks and databases where the works or other subject-matter are hosted. Such measures shall be reasonable and efficient, not go beyond what is necessary to achieve that objective, or unnecessarily hamper text and data mining.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 340 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
(35) The protection granted to publishers of press publications under this Directive should not affect the rights of the authors and other rightholders in the works and other subject-matter incorporated therein, including as regards the extent to which authors and other rightholders can exploit their works or other subject-matter independently from the press publication in which they are incorporated. Therefore, publishers of press publications should not be able to invoke the protection granted to them against authors and other rightholders. This is without prejudice to contractual arrangements concluded between the publishers of press publications, on the one side, and authors and other rightholders, on the other side.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 345 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall provide for an exception or limitation to the rights provided for in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1) of Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of this Directive in order to allow for the digital use of works and other subject- matter for the sole purpose of illustration for teachingeducational purposes, to the extent justified by the non-commercial purpose to be achieved, provided that the use:
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 374 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Member States may provide for restrictions on the amount of a work that can be copied in accordance with fair practice. Such restrictions shall take into account the needs of both users and rightholders.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 379 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Member States shall provide for an exception to the rights provided for in Article 2 of Directive 2001/29/EC, Articles 5(a) and 7(1) of Directive 96/9/EC, Article 4(1)(a) of Directive 2009/24/EC and Article 11(1) of this Directive, permitting cultural heritage institutions, to make copies of any works or other subject-matter that are permanently in their collections or use the facilities of third parties to do so, in any format or medium, for the sole purpose of the preservation of such works or other subject-matter and to the extent necessary for such preservation.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 404 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) (d) Member States shall, in consultation with rightsholders, collective management organisations and cultural heritage institutions, evaluate the effectiveness of such licensing solutions.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 418 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that information that allows the physical identification of the works or other subject- matter covered by a licence granted in accordance with Article 7 and information about the possibility of rightholders to object referred to in Article 7(1)(c) are made publicly accessible in a single online portal for at least six months before the works or other subject-matter are digitised, distributed, communicated to the public or made available in Member States other than the one where the licence is granted, and for the whole duration of the licence.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 420 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11
Protection of press publications 1. Member States shall provide publishers of press publications with the rights provided for in Article 2 and Article 3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC for the digital use of their press publications. 2. paragraph 1 shall leave intact and shall in no way affect any rights provided for in Union law to authors and other rightholders, in respect of the works and other subject-matter incorporated in a press publication. Such rights may not be invoked against those authors and other rightholders and, in particular, may not deprive them of their right to exploit their works and other subject-matter independently from the press publication in which they are incorporated. 3. 2001/29/EC and Directive 2012/28/EU shall apply mutatis mutandis in respect of the rights referred to in paragraph 1. 4. paragraph 1 shall expire 20 years after the publication of the press publication. This term shall be calculated from the first day of January of the year following the date of publication.Article 11 deleted concerning digital uses The rights referred to in Articles 5 to 8 of Directive The rights referred to in
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 440 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 4
4. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall expire 20 yearsix months after the publication of the press publication. This term shall be calculated from the first day of January of the year following the date of publication.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 464 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Information society service providers that store and provide to the public access to large amounts of works or other subject-matter uploaded by their users shall, in cooperwhose users upload copyright protected content without the authorisation withof rightholders, take measures to ensure the functioning ofif that authorisation is required, shall endeavour to achieve, where appropriate, agreements concluded with rightholders for the use of their works or other subject-matter or to prevent the availability on their services of works or other subject-matter identified by rightholders through the cooperation with the service providers. Those measures, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies, shall be appropriate and proportionate. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the functioning and the deployment of the measures, as well as, when relevant, adequate reporting on the recognition and use of the works and other subject-mattergoverning this content, unless they are eligible for the liability exemption provided in Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and the Council. The implementation of such agreements shall respect users' fundamental rights and Article 15 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and the Council. The service providers shall provide rightholders with adequate information on the implementation of such agreements.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 490 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the service providers referred to in paragraph 1 put in place complaints and redress mechanisms that are available to users in case of disputes over the application of the measureimplementation of such agreements referred to in paragraph 1.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 503 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall facilitate, where appropriate, the cooperation between the information society service providers, user representatives and rightholders through stakeholder dialogues to define best practices for the implementation of paragraph 1 in a manner that is proportionate and efficient, such as appropriate and proportionate content recognition technologies, taking into account, among others, the nature of the services, the availability of the technologies and their effectiveness in light of technological developments.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 506 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Hyperlinking to an already publicly available content does not constitute a communication to the public of that source, where the hyperlink only contains information necessary to find and/or request the source's contents.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 516 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shallmay ensure that authors and performers who are in a contractual relationship where there are ongoing payment obligations receive on a regular basis and taking into account the specificities of each sector, timely, adequate and sufficient information on the exploitation of their works and performances from those to whom they have licensed or transferred theire party with whom they entered into a contract for the exploitation of rights, notably as regards modes of exploitation, revenues generated and remuneration due.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 519 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4
(4) ‘press publication’ means a fixation of a collection of literary works of a journalistic nature, which may also comprise other works or subject-matter and constitutes an individual item within a periodical or regularly-updated publication under a single title, such as a newspaper or a general or special interest magazine, having the purpose of providing information related to news or other topics and published in any media under the initiative, editorial responsibility and control of a service provider.deleted
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 537 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. Member States may decide that the obligation in paragraph 1 does not apply when reporting obligations have been agreed by the parties or when the contribution of the author or performer is not significant having regard to the overall work or performance.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 547 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensurmay decide that authors and performers are entitled, in case of an unexpected success, to request additional, appropriate remuneration from the party with whom they entered into a contract for the exploitation of the rights when the remuneration originally agreed is disproportionately low compared to the subsequent relevant net revenues and benefits derived from the exploitation of the works or performances.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 557 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Member States shallmay provide that disputes concerning the transparency obligation under Article 14 and the contract adjustment mechanism under Article 15 may be submitted to a voluntary, alternative dispute resolution procedure.
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 574 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. The provisions of Article 11 shall also apply to press publications published before [the date mentioned in Article 21(1)].deleted
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 575 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The provision in Article 15 shall apply only to circumstances where the remuneration has become disproportionate due to cases of unexpected success after [the date mentioned in Article 21(1)].
2017/04/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 731 #

2016/0280(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11
Protection of press publications 1. Member States shall provide publishers of press publications with the rights provided for in Article 2 and Article 3(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC for the digital use of their press publications. 2. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall leave intact and shall in no way affect any rights provided for in Union law to authors and other rightholders, in respect of the works and other subject- matter incorporated in a press publication. Such rights may not be invoked against those authors and other rightholders and, in particular, may not deprive them of their right to exploit their works and other subject-matter independently from the press publication in which they are incorporated. 3. Articles 5 to 8 of Directive 2001/29/EC and Directive 2012/28/EU shall apply mutatis mutandis in respect of the rights referred to in paragraph 1. 4. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 shall expire 20 years after the publication of the press publication. This term shall be calculated from the first day of January of the year following the date of publication.Article 11 deleted concerning digital uses
2017/04/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 278 #

2016/0152(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. This Regulation shall not result in an obligation for the trader to bear additional costs in cases where a consumer exercises his right of withdrawal pursuant to Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council1a. The necessary costs to bring the goods into conformity do not entail costs of postage or transport which are additional to those costs necessary to deliver the goods as specified in the general conditions of access or as agreed upon. _______________ 1aDirective 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 (OJ L 304, 22.11.2011, p. 64).
2017/02/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 296 #

2016/0152(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Small sellers and micro- enterprises do not have to verify the location of the consumers they wish sell to. When a trader has an obligation to conclude contracts with consumers residing in a country they are not targeting it is necessary to guarantee that trader law will apply.
2017/02/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 394 #

2016/0152(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) Authe payee can request strong customer authentication by the payerntication requirements are fulfilled pursuant to the Directive (EU) 2015/2366; and
2017/02/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 401 #

2016/0152(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. The prohibition set out in paragraph 1 shall not preclude traders' possibility to request charges for the use of a card-based payment instrument for which interchanges fees are not regulated under Chapter II of Regulation (EU) 2015/751 and for those payment services to which Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 does not apply. Those charges shall not exceed the costs borne by the trader for the use of the payment instrument. The charges may include both direct and indirect costs borne by the trader, such as transaction fees charged on electronic payments.
2017/02/16
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 79 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
(26) There are new challenges, in particular in connection with video-sharing platforms, on which users - particularly minors - increasingly consume audiovisual content. In this context, harmful content and hate addition, the decision to remove such content, should respeech stored on video-sharing platforms have inct the principle of freedom of expreassingly given rise to concern. Ion. In this context, it is necessary, in order to protect minors from harmful content and all citizens from content containing incitement to violence or hatred hosted on video- sharing platforms, but also to protect and guarantee the fundamental rights of users, to set out proportionate rules on those matters.
2016/12/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 88 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
(28) An important share of the content hostored on video-sharing platforms is not under the editorial responsibility of the video-sharing platform provider. However, those providers typically determine the organisation of the content, namely programmes or user-generated videos, including by automatic means or algorithms. Therefore, those providers should be required to take appropriate measures to protect minors from content that may impair their physical, or mental or moral development and protect all citizenusers from incitement to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to sex, race, colour, religion, disability, descent or national or ethnic origin.
2016/12/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 89 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 29
(29) In light of the nature of the providers' involvement with the content hostored on video-sharing platforms, those appropriate measures should relate to the organisation of the content and not to the content as such. The requirements in this regard as set out in this Directive should therefore apply without prejudice to Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34, which provides for an exemption from liability for illegal information stored by certain providers of information society services. When providing services covered by Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC, those requirements should also apply without prejudice to Article 15 of that Directive, which precludes general obligations to monitor such information and to actively seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity from being imposed on those providers, without however concerning monitoring obligations in specific cases and, in particular, without affecting judicial orders by national authorities in accordance with national legislation. _________________ 34 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 (OJ L 178, 17.07.2000, p. 1).
2016/12/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 94 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
(31) When taking the appropriate measures to protect minors from harmful content and to protect all citizens from content containing incitement to violence or hatred in accordance with this Directive, the applicable fundamental rights, as laid down in the Charter on Fundamental Rights of the European Union, should be carefully balanced. That concerns in particular, as the case may be, the right to respect for private and family life and the protection of personal data, the freedom of expression and information, the freedom to conduct a business, the prohibition of discrimination and the right of the child. Member States have an obligation to ensure that the balance of incentives for media service providers and video-sharing platform providers covered by this Directive is such that legal content, including content which can offend, shock or disturb, can be communicated. Similarly, age verification should only be proportionate and should be implemented in a way which offers the maximum protection of privacy.
2016/12/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 103 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 36
(36) ERGA has made a positive contribution towards consistent regulatory practice and has provided high level and independent advice to the Commission on implementation matters. This calls for the formal recognition and reinforcement of its role in this Directive. The group should therefore be re-established by virtue of this Directive.
2016/12/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 107 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
(3) Directive 2010/13/EU should remain applicable only to thoseaudiovisual media services, the principal purpose of which is the provision of programmes in order to inform, entertain or educate, and which are intended for reception by, and which could have a clear impact on, a significant proportion of the general public. The principal purpose requirement should be also considered to be met if the service has audiovisual content and form which is dissociable from the main activity of the service provider, such as stand-alone parts of online newspapers featuring audiovisual programmes or user-generated videos where those parts can be considered dissociable from their main activity. Social media services are not included, except if they provide a service that falls under the definition of a video-sharing platform. Similarly, audiovisual media services that are not primarily economic in their purpose and do not compete with television broadcasting but, for example, provide and distribute the audiovisual content of private users for sharing in communities of interest, should not be included. A service should be considered to be merely an indissociable complement to the main activity as a result of the links between the audiovisual offer and the main activity. As such, channels or any other audiovisual services under the editorial responsibility of a provider may constitute audiovisual media services in themselves, even if they are offered in the framework of a video- sharing platform which is characterised by the absence of editorial responsibility. In such cases, it will be up to the providers with editorial responsibility to abide by the provisions of this Directive.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 119 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
(5) Establishing jurisdiction requires an assessment of factual situations against the criteria laid down in Directive 2010/13/EU. The assessment of such factual situations might lead to conflicting results. In the application of the cooperation procedures provided for in Articles 3 and 4 of Directive 2010/13/EU, it is important that the Commission can base its findings on reliable facts. The European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA) should therefore be empowered to provide opinions on jurisdiction, in conjunction with national regulatory authorities, upon the Commission's request.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 125 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 6 a – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that audiovisual media service providers provide sufficient information to viewers about content which may impair the physical, or mental or moral development of minors. For this purpose, Member States may use a system of descriptors indicating the nature of the content of an audiovisual media service.
2016/12/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 139 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) protect minors from content which may impair their physical, or mental or moral development;
2016/12/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 145 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) protect all citizens from content containing incitement to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to sex, race, colour, religion, disability, descent or national or ethnic origin.
2016/12/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 150 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point a
(a) defining and applying in the terms and conditions of the video-sharing platform providers the concepts of incitement to violence or hatred as referred to in point (b) of paragraph 1 and of content which may impair the physical, or mental or moral development of minors, in accordance with Articles 6 and 12 respectively;
2016/12/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 154 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 201/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point c
(c) establishing and operating age verification systems for users of video- sharing platforms with respect to content which may impair the physical, or mental or moral development of minors;
2016/12/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 158 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 201/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point e
(e) providing for parental control systems with respect to content which may impair the physical, or mental or moral development of minors;
2016/12/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 162 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) Whilst potentially a beneficial tool in the interpretation and implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU, it is important that Union codes of conduct comply fully with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. Further public information, clarification and consultation on the functioning of Union codes of conduct is necessary before the Commission considers facilitating the development of such codes of conduct.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 171 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 23
Directive 201/13/EU
Article 33 – paragraph 2
By [date – no later than four years after adoption] at the latest, and every three years thereafter, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament, to the Council and to the European Economic and Social Committee a report on the application of this Directive, including pertaining to the implementation of freedom of expression as regards Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
2016/12/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 173 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
(13) The market for TV broadcasting has evolved and that there is a need for more flexibilgreater clarity with regard to audiovisual commercial communications, in particular for quantitative rules for linear audiovisual media services, product placement and sponsorship. The emergence of new services, including without advertising, has led to a greater choice for viewers, who can easily switch to alternative offers.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 177 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) Independent audience measurement for audiovisual media services, including commercial communications, is needed to ensure adequate and transparent information to audiovisual media service providers and national regulatory authorities.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 191 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
(16) Product placement should not be admissible in news and current affairs programmes, consumer affairs programmes, religious programmes and children's programmes, with a significant children’s audiencehich should be understood as programmes that are primarily produced for and aimed at children. In particular, evidence shows that product placement and embedded advertisements can affect children's behaviour as children are often not able to recognise the commercial content. There is thus a need to continue to prohibit product placement in programmes with a significant children's audienceprogrammes. Consumer affairs programmes are programmes offering advice to viewers, or including reviews on the purchase of products and services. Allowing product placement in such programmes would blur the distinction between advertising and editorial content for viewers who may expect a genuine and honest review of products or services in such programmes.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 211 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
(19) While this Directive does not increase the overall amount of admissible advertising time during the period from 7:00 to 23:00, it is important for broadcasters to have more flexibility and to be able to decide when to place advertising in order to maximise advertisers' demand and viewers' flow. The hourly limit should thus be abolished while a daily limit of 20% of advertising within the period from 7:00 to 23:00 should be introduced.deleted
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 235 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
(21) Providers of on-demand audiovisual media services should promote the production and distribution of European works by ensuring, where practical and by appropriate means, that their catalogues contain a minimum share of European works and that those are given enough prominence.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 240 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
(22) In order to ensure adequatseek to improve levels of investment oin European works, Member States should be able tomay impose financial obligations ton on-demand service providers established owithin their territory. Thosejurisdiction. Those financial obligations can take the form of direct contributions to the production of and acquisition of rights in European works. The Member States could also impose levies payable to a fund, on the basis of the revenues made with on-demand services that are provided in and targeted towards their territory. This Directive clarifies that, given the direct link between financial obligations and Member States' different cultural policies, Member States are also allowed toIn accordance with the country of origin principle, Member States should only impose such financial obligations on providers of on- demand service providers established in another Member State which are targeted towards its territory. In this case financial obligations should only be charged on the revenues generated through the audience in that Member Statewithin their jurisdiction.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 244 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
(23) When assessing on a case-by-case basis whether an on-demand audiovisual media service established in another Member State is targeting audiences in its territory, a Member State shall refer to indicators such as advertisement or other promotions specifically aiming at customers in its territory, the main language of the service or the existence of content or commercial communications aiming specifically at the audience in the Member State of reception.deleted
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 246 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
(24) When Member States impose financial contributions to providers of on- demand services such contributions shall seek an adequate promotion of European works, while avoiding risks of double imposition for service providers. With this view, if the Member State where the provider is established imposes a financial contribution, it shall take into account any financial contributions imposed by targeted Member States.deleted
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 259 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
(26) There are new challenges, in particular in connection with video-sharing platforms, on which users -, particularly minors -, increasingly consume audiovisual content. In this context, harmful content and hate speech stored on video-sharing platforms have increasingly given rise to concern. It is necessary, in order to protect minors from harmful content and all citizens from content containing incitement to violence or hatred, to set out proportionate rules on those matters without prejudice to Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council33a . __________________ 33aDirective 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 (OJ L 178, 17.07.2000, p. 1).
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 278 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
(28) An important share of the content stored on video-sharing platforms is not under the editorial responsibility of the video-sharing platform provider. However, where it is demonstrated that those providers typically determine the organisation of the content, namely programmes or user- generated videos, including by automatic means or algorithms. Therefore, those providers, they should be required to take appropriate measures to protect minors from content that may impair their physical, mental or moral development and protect all citizens from incitement to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to sex, race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 284 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 29
(29) In light of the nature of the providers' involvement with the content stored on video-sharing platforms, those appropriate measures should relate to the organisation of the content and not to the content as such. The requirements in this regard as set out in this Directive should therefore apply without prejudice to Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 , which provides for an exemption from liability for illegal information stored by certain providers of information society services. When providing services covered by Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC, those requirements should also apply without prejudice to Article 15 of that Directive, which precludes general obligations to monitor such information and to actively seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity from being imposed on those providers, without however concerning monitoring obligations in specific cases and, in particular, without affecting orders by national authorities in accordance with national legislation. __________________ 34Directive 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 (OJ L 178, 17.07.2000, p. 1).
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 335 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 a (new)
(38a) The rights of persons with disabilities and of the elderly to participate in and be integrated into the social and cultural life of the Union is inextricably linked to the provision of accessible audiovisual media services. It is therefore important to ensure that accessibility is properly addressed in Directive 2010/13/EU, in line with the general principles of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The horizontal Commission proposal for a European Accessibility Act36a aims to enshrine these principles in Union law by removing barriers to access created by divergent legislation. While this is a welcome development and is considered appropriate in respect of the consumer equipment necessary to access audiovisual media content, the unique nature and cultural specificity of audiovisual media content itself is such that the regulation of existing and future access services that enable access to such content should remain in Directive 2010/13/EU, which is sector-specific. __________________ 36a COM(2015)615 final.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 336 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38 b (new)
(38b) The means to achieve accessibility should include, but not be limited to, access services such as sign language interpretation, subtitling for the deaf and hard of hearing, spoken subtitles, audio- description, and easily understandable menu navigation. Audiovisual media service providers should be transparent and proactive in improving such access services for persons with disabilities and for the elderly.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 379 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) 'programme' means a set of moving images with or without sound constituting an individual item within a schedule or a catalogue established by a media service provider, including feature- length films, videos of short duration, sports events, situation comedies, documentaries, children's programmes and original drama; that target a significant audience as mass media;
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 389 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point d a (new)
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
(da) The following point is inserted: (bb) 'editorial decision' means a decision taken on a day-to-day basis for the purpose of exercising editorial responsibility;
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 394 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point e
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point d a
(da) 'video-sharing platform provider' means the natural or legal person, without editorial responsibility, who provides a video-sharing platform service;;
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 395 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point e a (new)
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ea) The following point is inserted: (ga) 'access service' means, but is not limited to, an add-on feature of an audiovisual media service that improves the accessibility of a programme for people with functional limitations, including persons with disabilities. Access services include, but are not limited to: (i) subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing: synchronized visual text alternative for both speech and non- speech audio information needed to understand the media content; (ii) audio description: additional audible narrative, interleaved with the dialogue, which describes the significant aspects of the visual content of the programme that cannot be understood from the main soundtrack alone; (iii) spoken subtitles or audio subtitles: read aloud of subtitles in the national language when the audio speech is in a different language; (iv) sign language interpretation: simultaneous translation of both speech and non-speech audio information needed to understand the programme, provided in the national sign language.´
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 432 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) if a media service provider has its head office in one Member State but editorial decisions on the audiovisual media service are taken in another Member State, it shall be deemed to be established in the Member State where the majority of the workforce involved in the pursuit of the audiovisual media service activity operates;;deleted
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 445 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 5 a
5a. Member States shall communicate to the Commissiomaintain a list of the audiovisual media service providers under their jurisdiction and the criteria set out in paragraphs 2 to 5 on which their jurisdiction is based. They shall subsequently inform the Commission without undue delay of any changes to that list. The Commission shall ensure that Member States shall ensure that national regulatory authorities share such lists with the Commission and with other competent independent regulatory authorities have acc, via a central database, or by other appropriate means. Member States shall update such lists, without undue delay, whenever changess to this informatione audiovisual media service providers under their jurisdiction occur.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 580 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 6 a
(9) the following Article 6a is inserted: ‘Article 6a 1. Member States shall ensure that audiovisual media service providers provide sufficient information to viewers about content which may impair the physical, mental or moral development of minors. For this purpose, Member States may use a system of descriptors indicating the nature of the content of an audiovisual media service. 2. Article, Member States shall encourage co-regulation. 3. encourage media service providers to exchange best practices on co-regulatory systems across the Union. Where appropriate, the Commission shall facilitate the development of Union codes of conduct.;’deleted For the implementation of this The Commission and ERGA shall
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 600 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 7
(10) Article 7 is deleted;
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 615 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 7 a (new)
(10a) The following article is inserted: 'Article 7a 1. Member States shall take steps to develop codes of conduct applicable to media service providers under their jurisdiction intended to ensure that their services are made progressively more accessible to persons with visual and/or hearing disabilities. 2. Such codes of conduct may be a self- or co-regulatory measure. The Commission and ERGA shall facilitate the exchange of best practice between audiovisual media service providers. 3. Such codes of conduct shall include a requirement that media service providers report on an annual basis to Member States about the steps taken and progress made in respect of progressively making their services more accessible to persons with visual and/or hearing disabilities. Member States shall ensure that this information is made publically available. 4. Such codes of conduct shall encourage audiovisual media service providers to develop, and make publicly available, accessibility action plans made in respect of progressively making their services more accessible to persons with visual and/or hearing disabilities. Such action plans shall be communicated to national regulatory authorities.';
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 636 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point a
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States and the Commission shall encourage the development of self- and co- regulatory codes of conduct regarding inappropriate audiovisual commercial communications, accompanying or included in programmes with a reasonable expectation of a significant children's audience, of foods and beverages containing nutrients and substances with a nutritional or physiological effect, excessive intakes of which in the overall diet are not recommended, in particular fat, trans-fatty acids, salt or sodium and sugars.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 648 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point a
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
The Commission and ERGA shall encourage the exchange of best practices on self- and co-regulatory systems across the Union. Where appropriate and in accordance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, the Commission shall consider facilitateing the development of Union codes of conduct.;
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 658 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point b
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 9 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission and ERGA shall encourage the exchange of best practices on self- and co-regulatory systems across the Union. If considered appropriateWhere appropriate and in accordance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, the Commission shall consider facilitateing the development of Union codes of conduct.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 683 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. Product placement shall be admissible in all audiovisual media services, except in news and current affairs programmes, consumer affairs programmes, religious programmes and children's programmes, with a significant children's audience. hich should be understood as programmes produced for and aimed at children.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 707 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 12 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall ensure that audiovisual media service providers provide sufficient information to viewers about content which may impair the physical, mental or moral development of minors. For this purpose, Member States may use a system of descriptors indicating the nature of the content of an audiovisual media service. For the implementation of paragraph 1, Member States shall encourage co-regulation. The Commission and ERGA shall encourage media service providers to exchange best practices on co-regulatory systems across the Union. Where this results in the recognition of common approaches, the Commission shall consider facilitating the development of Union codes of conduct, in accordance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. Member States shall take appropriate measures to ensure that programmes provided by audiovisual media service providers under their jurisdiction, which may impair the physical, mental or moral development of minors are only made available in such a way as to ensure that minors will not normally hear or see them. Such measures may include selecting the time of the broadcast, age verification tools or other technical measures. They shall be proportionate to the potential harm of the programme.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 736 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Member States may require providers of on-demand audiovisual media services established under their jurisdiction to contribute financially to the production of European works, including via direct investment in content and contributions to national funds. Member States may require providers of on-demand audiovisual media services, targeting audiences in their territories, but established in other Member States to make such financial contributions. In this case, the financial contribution shall be based only on the revenues earned in the targeted Member States. If the Member State where the provider is established imposes a financial contribution, it shall take into account any financial contributions imposed by targeted Member States. Any financial contribution shall comply with Union law, in particular with State aid rule within their territory, including via direct investment in content or contributions to national funds.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 811 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. The daily proportion of television advertising spots and teleshopping spots within the period between 7:00 and 23:00a given clock hour shall not exceed 20 %.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 821 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) self-promotional and cross- promotional announcements made by the broadcaster in connection with its own programmes, audiovisual services and ancillary products directly derived from those programmes or with programmes from other entities belonging to the same media group;
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 829 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
‘(ca) neutral frames used to distinguish between editorial content and commercial communications, and between commercial communications.’
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 842 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Without prejudice to Articles 14 and 15 of Directive 2000/31/EC, Member States shall ensure that video-sharing platform providers take appropriate measuresset out in a code of conduct the measures they will take to:
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 871 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
What constitutes an appropriate measure for the purposes of paragraph 1 shall be determined in light of the nature of the content in question, the harm it may cause, the characteristics of the category of persons to be protected as well as the rights and legitimate interests at stake, including those of the video-sharing platform providers and the users having created and/or uploaded the content as well as the public interest.deleted
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 881 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Those measuresMeasures outlined in such a code of conduct shall consist of, as appropriate:
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 894 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) establishing and operating systems through which providers of video-sharing platforms explain to users of video- sharing platforms what effect has been given to the reporting and flagging referred to in point (b);
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 904 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point f
(f) establishing and operating systems through which providers of video-sharing platforms explain to users of video- sharing platforms what effect has been given to the reporting and flaggingtransparent, easy to use and effective procedures for the handling and resolution of disputes between the video- sharing platform provider and its users in relation to the implementation of the measures referred to in points (b) to (e) and the extent to which those measures conform with the code of conduct.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 907 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. What constitutes an appropriate measure for the purposes of paragraph 1 shall be determined in light of the nature of the content in question, the harm it may cause, the characteristics of the category of persons to be protected as well as the rights and legitimate interests at stake, including those of the video- sharing platform providers and the users having created and/or uploaded the content as well as the public interest.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 914 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Member States shall ensure that video-sharing platform providers conduct and publish regular audits of their performance in accordance with the code of conduct referred to in paragraph 1.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 922 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall establish the necessary mechanisms to assess the appropriateness of the measures referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3 taken by video- sharing platform providersreport on the delivery and effectiveness of the measures taken in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 2a. Member States shall entrust this task to the authorities designated in accordance with Article 30.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 933 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall ensure that complaint and redress mechanisms are available for the settlement of disputes between users and video-sharing platform providers relating to the application of the appropriate measures referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2.deleted
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 946 #

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 28 a – paragraph 8
8. Video-sharing platform providers or, where applicable, the organisations representing those providers in this respect shall submit to the Commission draft Union codes of conduct and amendments to existing Union codes of conduct. The Commission may request ERGA to give an opinion on the drafts, amendments or extensions of those codes of conduct. The Commission may give appropriate publicity to those codes of conductshall give appropriate publicity to those codes of conduct in order to promote the exchange of best practice.
2016/10/27
Committee: CULT
Amendment 51 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
(1) TIn some cases the tariffs applicable to low volume senders of cross-border parcels and other postal items, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises and individuals, are still relatively high. This has a direct negative impact on users seeking cross- border parcel delivery services, especially in the context of e- commerce.
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 63 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
(5) In most Member States there are several providers who provide domestic parcel delivery services, while only a few of those providers also provide cross- border parcel delivery services. In this context, it is essential to ensure, in order to safeguard and promote effective competition and to protect users, transparent and non-discriminatory access to the services and infrastructure necessary for the provision of cross- border parcel delivery services.deleted
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 72 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
(6) Currently, postal services are regulated by Directive 97/67/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council49 . This Directive establishes common rules governing the provision of postal services and the universal postal service in the Union. It focuses primarily, but not exclusively, on national universal services and does not address regulatory oversight of parcel delivery service providers, transparency of tariffs and terminal rates for certain cross- border parcel delivery services, the assessment of the affordability of tariffs for certain cross-border parcel delivery services and transparent and non-discriminatory access to certain cross-border parcel delivery services and/or infrastructure. This Regulation therefore complements, insofar as cross- border parcel delivery services are concerned, the rules set out in Directive 97/67/EC. _________________ 49 Directive 97/67/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 1997 on common rules for the development of the internal market of Community postal services and the improvement of quality of service (OJ L 1, 21.1.1998, p 14 - 25).
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 75 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
(8) Therefore, it is important to provide a clear definition of parcels and parcel delivery services and to specify which postal items are covered by thatose definitions. This concerns in particular postal items, other than items of correspondence, which because of their weight are commonly used for sending goods and merchandise. This Regulation should therefore cover, in line with consistent practice, postal items weighing up to 31.5 kg, as heavier items cannot be handled by a single average individual without mechanical aids. In line with current practice and Directive 97/67/EC, each step in the postal chain, i.e. clearance, sorting and delivery should be considered parcel delivery services. Transport alone that is not undertaken in conjunction with one of those steps should fall outside the scope of parcel delivery services as it can in this case be assumed that this activity is part of the transport sector.
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 87 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) When providing information to the national regulatory authority, it should be taken into account that parcel delivery service providers may have already provided certain information to the same national regulatory authority. Parcel delivery services are important for small and medium-sized enterprises and individuals and they should be able to compare easily between different providers. Therefore, the services for which tariffs should be provided by universal service providers should be clearly defined. Those tariffs should be published by the Commission on a dedicated webpage and should, together with the confidential regular provision of the underlying terminal rates, constitute the basis for the national regulatory authorities to assess the affordability of tariffs for cross-border parcel delivery services. Parcel delivery service providers other than universal service providers may voluntarily provide, in a comparable form, their national regulatory authority with the tariffs for the same items provided that such items are delivered at the home or the premises of the addressee.
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 103 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) Universal service providers providing parcel delivery services may conclude multilateral and bilateral agreements on terminal rates and may set up other programmes to facilitate the interconnectivity of their delivery networks. For reasons of non- discrimination, competing parcel delivery service providers shall be granted equal access to the terminal rates applicable between parties under multilateral agreements. It may be justified that terminal rates payable by third-party parcel delivery service providers, in some cases, exceed those payable by universal service providers that are parties to such agreements. This may be the case where the parties to a multilateral agreement on terminal rates are able to demonstrate that the cost of setting up, operating and administering the agreement, the extra cost incurred by accepting and handling items from non-designated parcel delivery service providers and other such costs are not covered by the terminal rates payable by the third-party service provider in the originating Member State.
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 105 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
(19) In practice and for operational reasons, the point at which access should be provided is the inward office of exchange, which is an office or a facility determined by universal service providers in the destination Member State for handing over postal items other than items of correspondence.deleted
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 122 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the transparency of tariffs and terminal rates for certain cross-border parcel delivery services and the assessment of the affordability of certain cross-border tariffs;
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 123 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) transparent and non- discriminatory access to certain cross- border parcel delivery services and/or infrastructure.deleted
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 142 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) "parcel delivery services" means services involving the clearance, sorting, transport orand distribution of postal items other than items of correspondence; transport alone shall not be considered a parcel delivery service; delivery of such items exceeding 31,5 kg shall not be considered a parcel delivery service;
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 145 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) "terminal rates" means payments from the originating universal service provider to the destination universal service provider for the costs of cross- border parcel delivery services in the destination Member State.deleted
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 173 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. By 31 Marchy of each calendar year, all parcel delivery service providers shall submit the following information to the national regulatory authority of the Member State in which they are established:
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 183 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) the number of persons working foremployed by the provider and involved in the provision of parcel delivery services in the Member State in which the provider is established in the previous calendar year
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 205 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6
6. A parcel delivery service provider which employngages fewer than 50 persons (whatever their employment or self- employment status) shall not be subject to the obligations under paragraph 1 and 2, unless that provider is established in more than one Member State.
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 207 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Where information is considered confidential by a national regulatory authority, in accordance with Community and national business confidentiality rules, the Commission and the national regulatory authorities concerned shall preserve such confidentiality.
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 208 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – title
Transparency of tariffs and terminal rates
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 216 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. Universal service providers providing parcel delivery services shall provide the national regulatory authority with the terminal rates applicable on 1 January of each calendar year to postal items originating from other Member States. That information shall be provided by 31 January of each calendar year at the latest.deleted
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 223 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. The national regulatory authorities shall submit the terminal rates obtained in accordance with paragraph 3 to the Commission and the national regulatory authorities of the originating Member States by 28 of February of each calendar year at the latest.deleted
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 235 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The national regulatory authority shallmay assess the affordability for users of cross- border tariffs forming part of the universal service included in the public lists of tariffs obtained in accordance with Article 4(1) within 3 months of receipt of that information. In that assessment, in particular the following elements shall be taken into account: in accordance with article 12 of Directive 97/67/EC.
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 242 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the domestic tariffs of the comparable parcel delivery services in the originating Member State and in the destination Member State;deleted
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 247 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the terminal rates obtained in accordance with Article 4(3);deleted
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 253 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) any application of a uniform tariff to two or more Member States.deleted
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 267 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Where information is considered confidential by a national regulatory authority, in accordance with Community and national business confidentiality rules, the Commission and the national regulatory authorities concerned shall preserve such confidentiality.
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 271 #

2016/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6
Transparent and non-discriminatory 1. Whenever universal service providers providing parcel delivery services conclude multilateral agreements on terminal rates they shall meet all reasonable requests for access to all network elements and associated facilities as well as relevant services and information systems, necessary for the provision of cross-border parcel delivery services. 2. The point at which access should be provided shall be the inward office of exchange in the destination Member State 3. Universal service providers referred to in paragraph 1 shall publish a reference offer. The reference offer shall contain all the relevant associated terms and conditions, including prices. 4. The reference offer shall include all components necessary for access as referred to in paragraph 1, including any conditions limiting access to and/or use of services where such conditions are allowed by Member States in conformity with Union law. 5. Before the reference offer is published, it shall be approved by the national regulatory authority. The national regulatory authority may, where necessary, impose changes to the reference offer to give effect to obligations set out in this Regulation. 6. Universal service providers referred to in paragraph 1 shall upon request, and based on a reference offer, make an individual offer available to a parcel delivery service provider requesting access within the meaning of that paragraph at the latest one month after the receipt of the request. Universal service providers receiving an access request and providers requesting access shall negotiate in good faith. 7. When no agreement is reached on the basis of the individual offer referred to in paragraph 6, the parcel delivery service provider requesting access may submit the individual offer made by the universal service provider to the national regulatory authority. If necessary, the national regulatory authority shall change the individual offer to give effect to the obligations laid down in this Article. 8. The access shall be operationally ensured within a reasonable period of time, not exceeding three months from the conclusion of the contract.Article 6 deleted cross-border access
2017/03/30
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 132 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
(9) The European Union Agency for Asylum should provide adequate support in the implementation of this Regulation, in particular by establishing the reference key for the distribution of asylum seekers under the voluntary corrective allocation mechanism, and by adapting the figures underlying the reference key annually, as well as the reference key based on Eurostat data. The European Union Agency for Asylum should also develop information material, in close cooperation with the relevant authorities of the Member States.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 149 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
(17) In order to prevent that applicants with inadmissible claims or who are likely not to be in need of international protection, or who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member State where an application is first lodged verifies the admissibility of the claim in relation to the first country of asylum and safe third country, examines in accelerated procedures applications made by applicants coming from a safe country of origin designated on the EU list, as well as applicants presenting security concerns.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 152 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
(19) The definition of a family member in this Regulation should include the sibling or siblings of the applicant. Reuniting siblings is of particular importance for improving the chances of integration of applicants and hence reducing secondary movements. The scope of the definition of family member should also reflect the reality of current migratory trends, according to which applicants often arrive to the territory of the Member States after a prolonged period of time in transit. The definition should therefore include families formed outside the country of origin, but before their arrival on the territory of the Member State. This limited and targeted enlargement of the scope of the definition is expected to reduce the incentive for some secondary movements of asylum seekers within the EU.deleted
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 163 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
(20) In order to ensure full respect for the principle of family unity and for the best interests of the child, the existence of a relationship of dependency between an applicant and his or her child, sibling or parent on account of the applicant’s pregnancy or maternity, state of health or old age, should become a binding responsibility criterion. When the applicant is an unaccompanied minor, the presence of a family member or relative on the territory of another Member State who can take care of him or her should also become a binding responsibility criterion. In order to discourage secondary movements of unaccompanied minors, which are not in their best interests, and in the absence of a family member or a relative, the Member State responsible should be that where the unaccompanied minor first has lodged his or her application for international protection, unless it is demonstrated that this would not be in the best interests of the child. Before transferring an unaccompanied minor to another Member State, the transferring Member State should make sure that that Member State will take all necessary and appropriate measures to ensure the adequate protection of the child, and in particular the prompt appointment of a representative or representatives tasked with safeguarding respect for all the rights to which they are entitled. Any decision to transfer an unaccompanied minor should be preceded by an assessment of his/her best interests by staff with the necessary qualifications and expertise.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 164 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
(21) Assuming responsibility by a Member State for examining an application lodged with it in cases when such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation may undermine the effectiveness and sustainability of the system and should be exceptional. Therefore, a Member State should only be able to derogate from the responsibility criteria only on humanitarian grounds, in particular for family reasons, before a Member State responsible has been determined and examine an application for international protection lodged with it or with another Member State, even if such examination is not its responsibility under the binding criteria laid down in this Regulation. A Member State may, at its own discretion, derogate from the responsibility criteria if they wish to accept a request from an applicant after another Member State has been determined responsible for the applicant but before the application has been examined. This requires the agreement of both the Member State responsible for the application and the Member State that would assume the responsibility for the application. This transfer of responsibility can happen once only, at the request of an applicant and the agreement of both Member States involved. In cases where the applicant's request is unsuccessful, responsibility remains with the Member State originally determined responsible and the applicant is not able to make another request to any other Member State to take responsibility for their application.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 216 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
(31) In accordance with Article 80 of the Treaty, Union acts should, whenever necessary, contain appropriate measures to give effect to the principle of solidarity. A voluntary corrective allocation mechanism should be established in order to ensure a fair sharing of responsibility between Member States and a swift access of applicants to procedures for granting international protection in situations when a Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applications for international protection for which it is responsible under this Regulation.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 238 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
(33) When the allocation mechanism applies, the applicants who lodged their applications in the benefitting Member State should be allocated to Member States which are below their sharepledged number of applications on the basis of, based on the guidelines established by the reference key as applied to those Member States. Appropriate rules should be provided for in cases where an applicant may for serious reasons be considered a danger to national security or public order, especially rules as regards the exchange of information between competent asylum authorities of Member States. After the transfer, the Member State of allocation should determine the Member State responsible, and should become responsible for examining the application, unless the overriding responsible criteria, related in particular to the presence of family members, determine that a different Member State should be responsible.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 248 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
(35) A Member State of allocation may decide not to accept the allocated applicants during a twelve months-period, in which case it should enter this information in the automated system and notify the other Member States, the Commission and the European Union Agency for Asylum. Thereafter the applicants that would have been allocated to that Member State should be allocated to the other Member States instead. The Member State which temporarily does not take part in the corrective allocation should make a solidarity contribution of EUR 250,000 per applicant not accepted to the Member State that was determined as responsible for examining those applications. The Commission should lay down the practical modalities for the implementation of the solidarity contribution mechanism in an implementing act. The European Union Agency for Asylum will monitor and report to the Commission on a yearly basis on the application of the financial solidarity mechanism.deleted
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 299 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – introductory part
(g) ‘family members’ means, insofar as the family already existed before the applicant arrived on the territory of the Member States in the country of origin, the following members of the applicant’s family who are present on the territory of the Member States:
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 320 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – indent 5
- the sibling or siblings of the applicant;deleted
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 484 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. The personal interview shall be conducted in a language that the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand and in which he or she is able to communicate. Interviews with minors shall be conducted in a child-friendly manner. Where necessary, Member States shall have recourse to an interpreter who is able to ensure appropriate communication between the applicant and the person conducting the personal interview.
2017/04/25
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 557 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. In the absence of a family member or a relative as referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3, the Member State responsible shall be that where the unaccompanied minor first has lodged his or her application for international protection, unless it is demonstrated that this is not in the best interests of the unaccompanied minor.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 609 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
By way of derogation from Article 3(1) and only as long as no Member State has been determined as responsible , each Member State may decide to examine an application for international protection lodged with it by a third-country national or a stateless person based on family grounds in relation to wider family not covered by Article 2(g) , even if such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation. By way of Derogation from Article 3(1) a Member State may, with the agreement of the Member States already determined responsible, examine the application for international protection lodged by a third- country national or stateless person based on a formal request, in writing, from the applicant.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 618 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. It is at the discretion of the Member State to which the applicant was allocated and the Member State to which the applicant wishes to be allocated, to consider a request from an applicant and to apply paragraph 1.
2017/04/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 784 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1
1. The voluntary allocation mechanism referred to in this Chapter shall be applied for the benefit of a Member State, where that Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applications for international protection for which it is the Member State responsible under this Regulation.
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 802 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3
3. The reference number of a Member State shall beMember States participating in the voluntary allocation mechanism shall pledge a number of places for allocation with reference to, but not determined by, the reference number that is determined by applying the key referred to in Article 35 to the total number of applications as well as the total number of resettled persons that have been entered by the respective Member States responsible in the automated system during the preceding 12 months.
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 819 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1
1. For the purpose of the corrective mechanism, thea non-binding reference number for each Member State shall be determined by a key.
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 844 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The reference number for a Member State shall take into account the number of persons already granted international protection in the Member State and the resources and expertise pledged and delivered by the Member State.
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 877 #

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 37
1. A Member State may, at the end of the three-month period after the entry into force of this Regulation and at the end of each twelve-month period thereafter, enter in the automated system that it will temporarily not take part in the corrective allocation mechanism set out in Chapter VII of this Regulation as a Member State of allocation and notify this to the Member States, the Commission and the European Union Agency for Asylum. 2. The automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall in that case apply the reference key during this twelve-month period to those Member States with a number of applications for which they are the Member States responsible below their share pursuant to Article 35(1), with the exception of the Member State which entered the information, as well as the benefitting Member State. The automated system referred to in Article 44(1) shall count each application which would have otherwise been allocated to the Member State which entered the information pursuant to Article 36(4) for the share of that Member State. 3. At the end of the twelve-month period referred to in paragraph 2, the automated system shall communicate to the Member State not taking part in the corrective allocation mechanism the number of applicants for whom it would have otherwise been the Member State of allocation. That Member State shall thereafter make a solidarity contribution of EUR 250,000 per each applicant who would have otherwise been allocated to that Member State during the respective twelve-month period. The solidarity contribution shall be paid to the Member State determined as responsible for examining the respective applications. 4. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt a decision in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56, lay down the modalities for the implementation of paragraph 3. 5. The European Union Agency for Asylum shall monitor and report to the Commission on a yearly basis on the application of the financial solidarity mechanism.Article 37 deleted Financial solidarity
2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 422 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) verify the asylum and reception systems, capabilities, infrastructure, equipment, staff available, including for translation and interpretation in Member States, financial resources and the capacity of Member States' asylum authorities, including theand that there are sufficient financial and human resources for the Member States´ judicial systems, to handle and manage asylum cases efficiently and correctly.
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 496 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) facilitate the examination of applications for international protection that are under examination by the competent national authorities;deleted
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 500 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point g
(g) assist with the relocation or transfer of beneficiaries of international protection within the Union;deleted
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 534 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point h
(h) regarding assistance with applications for international protection, including as regardwhich excludes the examination of such applications, specific information on the tasks that the asylum support teams or the experts from the asylum intervention pool may perform as well as reference to applicable national and Union law;
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 554 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the registration of applications for international protection and, where requested by Member States, the examination of such applications;
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 563 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3
3. Where in the event of 3. disproportionate pressure on the asylum or reception systems a Member State does not request the Agency for operational and technical assistance or does not accept an offer by the Agency for such assistance or does not take sufficient action to address that pressure, or where it does not comply with the Commission's recommendations referred to in Article 15(3), thereby rendering the asylum or reception systems ineffective to the extent of jeopardising the functioning of the CEAS, the Commissionuncil may adopt a decision by means of an implementing act, identifying one or more of the measures set out in Article 16(3) to be taken by the Agency to support the Member State concerned. That implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 64.
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 569 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 4
4. For the purposes of paragraph 3, the Executive Director shall, within two working days from the date of adoption of the Commissionuncil decision, determine the actions needed to be taken for the practical execution of the measures identified in the Commission decision. In parallel, the Executive Director and the Member State concerned shall agree on the operational plan.
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 587 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) when handling applications for international protection from children or vulnerable persons, upon request of Member States, as referred to in Article 13(2) and Article 16(3)(b) and (c);
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 592 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) where necessary to facilitate the examination of applications for international protection that are under examination by the competent national authorities as referred to in Article 16(3)(b);deleted
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 594 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) where necessary to assist with the relocation or transfer of beneficiaries of international protection within the Union as referred to in Article 16(3)(g);deleted
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 614 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 5
5. The Agency shall promote and assist in the swift return of irregular migrants, advocate and participate in the implementation of international agreements concluded by the Union with third countries, within the framework of the external relations policy of the Union and using necessary incentives for compliance, and regarding matters covered by this Regulation.
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 681 #

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 66 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
No later than three years from the day of entry into force of this Regulation, and every five years thereafter, the Commission shall commission an evaluation to assess, in particular, the Agency's performance in relation to its objectives, mandate and tasks. That evaluation shall cover the Agency's impact on practical cooperation on asylum-related matters and on the CEAS. The evaluation shall take due regard of progress made, within its mandate, including assessing whether additional measures are necessary to ensure effective solidarity and sharing of responsibilities with Member States subject to particular pressure.
2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 12 #

2016/0070(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Citation 1
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 53(1), 56 and 62 thereof,
2017/03/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 17 #

2016/0070(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Citation 3
After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments, and the subsequent 11 reasoned opinions by the national parliaments,
2017/03/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 26 #

2016/0070(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
(2) The freedom to provide services includes the right of undertakings to provide services in another Member State, to which they may and the right to post their own workers temporarily in order to provide those services there. The Treaty also provides that restrictions on the freedom to provide services are prohibited.
2017/03/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 46 #

2016/0070(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) Article 3 and 8 of Rome I Regulation specifies that an individual employment contract shall be governed by the law chosen by that of the parties concerned. Such a choice may not deprive the employee of the protection of the mandatory rules of the law of the country but for the choice of the parties, would have applied.
2017/03/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 48 #

2016/0070(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6 a (new)
(6 a) The freedom of employers and workers to choose the applicable law should be one of the cornerstones of both the free movement of workers and the freedom to provide services.
2017/03/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 51 #

2016/0070(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
(7) The Rome I Regulation further provides that the country where the work is habitually carried out shall not be deemed to have changed if he is temporarily employed in another country.
2017/03/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 65 #

2016/0070(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
(8) In view of the long duration of certain posting assignments, it is necessary to provide that, in case of posting lasting for periods higher than 24 months, the host Member State is deemed to be the country in which the work is carried out, unless a derogation has been obtained by the employer from the national social security administration in accordance with Regulation 883/2004/EC. In accordance with the principle of Rome I Regulation, the law of the host Member Sates therefore applies to the employment contract of such posted workers if no other choice of law was made by the parties. In case a different choice was made, it cannot, however, have the result of depriving the employee of the protection afforded to him by provisions that cannot be derogated from by agreement under the law of the host Member State. This should apply from the start of the posting assignment whenever it is envisaged for more than 24 months and from the first day subsequent to the 24 months when it effectively exceeds this duration. This rule does not affect the right of undertakings posting workers to the territory of another Member State to invoke the freedom to provide services in circumstances also where the posting exceeds 24 months. The purpose is merely to create legal certainty in the application of the Rome I Regulation to a specific situation, without amending that Regulation in any way. The employee will in particular enjoy the protection and benefits pursuant to the Rome I Regulation.
2017/03/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 91 #

2016/0070(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
(11) In a competitive internal market, service providers compete not only on the basis of a labour costs but also on factors such as productivity and efficiency, or the quality and innovation of their goods and services and according to the highly variable costs of providing services in another member state.
2017/03/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 123 #

2016/0070(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
(14) LMember States have the freedom to establish on their territory appropriate measures applicable to service providers including service providers from another Member State in order to ensure compliance with the applicable rules concerning posting in the case of subcontracting chains. In the case of the construction sector Member States are already obliged, by the Directive 2014/67/EU, to introduce appropriate liability measures in order to ensure fair competition and workers rights. Therefore, laws, regulations, administrative provisions or collective agreements universally applicable in Member States may ensure that subcontracting does not confer on undertakings the possibility to avoid rules guaranteeing certain terms and conditions of employment covering remuneration. Where such rules on remuneration exist at national level, the Member State may apply them in a non-discriminatory manner to undertakings posting workers to its territory provided that they do not disproportionately restrict the cross-border provision of services.
2017/03/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 160 #

2016/0070(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 96/71/EC
Article 2a – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Where an employer has obtained from its national social security administration a derogation to the 24 months within the meaning of Article 16 of Regulation 883/2004/EC, the duration mentioned in paragraph 1 shall be that of the derogation.
2017/03/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 168 #

2016/0070(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
2. For the purpose of paragraph 1, in case of replacement of posted workers performundertaking the same taskactivities at the same place of work, the cumulative duration of the posting periods of the workers concerned shall be taken into account, with regard to workers that are posted for an effective duration of at least six months.
2017/03/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 190 #

2016/0070(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a
Directive 96/71/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
ForIn the purposecontext of this Directive, remuneration means all the elements of remuneration rendered mandatory by national law, regulation or administand social security contributions shall be defined in accordance with the national law and/or practivce provision, collective agreements or arbitration awards which have been declared universally applicable and/or, in the absence of a system for declaring collective agreements or arbitration awards to be of universal application, other collective agreements or arbitration awards within the meaning of paragraph 8 second subparagraph, in the Member State to whose territory the worker is postedof the Member State on whose territory the worker is posted unless a derogation has been obtained by the employer from the national social security administration in accordance with Regulation 883/2004/EC.
2017/03/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 207 #

2016/0070(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Directive 96/71/EC
Article 3 – paragraph 1a
1a. If undertakings established in the territory of a Member State are obliged by law, regulation, administrative provision or collective agreement, to sub-contract in the context of their contractual obligations only to undertakings that guarantee certain terms and conditions of employment covering remuneration,, the Member State may, on a non– discriminatory and proportionate basis, provide that such undertakings shall be under the same obligation regarding subcontracts with undertakings referred to in Article 1 (1) posting workers to its territory.deleted
2017/03/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 578 #

2016/0014(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10a Compliance with Recommendations of the Forum for Enforcement 1. Member States shall implement recommendations made by the Forum for Enforcement in accordance with Article 10 where these are directed to one or more Member States. 2. Where a Member State chooses to not apply or deviate from a recommendation issued by the Forum for Enforcement, the Member State shall inform the Commission of its reasons for doing so. The Commission shall assess the reasons given and where it does not find the measures taken justified may, in consultation with the Member State, require implementation of the recommendation or the adoption of alternative measures. 3. In cases where the repeated failure to implement recommendations or alternative measures relating to point (c) of Article 10(2) gives rise to a non- compliance with this Regulation, the Commission shall be empowered to suspend or withdraw the authority for the concerned approval authority to accept applications for EU type approval certificates under Article 21. 4. Within two months after having suspended or withdrawn such authority under paragraph 3, the Commission shall submit a report on its findings regarding the non-compliance to the Member States. Where necessary to ensure the safety of vehicles, systems, components or separate technical units already placed on the market, the Commission shall instruct the concerned approval authorities to suspend or withdraw within a reasonable period of time, any certificates which were unduly issued.
2016/10/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 769 #

2016/0014(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. Type-approvals for vehicles, systems, components and separate technical units shall be issued for a limited period of 5 years without the possibility of prolongation shall be issued for a limited period not exceeding 15 years, except for category M1 vehicles, where the limited period shall not exceed 8 years. The expiry date shall be indicated in the EU type-approval certificate. AfterBefore the expiry of the type- approval certificate, it may be renewed upon application by the manufacturer and only where the approval authority has verified that the type of vehicle, system, component and separate technical unit complies with all the requirements of the relevant regulatory acts for new vehicles, systems, components and separate technical units of that typ of that approved type. Where the approved type has not changed, such verification shall not require the repetition of any tests carried out under Article 28. In order to allow the approval authority to fulfil its tasks, the manufacturer shall submit his application at the earliest 12 months and at the latest 6 months before the expiry date of the EU type-approval certificate.
2016/10/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 865 #

2016/0014(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Commission, in consultation with a broad range of stakeholders looking at both the important requirements of improving road safety and environmental protection and the interests of consumers in preserving competition in the aftermarket, shall draw up a report establishing the list of such parts or equipment which these measures should apply to.
2016/10/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 905 #

2016/0014(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Until the Commission has adopted the relevant standard through the work of the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) or comparable standardisation bodies, the vehicle OBD and vehicle repair and maintenance information shall be presented in an easily accessible manner in the form of machine readable and electronically processable datasets that can be processed by independent operators with reasonable effort.
2016/10/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1135 #

2016/0014(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex XVIII – point 6 a (new)
6a. Provisions for electronic system security and additional approved vehicle accessories Any vehicle with an emission control computer, or a vehicle which is electrically propelled, shall include features to deter modification, except as authorised by the manufacturer. The manufacturer shall authorise modifications if these modifications are performed by independent operators who have been approved and authorised using the scheme for access to secure repair and maintenance information for the diagnosis, servicing, inspection, roadworthiness, retrofitting, fitting of additional approved vehicle accessories (type-approved software components or technical units), performance improvements in accordance with approval legislation or repair of the vehicle without any subsequent overwriting or modifying by the vehicle manufacturer. Any reprogrammable computer codes or operating parameters shall be resistant to tampering and afford a level of protection at least as good as the provisions in ISO 15031-7 (March 15, 2001). Any removable calibration memory chips shall be potted, encased in a sealed container or protected by electronic algorithms and shall not be changeable without the use of specialized tools and procedures. Only features directly associated with emissions calibration or prevention of vehicle theft may be so protected.
2016/10/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1140 #

2016/0014(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex XVIII – point 7 – point 7.4 a (new)
7.4a. Manufacturers shall make available via a web service or as a download an electronic data set containing all VIN numbers and the correlated individual specification and configuration features of the corresponding vehicle.
2016/10/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 17 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas the single market has been, and remains, the cornerstone of EU integration and the engine of growth and jobs by facilitating trade across the EU and thus contributing to growth and prosperity;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 24 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas the single market is underperformingcould achieve more in almost all areas – in stimulating a digital-driven market, encouraging start- ups, integrating global supply chains, dealing with new business models and ensuring market facilitation, and standardisation and the licensing of professionals;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 37 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas a genuinely strategic approach is called for, and whereas the response to the challenges faced should be political as much as technical in nature, particularly in the case of unjustified non-tariff barriers within the single market;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 40 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E
E. whereas the EU should pursue a genuine single market and treat it as a common asset of all citizens, economic operators and Member States, and whereas the single market will only reach its full potential if it has the full support of all Member States in collaboration with each other;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 92 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that it is necessary to adopt a set of common definitions or indicators of innovative start- ups and SMEs, or objective criteria, that can be used as a point of reference for the adoption of related measures; calls on the Commission to propose such a definition;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 104 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Considers that further development of the single market requires the elimination of barriers to trade between Member States; supports the European Declaration of Competitiveness from February 2016, in particular the commitment to regulatory simplification and burden reduction, to do more to reduce the overall burden of EU regulation especially on SMEs and microenterprises, and to establish where possible burden reduction targets in specific sectors; recommends that work on establishing such burden reduction targets should commence immediately;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 106 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the Commission’s determination to address the difficulties faced by SMEs as a result of the complexity of differing national VAT regulations; extends its full support to the Commission in respect of the VAT reform; calls on the Commission to assess the feasibility of further coordination and, in particular, to assess the possibility of a single tax in the e-commerce sector;deleted
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 107 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the Commission’s determination to address the difficulties faced by SMEs as a result of the complexity of differing national VAT regulations; extendConsiders as a priority the development of a simplified, uniform and consistent online VAT system to reduce compliance costs for small and innovative companies operating across Europe; welcomes the introduction of the VAT Mini One-Stop Shop, which is a step towards ending the temporary EU VAT regime; nevertheless its full support to the Commission in respect of the VAT concerned that absence of the threshold puts certain SMEs in a difficult position to comply with the current regime; thereform;e calls on the Commission to assess the feasibility of further coordination and, in particular, to assess the possibility of a single tax in the e-commerce sector; urgently come forward with proposals to introduce this;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 117 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Welcomes the recent initiatives for more efficient and transparent public procurement, through better use of procurement data and greater voluntary assessment of procurement in certain large-scale infrastructure projects; calls on the Member States to cooperate with the Commission to implement these initiatives;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 127 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Draws attention to the difficulties faced by businesses, and in particular SMEs and start-ups, in securing funding; calls on the Commission, while continuing the valuable support provided to those companies through the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) and programmes such as Horizon 2020 and COSME, to explore ways of further facilitating access to them, especially for micro-enterprises, for instance by reducing calls for applications to six-month periods and further simplifying the relevant procedures; considers simplification to be the key enabler in SME and start-up access to funding;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 141 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Draws attention to the fact that each year thousands of SMEs across Europe go bankrupt while waiting for their invoices to be paid, including by the EU institutions and national public administrations; calls on the Commission and the Member States to step up their efforts to facilitate the application and enforcement of the Late Payment Directive; calls, furthermore, on the Member States to consider, in the event of unsatisfactory implementation of the Late Payment Directive, forms of adequate compensation for companies owed money by a public administration;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 145 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Welcomes the legislative initiative on business insolvency, including early restructuring and second chances, which will ensure that Member States provide a regulatory environment that is able to accommodate failure without discouraging entrepreneurs from trying new ideas; emphasises that failure and learning from failures is a key part of entrepreneurial innovation and therefore ultimately the success which drives economic growth;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 153 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Welcomes the Commission’s Single Digital Single Market Strategy, and in particular the announced Single Digital Gateway; calls on the Commission to explore all ways of making the best use of the Single Digital Gateway to help European start-ups to scale up across EuropeGateway, which should build on existing Points of Single Contact (PCSs) setup under the Services Directive and to connect PSCs to other similar single market networks; calls on the Commission to explore all ways of making the best use of the Single Digital Gateway to help European start-ups to scale up across Europe; urges the Commission to create a single entry point for businesses and consumers to all single market related information, assistance, problem solving and to national and EU-wide procedures needed to operate cross-border in the EU;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 162 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Emphasises that the collaborative (or sharing) economy is growing fast and changing the way that many services and assets are provided and consumed; underlines, furthermore, the strong link between these new business models and the performance of the single market; notes that the collaborative economy enables more flexible types of employment for many people otherwise unable to work; highlights the economic, societal and environmental benefits encouraged by the collaborative economy;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 179 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the Commission’s announced initiative on the European agenda for the collaborative economy, and its intention to look at that economybusiness established in that sphere in order to assess what needs to be done to accompany its growth and its major contribution to the economic systemy;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 185 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that, in the collaborative economy, the same rules should apply to the same services, with a viewCommission should look at the existing regulatory framework for service providers and the consumer acquis to ensuringe a level playing field and consumer safety while avoiding fragmentation that would hamper the development of new business models;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 197 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Draws attention to the important role of standards for innovation and progress in the single market; calls on the Commission to support and reinforce European standards, including by exploiting the opportunities offered by the ongoing negotiations for a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), the conclusion of which can help raise standards in the US and EU whilst increasing consumer choice and lowering prices;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 209 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Underlines the important role played by the standardisation system in the free circulation of products, and increasingly services; notes that the voluntary use of standards has contributed between 0.3 and 1% to GDP in Europe, and positively benefits labour productivity;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 210 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16b. Recalls that the vast majority of standards are developed in response to an industry-identified need, following a bottom-up approach to ensure market relevance of the standards; supports the commitment contained in the Single Market Strategy towards ensuring Europe remains at the forefront of standards development globally; encourages standardisation which is compatible with an international approach either through the development of global international standards or the recognition of equivalent international standards where appropriate; notes the intention to establish a framework and priorities for standardisation activities under a Joint Initiative for Standardisation; calls on the Commission to ensure that the Joint Initiative remains driven by such a bottom-up, industry-identified need and thus prioritises and delivers only those standards which respond to identified needs and demonstrate market relevance, and does not lead to unnecessary standards being pursued or inconsistent requirements compared to other related standards being established;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 211 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 c (new)
16c. Notes that the proposal for a Joint Initiative on European Standardisation will build on the Independent Review of the European Standardisation System, and supports its objective for the European standardisation community to develop actions that will improve the system as a whole, including recommendations regarding inclusiveness and support to the competitiveness of European business;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 212 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 d (new)
16d. Calls on the Commission in its engagement with European Standardisation Organisations (ESOs) to support ESOs and their national counter- parts in their efforts to improve the involvement of the SMEs, both in the standard-setting process itself and the take-up of standards once set; further encourages on the Commission to work closely with ESOs, National Standards Bodies and others to improve the transparency of the standards process, in implementation of commitments contained in the work programme for European standardisation for 2016 and the underling Regulation;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 213 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 e (new)
16e. Considers that the Joint Initiatives should focus on continued improvements to working practices, in particular by establishing processes to review composition of technical committees and measures to promote an openness and inclusiveness allowing a broad range of stakeholders to contribute to discussions in technical committees;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 214 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 f (new)
16f. Considers that a more transparent and accessible appeals mechanism would build trust and improve standards setting processes; believes that where a standard has been requested by the European Commission following the adoption of legislation by the European Union, the European Parliament relevant committee may be able to play a role in public scrutiny and debate as part of such a process, in advance of a decision for formal objection if appropriate; emphasises that when determining standardisation requests to be given to standardisation bodies, that principles of proportionality and a risk-based approach should be included;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 215 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 g (new)
16g. Believes that increasing public awareness of proposed standards in draft form prior to final approval may increase accountability and transparency and provide for a more robust process, in line with the existing best practices found amongst the European standardisation community;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 216 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 h (new)
16h. Invites the Commission to report to the Parliament by the end of 2016 on its implementation of the Joint Initiative on European standardisation, and the progress that has been achieved in cooperation with the European standardisation community on the recommendations contained in the 2016 annual Union work programme;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 220 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Urges the Commission to introduce and implement before 2019 an SPC manufacturing waiver to boost the competitiveness of the European Generics and Biosimilar Industry in a global environment, as well as to maintain and create additional jobs and growth in the EU, without undermining the market exclusivity granted under the SPC regime in protected markets;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 222 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Calls for measures to facilitate access to the patent system in Europe for all micro-enterprises and SMEs that wish to use the European patent with unitary effect in innovating their products and processeUnderlines the importance of measures contained within the unitary patent scheme for improving access to SMEs, for instance assistance with translation costs; believes that further measures could be introduced, such as reductions in renewal fees for SMEs;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 229 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Commission to present a proposal for the protection of geographical indications for non- agricultural products in the EU;deleted
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 247 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Points out that many measures have already been adopted but are not yet applied; points out, furthermore, that according to data provided by the Commission in mid-2015, around 1 090 infringement proceedings were pending in the area of the single market; calls on the Commission, therefore, to ensure that enforcement is prioritised at all levels by taking well-targeted enforcement actions, based on transparent and objective criteria, ensuring that the most economically significant cases of unjustified or disproportionate barriers are addressed;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 263 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. ERecognises that the Solvit network and Single Point of Contact have given great assistance to businesses and consumers but could be improved; emphasises that it is necessary to reinforce the Solvit network and to improve awareness of the network and its practical role in solving interpretation problems relating to the single market; considers that data on issues raised with the Solvit network should be taken into account when the Commission considers how to identify priorities for enforcement action;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 264 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Emphasises that it is necessary to reinforce the Solvit network and to improve awareness of the network, particularly by streamlining the existing EU mechanisms such as Solvit and EU Pilot to allow data sharing and a smooth handover between stages of complaint management, and to raise awareness of the network amongst citizens and SMEs, and its role in solving interpretation problems relating to the single market;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 269 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Emphasises that transparency of national rules is a vital tool in enabling cross-border trade within the single market and helps in identifying non-tariff barriers; encourages Member States to make their rules more easily available online and in more than one language, in the interests of increasing trade, which will be of benefit to all;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 271 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 b (new)
22b. Considers that useful data on repeated and unresolved cases can be extrapolated from the complaints made to Solivt, which can help the Commission better target their enforcement actions and, where necessary, infringement proceedings;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 278 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Takes note ofSupports the Commission proposal, as part of strengthening the single market for goods, to improve mutual recognition through action to increase awareness of the mutual recognition principle and through the revision of the Mutual Recognition Regulation;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 284 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
24. Reiterates its call for the rapid adoption ofBelieves that the Product Safety and Market Surveillance Package by the Council; underlines the importance of the indication of country of originhad many potential benefits but that a new approach is needed if no agreement is reached in the Council; supports the Commission’s commitment to strengthen market surveillance through closer cooperation between Member States’ enforcement authorities; underlines the importance of product traceability, which is crucial to protect consumers and to strengthen the fight against counterfeiting;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 297 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Stresses that regulatory differences between Member States regarding differing labelling requirements create unnecessary obstacles to the activities of suppliers of goods; calls on the Commission to consider introducing a mandatory scheme for the provision of key information for furniture, established at EU level; considers that such an initiative would be beneficial for consumers, industries and trade operators, ensuring transparency, adequate recognition of European products and harmonised rules for operators in the single markethave expanded significantly; new requirements create additional costs for businesses, lead to confusion among consumers and diverging national requirements fragment the single market; calls on the Commission to present a plan to reduce the number of EU and national labelling requirements and create a framework to assess which labels are essential and non- essential and pave the way to provide adequate information in different ways to consumers and professional users on products in a transparent manner;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 312 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Emphasises, in respect of the single market in services, that there is a clear need to improve the cross-border provision of services; urges the Member States to ensure proper and more effective application of the Services Directive, while avoiding the practice of gold-plating in order to deepen the single market for services and achieve better productivity and economy growth; welcomes the Commission proposal to improve notification under the Services Directive; agrees to extend thesupports a reformed notification procedure provided for in Directive 2015/1535 to all the sectors not covered by that directivethat is transparent and open to comment from all stakeholders, covering all sectors and subject to a robust proportionality methodology;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 325 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
27. Supports the Commission proposal to introduce a services passport to helpensure service providers demonstrate that they satisfy the requirements applicable to them in the Member State where they wish to provide their service on a temporary basis or through secondary establishment; considers that this initiative should be aimed at reducing administrative burden for service providers and simplifying the procedures applicable to cross-border service provisionfacilitate mutual recognition of regulatory requirements so businesses do not have to recomply with rules in the host Member State that has the same aim as requirements they already follow at home, as well as reducing administrative burden for service providers and simplifying the procedures applicable to cross-border service provision; believes that to improve the mutual recognition of professional qualifications, where systems are similar but not identical, processes should be established to bridge any differences including through training programmes and induction schemes in order to avoid a race to the bottom in terms of service provision standards; recognises that the Internal Market Information Service is working well in some Member States but needs substantial improvement in others;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 333 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Stresses the importance of consistent proportionality assessment of regulatory requirements and restrictions in services markets; notes the Commission’s proposed analytical framework for Member States to use when reviewing existing or new regulation of professions, and believes this can contribute to ensuring consistency across Member States through being mandatory in nature;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 354 #

2015/2354(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
28. Stresses that discrimination againstfferent terms and conditions for consumers and entrepreneurs on the basis of nationality or place of residence, in both online and offline environments, is not acceptableshould only occur within the single market if justified on the basis of objective reasons, such as compliance costs, copyright and non- viable business models;
2016/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 45 #

2015/2349(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. StressNotes that the current legal uncertainty as to the definition of ‘service providers’ in the transport sector prevents the establishment of fair competition, and regrets, that being so, the difficulties experienced bycould be unhelpful to many small businesses inseeking to accessing the market and offering new services;
2016/06/16
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 87 #

2015/2349(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. NotWelcomes that the development of collaborative business models permitsallows better use of resources through the optimisation of vehicle and infrastructure use, which while it contributes to meeting these objectives is not a sufficient solution in itself; notes that the growing exploitation of user-generated data could eventually result in the added value created in the transport chain ending in the hands of digital operators, which could have an adverse effect both on the fair distribution of profits and on participation in infrastructure investment, which takes place in the real world to capacity demands;
2016/06/16
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 97 #

2015/2349(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Warns of the danger that intermediation platforms, with their ‘winner takes all’ ethos, will give rise to monopolies and harm the diversity of the economic fabric, but also notes that these platforms have brought into play the idea of challenging the existing operators and have led Member States to review the structure of theelcomes that intermediary and online platforms have challenged existing operators, driving innovation and competition and encouraged a much more consumer-demand focused market;
2016/06/16
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 114 #

2015/2349(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Draws attention to the upheavalchallenges and opportunities which the development of connected and self-driving vehicles are likely to cause for small businesses;
2016/06/16
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 126 #

2015/2349(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Calls for efforts to be pursued with a view to completing the single European transport area; takes the view that any legislation which imposes new requirements on small businesses should be avoided where possible and should be proportionate and accompanied by the necessary incentives;
2016/06/16
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 199 #

2015/2349(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Regrets that the Member States’ response to the development of collaborative business models has so far been very fragmented, and considers that a coordinated, overall European level approach is indispensable; notes the Commission’s reasonable approach to this ‘new business model’ and eagerly awaits the publication of its guidelines on this topicmixed; welcomes the Commission's recently published guidelines on the collaborative economy, which emphasised the importance of the collaborative economy to future growth;
2016/06/16
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 28 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas the monitoring of barriers and costs is piecemeal and unsystematic, quantification and clear identification of barriers and costs is lacking, which makes prioritisation of policy actions difficult;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 29 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Fb. whereas businesses and individuals are facing major obstacles in cross border activities within the single market due to lack of availability and quality of information, assistance services and online procedures, leading to high administrative burden and significant compliance costs;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 31 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Realises that despite the removal of tariff barriers since 1 July 1968, the free movement of goods and services has continued to be hampered by non-tariff barriers (NTBs) such as national technical rules and requirements governing products and service providers; highlights that strengthening of the single market requires urgent actions at Union and Member States levels to address such NTBs;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 39 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Understands an NTB as being a burden or cost introduced by regulatory action which must be borne by a firm which seeks to enter a market, and which is not borne by firms already in the market, or a cost which accrues to non-national firms which is not borne by domestic firms, thereby having a discriminatory effect;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 40 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Recognises that national-level differences may emerge owing to multi- level governance, leading to internal NTBs within a Member State; believes that the need for measures to be proportionate and in furtherance of legitimate public policy objectives should be well-understood at all levels of regulatory decision-making; notes that decisions taken at municipal, state, national or EU level can all contribute to the creation of NTBs if they are not well- conceived; believes that consistency and coherence of policy and regulatory practice can contribute significantly to lowering NTBs;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 46 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that where such NTBs can be justified as proportionate, information on differing national regulatory requirements should be easily accessible and the related provision of notification information and completion of procedures by businesses rendered as user-friendly as possible; considers that the present system built around a diverse range of contact points, including Product Contact Points and Single Points of Contact, is deeply unsatisfactory; urges the Commission and the Member States to place greater emphasis on streamlining and improving these systems, understanding that by being more open and accessible as regards regulatory requirements their Member State becomes more attractive for inward investment;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 49 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that where such NTBs can be justified as proportionate, information on differing national regulatory requirements should be easily accessible; considers that the present system built around a diverse range of contact points, including Product Contact Points and Single Points of Contact, is deeply unsatisfactory; recalls the importance of strengthening and streamlining existing single market tools for SMEs in order to simplify their cross- border expansion; urges the Commission and the Member States to place greater emphasis on streamlining and improving these systems, in particular the need for rapid improvement of the Points of Single Contact and calls the Commission to report to the European Parliament on the progress and next steps by the end of 2016; highlights that understanding that by being more open and accessible as regards regulatory requirements their Member State becomes more attractive for inward investment;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 50 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers that the Commission and Member States working together to improve the functioning of SOLVIT is important to eliminating NTBs, especially in geographical or industry areas where businesses do not use SOLVIT often, and not all submitted cases are taken up by the competent authority;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 52 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Welcomes the Single Digital Gateway initiative and urges the Commission to create a single entry point for businesses and consumers to all single market related information, assistance, problem solving and to national and EU-wide procedures needed to operate cross-border in the EU;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 55 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines that for many companies, in particular SMEs, seeking to trade in another Member State, such an expansion will still from their perspective constitute ‘international trade’; highlights that SMEs, start-ups and innovative businesses, in particular sharing economy businesses, should be fully enabled to grow through cross-border trade;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 57 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notes that the elimination of NTBs does not entail the limitation of workers' rights, where these are not discriminatory, disproportionate or fail to be founded upon a legitimate public policy objective;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 62 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the objective of the Union should be the eventualCalls for abolition of NTBs where they cannot be justified;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 65 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the objective of the Union and its individual Member States should be the eventual abolition of disproportionate NTBs where they cannot be justified;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 71 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. BelieveHighlights that differences in the speed of transposition and the exact implementation at national level of existing directives create legal uncertainty for businesses;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 72 #

2015/2346(INI)

8. Considers that where the Commission has repealed unnecessary EU legislation, Member States should act swiftly to repeal corresponding domestic provisionsUrges Member States to swiftly repeal outdated domestic provisions where the Commission has repealed unnecessary EU legislation;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 74 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that extended non-compliance with Union law by Member States is detrimental for the single market; considers also that the slow compliance process leads to some Member States benefiting from an undue prolongation of the transposition deadline, a compliance culture should be further promoted in co-operation with Member States, as foreseen in the Single Market Strategy;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 83 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Draws attention to the issue of ‘gold- plating’, i.e. the tendency of national governments to load transposed directives with additional rules that add to business burdens and costs, the data analytics tool being developed by the Commission could improve the monitoring of transposition of single market legislation;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 88 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. BelieveHighlights that inconsistent enforcement of existing correctly transposed rules causes the same harm as slow transposition; considers that compliance and enforcement are made more challenging when commonly used definitions are given different meanings in different pieces of legislation; calls for better regulation principles to be respected in the legislation drafting process;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 89 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that inconsistent enforcement of existing correctly transposed rules causes the same harm as slow transposition; considers that compliance and enforcement are made more challenging when commonly used definitions, for example, traceability, placed on the market, are given different meanings in different pieces of legislation;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 92 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that unequal application of the same rules in different Member States has the potential to create new NTBs; considers that transposition workshops should be held in order to minimise divergences at an early stage;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 100 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Notes the persistence of national-level differences in product market regulation with which businesses operating across borders still have to contend both in terms of level of restriction and differences between Member States; considers that this unnecessarily forces businesses to adapt their products and services to comply with multiple standards or repeated testing, thus limiting intra-EU trade, reducing growth and hampering job creation;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 101 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Notes the persistence of national-level differences in product market regulation with which businesses operating across borders still have to contend; considers that this unnecessarily forces businesses to adapt their products and services to comply with multiple standards or, re-labelling of products, and repeated testing;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 113 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Believes that many national administrative practices also give rise to NTBs, including requirements for formalising of documents by national bodies or offices; considers thaturges Members States should concentrate on e-governance as a way to reduce barriers, building on examples such as those in Estonia and Denmark, where a transition to digital services has simplified administration for businesses and citizeto use e-governance solutions and modernise their public administrations, building on examples such as those in Estonia and Denmark, by providing more and better accessible, digital services for citizens and businesses, and to facilitate cross border cooperation and interoperability of public administrations;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 121 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Commission to focus on ground-level in practice enforcement, making sure that rules are followed in the Member States; considers, in this regard, that transposition workshops should be undertaken to minimize differences between Member States at an early stage;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 129 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Highlights that many businesses are not aware of mutual recognition and believe that they have to comply with national requirements in the Member State of destination when trading in the single market; calls for Member States to ensure that mutual recognition principle is applied by their competent authorities;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 133 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on the Commission to act decisively to improve the application of mutual recognition; anticipates, in that context, the Commission’s plans to increase awareness among competent authorities and revise the Mutual Recognition Regulation;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 144 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Draws attention also to the restrictions in Member States as regards the legal form of service providers and their shareholding or management structure, and as regards restrictions on the joint exercise of the profession; considerstresses that these restrictions are serious obstacles to cross-border service provision; emphasizes the need to ensure consistent proportionality assessment of regulatory requirements and restrictions applicable to services;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 150 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Emphasises that the notification obligation contained in the Services Directive could have been effective in reducing or eliminating NTBs, but has been neglected by Member States and the Commission; welcomes, therefore, the renewed focus on the notification procedure in the Single Market Strategy, as through early engagement as regards proposed regulatory measures, disproportionate national measures can be revised to resolve issues before they occur; welcomes the introduction of a services passport; highlights that it should not lead to additional administrative burdens, but tackle non-tariff barriers and advance mutual recognition;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 162 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 6
Single market for professional servicesdeleted
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 179 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
28. Calls on the Commission to address theset out reform priorities of Member Statesand address them accordingly in the area of professional services in the context of the European Semester and country-specific recommendations on deregulating certain professions in the Member States;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 190 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
31. Calls on the Commission to set out best practices on retail establishment and operational restrictions in the single market, whilst respecting Member State subsidiarity in areas such as worker's rights;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 193 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31a. Calls on the Commission to analyse operational restrictions to retail and wholesale in the single market, bringing forward reform proposals where necessary, and report on that in Spring 2017;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 202 #

2015/2346(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
33. Calls on the Commission to deepen its work on enforcement and the principles which underpin the single market; believes that early intervention with regard to national measures or implementation procedures which constitute NTBs may be effective and results more readily achieved than through infringement proceedings; underlines, nevertheless, that for serious or persistent failures or misapplication of Union law, particularly in areas of single market and economic interest, the Commission may prioritise infringement actionust use all available measures, including infringement procedures, to ensure full implementation of legislation on the Single Market and to ensure structural reforms in Member States;
2016/01/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 23 #

2015/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas first of all, it is compliance with existing rules within the European Semester and the Single Market that will provide real insight into the suitability or shortcomings of current rules;
2015/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 27 #

2015/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. BelievStresses that effective coordination of economic and fiscal policies must also encompass macro- and microeconomic coordination, and calls forcompliant but diverse implementation of the EU rules within Member States, together with various national legal orders might negatively influence functioning of the Single Market; asks the Commission to monitor and evaluate the functioning of the Sinclusion of coordination of current EU microeconomic policies gle Market in Member States, to identify unnecessary non-tariff, regulatory and administrative barriers and to prepare country specific recommendations concerning the European Semester processelimination of barriers in the Single Market;
2015/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 56 #

2015/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Reiterates a call for inclusion of the Single Market pillar in the European Semester, with a system for regular monitoring, identification of the country specific barriers of the Single Market and evaluation of SM integration and competitiveness focused on a set of priorities where action would generate the most impact in growth and jobs; considers that the system should comprise a robust information database, a set of quantitative and qualitative indicators, benchmarking, peer review and exchange of best practices;
2015/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 99 #

2015/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Stresses that the public sector and public procurement are critical drivers of bothpublic procurement in the public sector makes a significant contribution to Member State and business growth, job creation and competitiveness (representing more than 19 % of EU GDP expenditure); asks the Commission to support transparency of the public procurement in the public sector to the greatest possible extend;
2015/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 117 #

2015/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Highlights that it is the private sector that is a crucial driver of the sustainable growth and job creation and that national regulations and practices, coupled with inadequate implementation of the mutual recognition principle, continue to create unnecessary barriers and burdens for businesses; calls for better enforcement of the principle and cost-efficient instruments for dispute settlement;
2015/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 172 #

2015/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
34. Remains concerned about the long length of infringement procedures and the high number of outstanding cases; suggests that the Commission prioritises and focuses infringement action in a timely and effective manner on areas with the most dissuasive impact; recognises the need for a fast-track extra-judicial arbitration procedure as a fast, alternative remedy instrument;
2015/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 183 #

2015/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
38. Recognises the importance of better regulation principles and the REFIT initiative, and the need for regulatory security and predictability, when designing new legislative initiatives; calls in this context not to alter the obligations reduced within REFIT by new burdens;
2015/12/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 17 #

2015/2255(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas there is no clear and universally accepted definition of "social dumping" and there are different interpretations of this term, which may create confusion and sometimes include protectionist measures that can lead to fragmentation the EU common market;
2016/02/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 140 #

2015/2255(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for the EU and the Member States to cooperate across borders in relation to enforcement information, to giveallow, where necessary, monitoring authorities access upon request to data registered in the Member States' national electronic registers and in the European Register of Road Transport Undertaking (ERRU) and to consolidate the list of infringements leading to the loss of good repute of road transport operators by including illegal cabotage and non- compliance with Community social and labour legislation;
2016/02/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 155 #

2015/2255(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
8. Calls for the creation of a European Road Transport Agency to ensure proper implementation of EU legislation and promote standardisation across all Member States, including the social dimension, such as working conditions and labour issues in road transport;deleted
2016/02/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 171 #

2015/2255(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that the social dimension of the Aviation Package published by the Commission must be strengthened as employment and working conditions are directly linked to the maintenance of the safety and security of both passengers and staff; underlines furthermore, in this connection, the need for the Commission and the Member States to monitor and ensure proper enforcement of national social legislation and collective agreements for airlines having operational bases on EU territory;deleted
2016/02/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 184 #

2015/2255(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the need for a new groundhandling regulation, that will provide social protection for workers; calls for an improved Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 to ensure binding application of national labour legislation for airlines having European operational bases and to improve the definition of ‘homebase’ for crew members;deleted
2016/02/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 213 #

2015/2255(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses that, without prejudice to national and Union law, including collective agreements between social partners, the competent authority should require the designated provider of port and railway services to establish staff working conditions on the basis of binding national, regional or local social standards and to implement the compulsory transfer of staff in the event of a change in service provider;deleted
2016/02/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 227 #

2015/2255(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission to establish minimum training requirements for maintenance personnel in the railway sector and to safeguard the economic equilibrium of public service obligations.deleted
2016/02/24
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 1 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point a - point -i a (new)
-ia. to continue and complete negotiations for the Trade in Services Agreement delivering considerable systemic benefits while harmonising the trade rules applicable to 70% of global trade in services; specifically the Commission should focus not only on securing existing levels of liberalisation among the parties but also on providing EU businesses and consumers with new market access opportunities while creating new and enhanced regulatory disciplines which are both WTO compatible and open to multilateralisation;
2015/10/19
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 6 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point a - point i
i. to ensure the highest level of transparency in the negotiations, in particular by allowing access to, where appropriate, to relevant documents and by organising a consultation with Parliament and civil society, citizens, businesses, and other relevant stakeholders;
2015/10/19
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 10 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
(ia) to ensure that negotiations are mindful of the rapidly evolving nature of the transport sector and the growing importance of collaborative economy transport modes in Europeans' everyday lives;
2015/11/12
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 14 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point a - point ii
ii. to ensure that before considering the removal of barriers, the agreement seeks to create a level playing field the agreement first and foremost delivers on its potential to create high quality well paid jobs in the European Union, by ensuring the services sector, and has as its main objective to highlight andat high standards and disciplines are further reinforced and improved, with a view to establishing them more firmly at the multilateral level; considers this objective perfectly compatible with maintaining the high level of protection of consumers, workers and the environment enshrined in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and existing Consumer acquis;
2015/10/19
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 17 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point ii
(ii) to ensure that the negotiations address transport sectors in an ambitious and meaningful way and in a spirit of reciprocity;
2015/11/12
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 26 #

2015/2233(INI)

iii. to ensure that the TiSA provides reciprocal access, notwithstandingguarantees increased market access, and is without prejudice to the right of countries to adopt regulations whichthat are duly justified onby the public policy groundinterest, notably with the inclusion of horizontal provisions, general principles and an explicit recognition of the right to regulate, as is already the case with GATS Article XIV, which in no way has prevented the EU or its Member States from adopting legitimate public policy objectives;
2015/10/19
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 31 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point iii
(iii) to promote negotiations on regulation that address issues such as transparency, deadlines, due process, non-discrimination and redress, while continuing to require that foreign companies wishing to offer transport or delivery services within the European Union comply with existing EU regulatory standards;
2015/11/12
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 40 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point b
b) regarding the protection of public services and services of general interest
2015/10/19
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 45 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point b - point i
i. to ensure that the negotiations maintain and strengthen the fundamental role played by public services and services of general interest in the European Union, which provide an essential safety net for citizens and contribute to public health, social cohesion, growth and employment, requests therefore that the Turkish desire to include portability of healthcare be firmly rejected by the Commission;
2015/10/19
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 54 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point b - point ii
ii. to maintain the Member States’ freedom to regulate those services at all levels and to provide, commission and fund public services in compliance with the Treaties, as is the case with EU FTAs already negotiated with the Andean Countries, Central America, South Korea, Canada and Singapore; this can be done using known reservations and exemptions which have functioned without issue;
2015/10/19
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 59 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point c
c) regarding the services includedcope of the agreement and dispute settlement
2015/10/19
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 61 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point c - point i
i. to ensure that a positive list of services ready to be placed on the market is presented by the Union in order to protect those services not explicitly referred to from being opened up to competitione widest possible inclusion of service sectors in the agreement, in particular the digital service sector, based on the mandate from the Member States, given that services make up around 70% of the EU economy and account for 90% of new job creation, underlining the crucial relevance of finding new market access opportunities for service exports in third countries;
2015/10/19
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 70 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point c - point ii
ii. to ensure that the negotiations comply with the new directives on public procurement and concessions, in particular as regards the definition of public-public cooperation, exclusions and SME accessguarantee that the final agreement respects existing EU law and meets the requirements of the new directives on public procurement and concessions, including the relevant definitions contained therein;
2015/10/19
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 76 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point c - point iii
iii. to ensure reciprocity in the mutual recognition of professional qualifications, in particular by establishing a legal framework, and that mobility is promoted by making it easier for professionals in the sectors covered by the agreement to obtain visaseek visas, recognising the varying sensitivities around different sectoral labour mobility, and that these considerations be taken into account in negotiations;
2015/10/19
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 86 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point c - point iv a (new)
iva. to ensure the inclusion of a strong dispute settlement mechanism which should aim at ensuring the continued commitment of the parties to respecting and observing mutually agreed rules and openings;
2015/10/19
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 90 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point d - point i
i. to ensure that the regulated professions are excluded from the agreement;deleted
2015/10/19
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 95 #

2015/2233(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 - point d - point ii
ii. to maintain the exclusion of audio-visual and cultural services;
2015/10/19
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 36 #

2015/2210(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that better and stronger tax coordination, with due respect for national competences, is needed in order to ensure a level playing field and to avoid unfair competition and detrimental distortionseach Member State is fully responsible for their tax policy and that it is the responsibility of Member States to ensure that their tax system is competitive within the single market;
2015/09/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 6 #

2015/2179(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Takes note of the Court's comment on the procedure of awarding a specific framework contract on ERTMS which resulted in financial offers close to the maximum contract value; calls the Agency to appropriately use these types of contracts in order to seek competition on the price while ensuring the quality of the projects chosen, in line with the principle that better value for taxpayers' money should be a cornerstone of the Agency's mission;
2016/01/20
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 5 #

2015/2174(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights the Agency’s contribution to maritime safety and prevention of ship pollution in Europe; deplores that, while expending competences following the entry into force of its amended basic regulation in February 2013 (Regulation (EU) No 100/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2013 amending Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002 establishing a European Maritime Safety Agency), staff reduction and budgetary cuts became applicable in 2014; reaffirms that the Agency has to be given the financial, material and human resources it needs to perform its tasks successfully, inclubut reaffirms that the Agency should continue to seek efficiency savings through intelligent use of existing resources and avoiding wthen dealing with activities outside their mandate (i.e. contribution with know-how and staff of the Agency to the refugees crisis) unnecessary duplication of the work of national authorities;
2016/01/19
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 23 #

2015/2155(DEC)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Stresses that the Court of Auditors report adopted on 11.07.2014 states that the potential saving for the EU budget would be about 114 million EUR per year if the European Parliament centralised its activities; reiterates the call on Parliament and the Council to address, in order to create long term savings, the need for a roadmap to a single seat, as stated by Parliament in several previous resolutions;
2016/03/14
Committee: CONT
Amendment 18 #

2015/2154(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that there is information on transport projects available in various databases, such as Financial Transparency System, INEA database of TEN-T projects and CORDIS for Horizon 2020 projects; calls for smart use of these tools in order to have a better overview, upstream and downstream, of the process of allocating EU funds; reiterates the importance of publishing of easily accessible annual list of transport projects co-financed by the Union in the interests of transparency and to encourage more applications from suitable projects;
2016/01/20
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 20 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
(1a) Underlines the importance of the creative sector to the economy and its contribution to growth and employment; recalls that the copyright intensive activities account for a significant part in the economy;
2015/09/24
Committee: JURI
Amendment 26 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 51 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 10th December 2013 on the evaluation report regarding BEREC and the Office1a, 1a Text adopted, P7_TA-(2013)0536
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 29 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Underlines the importance of the creative sector to the economy and its contribution to growth and employment; recalls that copyright intensive activities account for a significant part of the creative sector's economy;
2015/10/02
Committee: CULT
Amendment 30 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Urges the Commission to assess the need to modernise EU regulations and adapt them to the digital age; asks the Commission to harmonise the regulatory framework of different transport modes in order to promote true competition between modes and to encourage new innovations and services for mobility and logistics, including those based on the sharing economy, while creating a level playing field for existing market actors and new market entrants in terms ofst recognising high European standards regarding safety, working conditions, fair taxation, consumer choice and protection and the prevention of harmful environmental effects;
2015/09/23
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 36 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Points out that the creative sector has specificities and different challenges, notably arising from the different types of content, creative works and business models used; therefore calls on the Commission to better identify these specificities and take them into account when proposing modifications and solutions;
2015/10/02
Committee: CULT
Amendment 41 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Emphasises the need to embrace new business models in the transport sector, particularly in the demand driven sharing economy, that increase competition and improve the quality, affordability, range and flexibility of transport options for users;
2015/09/23
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 42 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas the use of the internet and mobile communications has changed the way users communicate, invent, consume and share; whereas this has expanded the market place, facilitating access by small companies to a customer base of 500 million customers and the development byallowing individuals the opportunity to develop new, entrepreneurs of newial ideas;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 54 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Recognising the increasingly digital market for transport tickets, urges the transport sector to further develop and promote multimodal and cross border online ticket purchasing, which will further enhance competition and consumer choice;
2015/09/23
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 57 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
(2a) Underlines that any modification of the current legal framework on copyright should be considered in a targeted way and with a focus on economic growth, competitiveness and enhanced consumer experience;
2015/09/24
Committee: JURI
Amendment 58 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
(2b) Points out that the creative sector has specificities and different challenges, notably arising from the different types of content and creative works and from the business models used; therefore calls on the Commission to better identify these specificities and take them into account when proposing modifications and solutions;
2015/09/24
Committee: JURI
Amendment 59 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
(2c) Calls on the Commission to make sure that any reform of the copyright directive is evidence based and carefully assessed; considers that it should take into account the results of the ex-post impact assessment of the Directive of 2001, and be based on solid evidence including an assessment of the possible impact of the modifying elements; takes the view that a proper economic analysis including the impact with regards to jobs and growth must be carried out;
2015/09/24
Committee: JURI
Amendment 60 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
(2d) Takes the view that any modification of the audiovisual media services directive should take into account new ways of access to audiovisual content and should be consistent with the current reform of legislation relating to copyright;
2015/09/24
Committee: JURI
Amendment 61 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)
(2e) Underlines the importance of ensuring accessibility of the Digital Single Market for people with disabilities; in this regard, notes the conclusion of the Marrakesh Treaty, which will facilitate access for the visually impaired to books, and encourages swift ratification thereof;
2015/09/24
Committee: JURI
Amendment 62 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 f (new)
(2f) Maintains that the approach of copyright exceptions and limitations should be balanced, targeted and format neutral and should not undermine the interests of right holders;
2015/09/24
Committee: JURI
Amendment 64 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 g (new)
(2g) Emphasises that any European-wide exception for text and data mining should be limited to accredited academic and public-funded research and should not undermine revenue streams or be extended to commercially owned data;
2015/09/24
Committee: JURI
Amendment 65 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 h (new)
(2h) Points out that the rapid rate of technological development in the digital market calls for a technologically neutral framework for copyright;
2015/09/24
Committee: JURI
Amendment 66 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 i (new)
(2i) Notes the importance of transparency of copyright levies in those Member States which choose to apply them;
2015/09/24
Committee: JURI
Amendment 71 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas all Union policies and legislation in the area of the Digital Single Market should allownot restrict the emergence of new opportunities for users and businesses to emerge, especially within today’s service society, while taking a holistic approach that considers their social dimension as theyst recognising that these opportunities will inevitably involve structural changes;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 87 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that further efforts are needed to overhaul copyright law and that any revised provisions should apply to all mediareform copyright law and that any revised provisions should apply to all media; points out that the rapid rate of technological development in the digital market calls for a technologically neutral framework for copyright; underlines that any modification of the current legal framework on copyright should be considered in a targeted way and with a focus on economic growth, competitiveness and enhanced consumer experience; calls on the Commission to make sure that any reform of the copyright directive is evidence based and carefully assessed; considers that it should take into account the results of the ex-post impact assessment of the Directive of 2001, and be based on solid evidence, including an assessment of the possible impact of the modifying elements; takes the view that a proper economic analysis, including the impact on jobs and growth, must be carried out, in line with the Commission's objective of better regulation;
2015/10/02
Committee: CULT
Amendment 87 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
(2a) Strongly believes that creators should be granted appropriate remuneration and that copyright should keep its primary function of allowing creators to gain rewards for their efforts through others making use of their work, and therefore to encourage future creativity;
2015/09/24
Committee: JURI
Amendment 99 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Underlines the importance of ensuring accessibility of the Digital Single Market for people with disabilities; in this regard, notes the conclusion of the Marrakesh Treaty, which will facilitate access for the visually impaired to books, and encourages swift ratification thereof;
2015/10/02
Committee: CULT
Amendment 101 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas 75% of the value added by the digital economy comes from traditional industry; whereas its integration of digital technology remains weak, with only 1.7% of EU enterprises making full use of advanced digital technologies and 14% of SMEs across the EU using the internet as a sales channel; whereas some member states have far greater online business penetration;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 113 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
(3a) Stresses that the growth of online platforms has been driven by consumer demand; notes, however, the importance of taking action against piracy;
2015/09/24
Committee: JURI
Amendment 114 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
(3b) Recognises the clarity that intermediary liability has enabled in terms of the growth of online platforms and warns that the creation of new legal uncertainty in this area could have a negative impact on economic growth;
2015/09/24
Committee: JURI
Amendment 127 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas a high level of consumer empowerment, protection and satisfaction necessarily entails choice, flexibility, information and trust in a secure online environment;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 155 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Recommends a continued focus on improving how children are protected online, through transparent self- regulatory measures in accordance with existing national and EU legislation where appropriate, such as flexible parental controls based on the informed consent of parents, and by collaboration between stakeholders including regulatory authorities, industry, charities and other appropriate entities, including through the implementation of proportionate "notice and takedown" policies in accordance with Directive 2011/92/EU on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography;
2015/10/02
Committee: CULT
Amendment 158 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas small- and medium-sized companies have the most to gain from the digital economy but also have the most to lose from burdensome regulation;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 165 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the Commission’s aim to withdraw the proposal on a Common European Sales Law and the intention to propose rules for digital content; notes the proposal to introduce the ‘home option’ in order to br with targeted harmonisation as mechanism for bringing down barriers to cross- border trade; but insists on the need for comprehensivethorough evidence and consultation with stakeholders before this approach is pursued, in particular as regardson the impact it would have on the current protection provided to consumers under national law, especially in terms of remedies for failure to comply with the terms of contracts for online sales.with regard to remedies for non-conformity with the contract for online sales; believes that rules on Consumer Rights for Digital Content need to be principles based in order to be technologically neutral and future proof, focused on remedies to concrete problems which have been clearly identified, limited to paid for content only, realistic regarding quality expectations, and fully recognise the differences between digital content and traditionally acquired content; stresses furthermore with regard to future Commission proposals in this area, the importance of avoiding inconsistently and overlap with existing legislation;
2015/09/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 172 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
(5a) Stresses the need to improve the processes for businesses to establish and operate online across all Member States which should be streamlined and digitalised and calls on the Commission to consider this further in its forthcoming Internal Market strategy;
2015/09/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 173 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
(5b) Calls for support for small businesses and for the single market to be fit for purpose in a digital age; In this regard, stresses concern about Vatmoss rules, which are hampering small online entrepreneurs by obliging them to collect and process VAT payments, even if they conduct a small volume overseas trade; welcomes in this regard recent suggestions from the Commission on the introduction of minimum thresholds but believes that an interim solution is also urgently required;
2015/09/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 179 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Suggests that the digitisation of the Single Market is a trend to be welcomed due to increased choice, competition, innovation, growth potential and lower costs for consumers and larger markets for businesses; emphasises the need to consider the Digital Single Market as a development of the traditional Single Market and not as something separate or different;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 186 #

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
(5c) Considers that the amended proposal by the Commission should also clarify how the existing rules apply in a digital environment when selling online cross- border, including the application of the Services Directive to address unfair online price discrimination based on nationality or location;
2015/09/28
Committee: JURI
Amendment 194 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that better regulation should help toserve as an examineing policy through a digital lens and facilitate the adaptation ofassess whether legislation and enforcement frameworks in the light of new technologies and new business models to prevent fragmentation of the single market;, such as in the area of competition law, the Services Directive and the consumer protection acquis, are fit for purpose in a digital era in light of new technologies and new business models to prevent fragmentation of the single market; stresses that legislation should aim to be principles based and technology neutral in order to be relevant for future technological developments; considers that any initiatives proposed by the Commission must go through a competitiveness test an innovation test and an SME test; notes that wherever a REFIT exercise is taking place, including the forthcoming REFIT of financial services regulation, the digital perspective must be taken into account:
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 207 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Recognises that the digital revolution has the potential to empower individuals, entrepreneurs and consumers in a way that was never previously possible;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 215 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that users’ trust in digital services is vital to innovation and growth in the digital economy and that reinforcingdigital businesses live and die based on thate trust should be at the basis of both public policy and business modelof their users, and therefore legislative responses need to be tailored to recognising this;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 231 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that users’ trust in digital services is vital to innovation and growth in the digital economy and that reinforcing that trust should be at the basis of both public policy and business models; suggests that proper implementation and enforcement of competition law, the Services Directive and the consumer protection acquis could do much to achieve this but recognises that targeted clarification of existing rules may be required;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 251 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses the urgent need for the Commission and Member States to promoteremove barriers to allow a more dynamic economy for innovation to flourish and for companies to scale up, through the development of e- government, a modernised regulatory framework fit for the emergence and scale- up of innovative businesses, and a long term investment strategy in infrastructure, skills, research and innovation;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 280 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission, in cooperation with Member States, to further develop initiatives to boost entrepreneurship that range from changing the mind-set on how success is defined to, including the promotingon of an entrepreneurial and innovation culture; believes, in addition, that the diversity and specific attributes of the different national innovation hubs could be turned into a real competitive advantage for the EU if they are effectively interconnected;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 346 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Recognises that the collaborative economy can provide a significant economic boost, at virtually no cost, primarily by matching surplus capacity with unmet demand;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 353 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Believes that the digital economy has brought greater consumer empowerment especially through the increasing use of online reviews, peer reviews and customer information prior to purchase;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 359 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Believes that reducing administrative burdens and red tape, making it easier to establish an online retail presence and simple, secure, reliable payment systems also contribute to creating growth in e- commerce; notes that easy online access for businesses and consumers about different legal rights and responsibilities at national, regional and local level is key to enabling the performance of the Single Market; notes that the Points of Single Contact were established under the Services Directive with the ambition to provide such information; expresses deep disappointment in the results of the recent "mystery shopping" exercise conducted by Eurochambres, which identified severe deficiencies in many Member States; believes that Member States must urgently act to rectify this situation;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 366 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the Commission's initiative to improve theconsumers' legal protection of consumers as regardsconcerning intangible digital content; believes any such improvements must be targeted to specific needs and be proportionate; points out that while consumers buying tangible digital content are protected by consumer protection laws, consumer rights when buyingthere could be greater clarity regarding rights associated with intangible digital content remain largely unregulin many Member Stateds; agrees that consumers should enjoy a comparable level of protection regardless of whether they purchase digital content online or offline; suggests that where possible existing definitions should be used in any new proposals on consumer rights, with particular regard to the definition of 'digital content' in Article 2 (1) of Directive 2011/83/EU on consumer rights; suggests that, as a guiding principle, if a consumer uses a digital good or content in a manner equivalent to a tangible good, then this digital good or content should be accompanied by equivalent consumer rights; suggests however that it is important to focus on rights associated with the quality of a digital good, not the service providing that good on the basis that service provision is dealt with in a different regulatory context;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 447 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Regrets the imprecision of the Commission’s proposal regarding a legislative measure for a more comprehensive online sales law that covers digital content products as well as tangible goods; suggests the Commission should approach consumer rights for digital content and online purchases of tangible goods separately since they present different challenges, taking into account the need to ensure regulatory certainty for businesses and consumers ahead of the REFIT of the consumer acquis in 2016;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 451 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Notes that risks to consumer security are often mitigated by supplier-led provision of software upgrades or patches and therefore encourages better promotion by suppliers of security-related upgrades or patches;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 452 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Believes the future-proofed approach of the e-Commerce Directive has enhanced trust and clarity with regard to the responsibility of stakeholders acting in online marketplaces and suggests that re- opening the directive could risk destabilising that trust;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 454 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Is sceptical about the legal nature of model contracts regarding online sales of tangible goods in the absence of statutory regulation;deleted
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 462 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Believes that model contracts and online review tools are realistic and targeted measures which can ensure consumer trust in digital goods;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 470 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission to explore the possibilities of introducing an EU trustmark for online sales in order to induce trust, particularly in relation to cross-border online sales;deleted
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 519 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses that accessible, affordable, efficient and high-quality delivery services are an essential prerequisite for thriving cross-border e-commerce; supports the proposed measures to improve price transparency, interoperability and regulatory oversight that should target both the smooth functioning of cross-border parcel delivery markets, including promoting cross-border track-and-trace systems, and compliance with relevant social and labour rights, allowing enough flexibility for the delivery market to evolve and adapt to technological innovations;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 532 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Highlights that the parcel industry needs to adapt to modern living patterns and offer more flexible and consumer focused delivery patterns;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 540 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Argues that to encourage the growth of e-commerce both inside the Single Market and with third countries, the Union Customs Code should be implemented in a manner that does not impede trade flows and that allows for sufficiently long transition periods and targeted exemptions for all economic operators;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 559 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Considers that ambitious actions are needed to improve access to legal digital content, in particular by ending unjustified geo- blocking practices and unfair price discrimination based on geographical location;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 582 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Considers that unjustified geo- blocking practices are harmful to both the proper functioning of the single market and encourage online piracy, particularly in cases where content is not legally available through any means in a member state;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 592 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16b. Calls for portability of legally bought content within the EU, whereby a consumer who has purchased digital content in their member state of residence may be able to access that content when in another member state;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 615 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Further points out the importance of the ongoing competition sector inquiry into the e-commerce sector in order to investigate, inter alia, whether geo-blocking restrictions infringe the rules of EU competition law; stresses the importance of increasing consumer and business confidence by introducingassessing whether targeted changes to the Block Exemption Regulation, most importantly Article 4a and Article 4b, in order to limit undesirable could limit unjustified re-routing and territorial restrictions;
2015/10/21
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 732 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Calls as a priority for a harmonised framework for spectrum allocation to boost long-term infrastructure investments;deleted
2015/10/22
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 838 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 c (new)
23c. Notes that the e-Commerce Directive already seeks to contribute to the proper functioning of the digital single market by ensuring the free movement of information society services, defined as "any service normally provided for remuneration at a distance, by means of electronic equipment for the processing and storage of data, at the individual request of a recipient of the service"; suggests that the ECD has functioned well, given that a core element of the ECD is the protection of consumers, including investors, in spite of dramatic technological changes since its introduction; calls on the Commission to continue using agreed legal definitions as far as possible and to recognise the successes of the provisions in the ECD on intermediary liability as being futureproof and technological neutral;
2015/10/22
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 855 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
24. Appreciates the Commission's initiative to analyse the role of platforms in the Digital Ecollaborative economy as part of the upcoming Internal Market Strategy; points out that the collaborative economy brings enormous economic, social and environmental benefits through the more efficient use of resources, skills and other assets; notes that the definition of 'collaborative economy' used by the Commission's Consultation on the regulatory environment for platforms, in particular that it 'links individuals and/or legal persons... allowing them to provide services and/or exchange assets, resources, time, skills, or capital, sometimes for a temporary period and without transferring ownership rights', is in fact a description of a free market;
2015/10/22
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 894 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Encourages the Commission to analyse the need to protectbalance between protecting and empowering consumers in the sharing economy and, where appropriate and if necessary, to come forward with proposals to ensure the adequacy of the consumer- related legislation framework in the digital sphere, including possible abuses;
2015/10/22
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 908 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Notes in particular the benefits of the digital transformation for increasing accessibility to affordable financial services for consumers and the contributions that this brings to access to capital for entrepreneurs and thus to further economic activity and growth; recognises that consumers are embracing new models for payment services including both bank and non-bank related services;
2015/10/22
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 918 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Stresses the need for Governments, law enforcement authorities and the IT companies in the private sector to work together in order to address the need of removing illegal content, including the protection of children online; within existing legal framework whilst respecting fundamental rights and the rule of law;
2015/10/22
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 922 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Considers, in order to ensure trust in digital services, that increased resources from the public and private sector are required toshould work together strengthen the security of IT systems and online networks and, the encryption of communication, to improve cyber-attacks prevention and to increase knowledge ofver basic security processes among users of digital services;
2015/10/22
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 937 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 c (new)
26c. Welcomes the proposals for the data protection Regulation; notes that the new Regulation must ensure a balanced and workable European framework with a risk based approach, which avoids unnecessary bureaucracy, especially for SMEs, provides legal clarity across the EU, and ensures a high level of data protection and privacy;
2015/10/22
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 946 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 e (new)
26e. Acknowledges the ongoing concern of EU consumers about their privacy and the use of personal data, and the need to better outline the legal framework regarding an individual's right to exercise control over their own personal data; notes the importance of ensuring that data subjects are fully informed with accessible and clear information regarding the rights, rules and redress available to them with regard to the use of their data, stresses the need to raise awareness with the public on issues of data protection;
2015/10/22
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 968 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 d (new)
26d. Calls for the swift conclusion of the new Safe Harbour Agreement and the EU-US data protection Umbrella Agreement; Stresses that a workable and reliable framework for adequacy decisions, which is compatible with the EU data protection principles is important for both businesses and consumers;
2015/10/22
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 972 #

2015/2147(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26b. Emphasises that actions taken by the Commission should be conformity with the legal competences of the EU, and respect the rights of Member States with regard to ensuring national security, and maintaining public security;
2015/10/22
Committee: ITREIMCO
Amendment 8 #

2015/2132(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that the Single Market (SM) is a key driver of growth and jobs; notes, however, that this potential remains untapped in many respects; asks, therefore, for better spending of the budget by providing adequate financial means for the SM in order to cover a clear set of priorities related to the real economy, whilst finding equivalent savings in other sections of the budget;
2015/07/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 16 #

2015/2132(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Is convinced that consumer policy is a main priority for the European Union and that the budget for this policy area should reflect this, whilst other areas of the budget should see a corresponding reduction in spending;
2015/07/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 21 #

2015/2132(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Asks for the financing, from reductions in other areas of the budget, of a new pilot project entitled ‘Consumer Empowerment and Education in the Digital Single Market (DSM)’, contributing to a large public education campaign to support consumer and business understanding and appreciation of the challenges associated with e-commerce; stresses that this should help citizens and SMEs comply with consumer protection law in the online environment; emphasises that, in a truly connected DSM, every consumer should be able to trust the safety of products purchased online; considers that better compliance with the rules would reduce consumer problems and benefit traders by avoiding problems with the enforcement authorities;
2015/07/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 22 #

2015/2132(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Asks for the financing of a new pilot project entitled ‘Consumer Empowerment and Education in the Digital Single Market (DSM)’, contributing to a large public education campaign to support consumer and business understanding and appreciation of the challenges associated with e-commerce; stresses that this should help citizens and SMEs comply with consumer protection law in the online environment; emphasises that, in a truly connected DSM, every consumer should be able to trust the safety of products purchased online; considers that better compliance with the rules would reduce consumer problems and benefit traders by avoiding problems with the enforcement authorities; recalls at this occasion the on- going project entitled ´Training SMEs on Consumer Rights in the Digital Age’ and asks the Commission to make sure both projects do not unnecessarily overlap but target very concrete actions;
2015/07/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 32 #

2015/2132(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
8. Emphasises that SOLVIT has proved its effectiveness in resolving problems affecting citizens; reiteraa good record of customer satisfaction when resolving problems affecting citizens; believes that more could be done to improve how governance tools operate together, to improve the awareness of such tools and to maximise value from the resources allocated to them; invites further reflection on the possibility for consolidation of these tools in future budgetary proposals; notes its support for budget line 02 03 04 on internal market governance tools;
2015/07/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 36 #

2015/2132(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that supporting the real economy should be athe key priority for the EU; urges that the uptake of this financial support by SMEs be maximised;
2015/07/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 37 #

2015/2132(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Recognises that governments and the EU do not create jobs, but entrepreneurs do; calls for more targeted spending programmes that help and encourage entrepreneurship;
2015/07/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 7 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Aa. Whereas technological advancements in the area of robotics and artificial intelligence can be a factor in ensuring and improving fundamental rights for people with disabilities; notes therefore that it is crucial to ensure inclusive and equal access to these technologies;
2016/10/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 14 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that guiding ethical rules and principles for the design, engineering and use of robots andre needed to complement the European legal framework; considers that in the field of artificial intelligence amore needed to complement the European legal frameworkresearch and information is required to produce functioning ethical rules and principles for the design and engineering; underlines that workable ethical rules in the area of artificial intelligence do not currently exist and that implementing ethical systems in artificial intelligence, even at a theoretical level, has proved a very challenging issue;
2016/10/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 24 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Believes thatAcknowledges that currently no robust conceptual laws on robotics andor artificial intelligence, especially those with built-in autonomy and the possibility of self- learning, should be subjected to the primary robotics laws or principles, such as a principle that a robot may do not harm to a human being and must obey a human being; these principles should also be in compliancexist and the topic is widely debated in academia; reiterates its call for more research in the field of ethics of artificial intelligence also to increase the likelihood that these future laws on robotics would be aligned with the rights and principles enshrined in the CFR, in particular human dignity, the respect for private and family life, the protection of personal data, the freedom of expression and information, equality and non- discrimination, solidarity, and citizens’ rights and justice;
2016/10/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 51 #

2015/2103(INL)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines that the free flow of data is a basis for the digital economy and is essential for the development of robotics; highlights that high security of robotics and artificial intelligence systems as a whole, including their internal data systems and data flows, is crucial for the adequate utilisation of robots and artificial intelligence; stresses that a high level of safety, security and privacy of data used for the communication between people and robots and artificial intelligence, together with high quality of voice and sign language recognition systems, has to be ensured; calls on the Commission and Member States to support and incentivise the development of the necessary technology, including security by design and channels of communication;
2016/10/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 130 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital K
K. whereas the current Visa Code already allows Member States to deviate from the normal admissibility criteria for a vissue visas based ‘on humanitarian grounds’ (Articles 19 and 25); however, notes that there is a application ‘on humanitarian grounds’ (Articles 19 and 25)clear distinction between legal and economic migration, on the one side, and those seeking refuge and asylum, on the other side;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 155 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital N
N. whereas EU-third country cooperation is developed through political instruments such as regional dialogues, bilateral dialogues, common agendas for migration and mobility and mobility partnerships, through legal instruments such as migration clauses in ‘global agreements’, readmission agreements, visa facilitation agreements and visa exemption agreements, and through operational instruments such as Regional Protection Programmes (RPP), Regional Development and Protection Programmes (RDPP), Frontex working arrangements and EASO cooperation with third countries; notes that at present readmission agreements with a number of third countries are proving to be ineffective, and the EU should seek to be more ambitious in their implementation and the creation of further agreements following the Valletta Summit;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 490 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Underlines that, in so far as resettlement remains unavailable for third-country nationals, all Member States should be encouraged to establish and implement humanitarian admission programmes;deleted
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 544 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
30. Observes that the operation of the Dublin III Regulation10 has raised many questions linked to fairness and solidarity in the allocation of the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection; notes that the current system does not take into sufficient consideration the particular migratory pressure faced by Member States situated at the Union’s external borders; believes that the European Union needs to accept the on-going difficulties with the Dublin logic, and to develop options for solidarity both among its Member States and the migrants concernedis under revision in order to increase its effectiveness and practicality during crisis situation; stresses however, that the basic principles of Dublin should not be changed regarding that an asylum seekers should be processed in the first Member State entered; stresses that this is essential in order to ensure proper processing, fingerprinting, the prevention of forum shopping and any possible pull factors; __________________ 10 Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (recast) (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 31).
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 582 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
34. Takes the view that the European Union should support thfrontline Member States receiving the most asylum claims with proportionate and adequate financial and technical support; considers that the rationale of using solidarity and responsibility-sharing measures is to enhwith financial and technical support; and that Member States should ensure meaningful and sufficient assets, expertise, and finances the quality and functioning of the CEASo Agencies supporting frontline Member States; such as EASO and FRONTEX, especially in light of FRONTEX's proposed increased mandate;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 591 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
35. Points out that one option for a fundamental overhaul of the Dublin system would be to establish a central collection of applications at Union level – viewing each asylum seeker as someone seeking asylum in the Union as a whole and not in an individual Member State – and to establish a central system for the allocation of responsibility for any persons seeking asylum in the Union; suggests that such a system could provide for certain relative thresholds per Member State, above which no further allocation of responsibility could be made until all other Member States have met their own thresholds, which could conceivably help in deterring secondary movements, as all Member States would be fully involved in the centralised system and no longer have individual responsibility for allocation of applicants to other Member States; believes that such a system could function on the basis of a number of Union ‘hotspots’ from where Union distribution should take place; underlines that any new system for allocation of responsibility must incorporate the key concepts of family unity and the best interests of the child;deleted
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 615 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
36. Notes that, at present, Member States recognise asylum decisions from other Member States only when they are negative; reiterates that mutual recognition by Member States of positive asylum decisions is a logical step towards proper implementation of Article 78(2)(a) TFEU, which calls for ‘a uniform status of asylum valid throughout the Union’;deleted
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 657 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 a (new)
40 a. Emphasises that reception of asylum seekers in their region of origin could better contribute to their integration in a new community;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 672 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
42. Takes the view that, where those persons granted international protection in the Union have an offer of employment in a Member State other than the one in which they have been granted international protection, they should be able to avail themselves of such an offer;deleted
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 704 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
45. Encourages the Member States to seek to keep familiimmediate family relatives together, which will assist integration prospects in the long-term as the focus can be directed towards the establishment of a new life instead of concerns towards family members that are still in insecure situations;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 814 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
53. Regrets the current situation in which Member States apply different lists, containing different safe countries, hampering uniform application and incentivising secondary movemenWelcomes a uniform approach to safe third countries; but stresses that in addition to an EU list, Member States must also be able to keep national lists;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 981 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77
77. Notes that the Commission is considering a revision of Council Directive 2002/90/EC defining the facilitation of unauthorised entry, transit and residence; takes the view that anyone who provides dlifferent formse saving ofr humanitarian assistance to those in need should not be criminalised and that Union law should reflect that principle; but that individuals and organizations must not facilitate the illegal smuggling of individuals into the EU;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1142 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 101 a (new)
101a. Notes that outside of the formal budget structures of the EU; Member States should look to support each other through the donation of assets and expertise;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1155 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 104
104. Notes that, prior the increased migratory flows into the Union in 2015, according to an OECD and Commission study of 2014, the working-age population (15-64) in the Union will decline by 7.5 million between 2013 and 2020, and that if net migration were to be excluded from their projections, the decline would be even more pronounced, as it would amount to a reduction of the working age population by 11.7 million;deleted
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1167 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 106
106. Further notes that, according to recent Eurostat projections, the ratio of people aged 65 or older, relative to those aged 15 to 64, will increase from 27.5 % at the beginning of 2013 to almost 50 % by 2050; notes that this would mean a change from the present ratio of four working-age persons for every person aged 65 or older to only two working-age persons for everyone aged 65 or older;deleted
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1233 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 120
120. Reiterates that the Commission’s Implementation Report on the current Blue Card Directive underlines its flaws, including the very limited level of harmonisation brought about by the wide discretion in implementation it gives the Member States, in particular the right for Member States to maintain parallel national schemes;deleted
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1236 #

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 120 a (new)
120a. Stresses the importance of being respectful of Member States' competences;
2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 5 #

2015/2074(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that a consumer policy with adequate funding is of utmost importance to any effort to increase consumer confidence in a more transparent Single Market; calls, therefore, for focus to be placed both on reinforcing consumer safety and on adjusting consumer rights to societal, technological and economic changes;
2015/05/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 103 #

2015/2065(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recognises that consumer habits in member states vary and that consumers benefit and expect certain kinds of promotions in different member states and action against commercial agreements which consequently undermine those promotions would be counter-productive to producers, suppliers and retailers;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 126 #

2015/2065(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Endorses the Commission's view that UTPs arise as a result of a lack of balance in commercial relationships and a worrying increase in the bargaining power of larger entities, which gives them, which can give larger entities a dominant position on the market that, which can allows them to impose unfavourable contractual terms on weaker trading partners and to make use of unfair practices that grossly deviate from good commercial conduct and are contrary to the principles of good faith and fair dealing; condemns practices that exploit imbalances in bargaining power between economic operators and have an adverse effect on freedom to contract;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 137 #

2015/2065(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Points out that UTPs imposed by parties in a stronger bargaining position clearlyan have a negative impact; stresses that UTPs can hamper investment and product innovation;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 182 #

2015/2065(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission and the Member States fully and consistently to enforce competition law, rules on unfair competition and anti-trust rules; points out, nonetheless, that competition law can go only a limited way towards resolving the problem of unfair practices;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 203 #

2015/2065(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Points out that taking advantage of a stronger bargaining position to impose UTPs iscan be a violation of the principle of freedom to contract, as the stronger party can hasve more say in the shape that the business relationship is to take and can unilaterally impose terms that disproportionately serve its own financial interests, and the weaker party has no option other than to agree to those terms; believes that steps need to be taken to build mutual trust between supply chain partners, on the basis of the principles of freedom to contract, equivalence of benefits and freedom to take advantage of those benefits;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 263 #

2015/2065(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to assess the voluntary and self-regulatory schemes put in place to date and the effectiveness of the regulatory action taken at national and EU level; calls for an assessment of the likely impact of the various types of EU regulatory action that have been proposed, with due account being taken of all the possible implications for the various stakeholders and for consumer welfare;
2015/09/18
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 278 #

2015/2065(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
- having regard to the Report of the European Commission of 29th January 2016 on unfair business-to-business trading practices in the food supply chain,
2016/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 301 #

2015/2065(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the steps taken to date by the Commission to combat UTPs with a view to securing a more balanced market and takes note of the Commission Report of the 29th January 2016 on unfair business-to-business trading practices in the food supply chain, supports its conclusions, which suggest that regulatory harmonisation at EU level would have no added value to actions already being taken at member state level;
2016/03/02
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 24 #

2015/2062(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas prison conditions and prison management are responsibilities of the Member States but the Union also has a necessary role to play in sharing best practice in order to protecting the fundamental rights of prisoners and in creating the European Area of Freedom, Security and Justice;
2017/05/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 83 #

2015/2062(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital L
L. whereas the spread of radical and violent ideologies and terrorist radicalisation is occurrincreasing in many prisons inacross the European Union;
2017/05/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 117 #

2015/2062(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. DeplorRecognises the fact that overcrowding of prisons, which is very common in Europe’s prisons, particularly in Greece, France, Belgium, Italy, Slovenia and Romania, in many cases has a serious impact on the safety of prison staff and prisoners, but also with regard to the activities made available, medical care and monitoring of prisoners;
2017/05/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 228 #

2015/2062(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on Member States to combat the growing phenomenon of radicalisation in prisons by improving mechanisms for identifying and dealing with extremist behaviour and mechanisms for identifying and confiscating extremist propaganda materials, as well as working on rehabilitation programs and units; encourages Member States to exchange best practice in order to counter the increase in terrorist radicalisation in Europe's prisons;
2017/05/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 255 #

2015/2062(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Recalls that consideration for and training of prison staff is essential in order to ensure good detention conditions in prison, and encourage; supports Member States to share information and good practices; to this end, calls for a General Assembly of Prison Administrations to be convenedintroducing specialised training for all prison staff, partners operating in the penal system, religious staff and NGO personnel who interact with prisoners, in order to ensure they detect, prevent and deal with behaviour tending to radical and extremist behaviour at the earliest stage possible and encourages Member States to share information and good practices on this;
2017/05/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 261 #

2015/2062(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Recommends that the Commission and Member States examine the evidence and experience concerning the practice of separation in prisons with the objective of containing the spread of radicalisation and whether this practice could be implemented by Member States in a way that is proportionate and in full compliance with the fundamental rights of the inmate;
2017/05/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 266 #

2015/2062(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Encourages Member States to share best practice on education, rehabilitation and reintegration programs particularly in order to improve reintegration after leaving prison and to help prevent further cases of radicalisation;
2017/05/10
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 27 #

2015/2061(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Acknowledges that prior agreement by all the EEA EFTA states regarding the determination of EEA-relevance is necessary and that technical adaptations may be required before incorporation; is concerned, however, that increasing requests for adaptations and exceptions arecan leading to unnecessary to delays and fragmenting the Single Market; strongly calls on these countries to remedy this situation andwork closely with the EU in order to ensure a level playing field in the extended Single Market;
2015/05/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 47 #

2015/2061(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Underlines the democratic legitimacy of referenda and the need to respect the outcome whilst adhering to the rule of law;
2015/05/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 48 #

2015/2061(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Takes not of the result of the popular initiative of 9 February 2014; calls upon the Commission to work with Switzerland and the member States to find a satisfactory solution that takes into consideration the outcome of this vote whilst respecting the provisions of the concerned agreements;
2015/05/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 51 #

2015/2061(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes in this context the opening of the negotiations in May 2014 for an institutional framework as a precondition for the further development of a bilateral approach; stresses that without such a framework agreement no further agreements on Swiss participation in the internal market, includingit is of high importance for the economies of neighbouring countries and the Switzerland to make progress on the Electricity Agreement, will be concluded; urges the Swiss Government to step up its efforts to progress with the negotiations on the outstanding issues;
2015/05/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 60 #

2015/2061(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. ReiterateConsiders that the free movement of persons is one of the fundamental freedoms and a pillar of the Single Market and that it always has been an inseparable part of and precondition for the bilateral approach between the EU and Switzerland; therefore fully supports the EU's rejection of July 2014 of the Swiss Authorities' request to renegotiate the FMPA with a view to introducing a quota or a national preference system; ; believes that free movement of persons should respond effectively to labour market supply and demand, and to skills shortages or opportunities; views the contribution free movement of persons can make to the single market as important, however views it as only one element of the legal relationship between the EU and Switzerland; points out that Switzerland has never been fully part of the Single Market and that the bilateral approach between the EU and Switzerland has nevertheless contributed positively towards the development of both parties;
2015/05/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 9 #

2015/2053(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that the lack of a unitary system for the protection of geographical indications relating to non- agricultural products creates a highly fragmented situation in Europe, arquires careful analysis, in view of the interplay between existing from differentrights held at European, national and, local, or sectoral or transversal rules, which have distorting effects, which hamper the harmonious development of the common market, as well as homogeneous protection and effective competition on equal terms,levels, and other provisions at European level which preventovide consumers from receiving accurate, truthful and comparable information and which are an obstacle to consumer protection protection against misrepresentations of this kind;
2015/05/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 14 #

2015/2053(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. WelcomNotes, therefore, the publication of the Green Paper (COM(2014)469) by the Commission and looks favourably upon the possible extension of the European Union's geographical indications to non- agricultural products;
2015/05/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 19 #

2015/2053(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Hopes, furthermore,Considers that the Commission will submit without delay a legislative proposal with the aim of establishing a single European system of protectionmust base any potential future action on solid evidence, and looks forward to deeper analysis of the stakeholder consultation, future impact assessment and other research into the area of geographical indications for non-agricultural products;
2015/05/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 25 #

2015/2053(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that this system should beanalysis may be based on a system based on the general principles governing the system in force for agricultural and food products, and calls on the Commission to learn the necessarybut cautions that any such policy option assessed by the Commission should include revision based on the lessons from the experience gained in that sector, with the aim of creating a system; any such policy options should be based on best practices and transparent and non- discriminatory principles, and offer positive impacts which isare effective, responsive and free of unnecessary administrative burden for the operators involved;
2015/05/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 30 #

2015/2053(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Is strongly convinced that extending protection of geographicof the opinion that proposals indications to non-agricultural products this area could have many and varied positive effects for citizens, consumers, producers and the whole European economic and social fabric, underlining the need for robust analysis before bringing forward a proposal; emphasises that such a proposal must be of benefit to SMEs as well as consumers, and notes with concern the opinion expressed in the consultation that SMEs may not find a new system worth investing in;
2015/05/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 32 #

2015/2053(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that this system could, in particular: - protect consumers more effectively and help them to make better informed choices about buying products, increasing transparency, furnishing more information about quality and origin and ensuring traceability; - help effectively to combat counterfeiting, fraudulent use of the name of a geographical origin and other unfair practices which mislead the final consumer and cause harm, most of all, to micro and medium-sized enterprises which produce the vast majority of the products that could potentially receive protection; - promote and facilitate access to the common market for European craft products, which are the fruit of traditional knowledge and skills, helping to conserve precious know-how which characterises entire social and local communities and which represents a significant element in the historical, cultural, economic and social heritage of Europe; - promote the development of new, skilled employment with links to local areas, with particular reference to depressed areas and to the poorest regions, imparting a fresh impetus to vocational and craft training closely connected to the development of localities and production areas; - help to increase the overall attractiveness of an area and to preserve local identities, as well as facilitating the generation of useful synergies to promote local areas and their distinctiveness, with consequent benefits also from the point of view of tourism, culture and trade;deleted
2015/05/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 67 #

2015/2053(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that the newany such system, as happened in the past with agrofood products, should represent a guarantee which is intuitively perceptible to consumers who seek high-quality products, regarding authenticity and origin, based on reliable and clear information; believes that a strong link with the geographical area should be required, for instance that all raw materials used in the production are sourced from that particular area;
2015/05/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 70 #

2015/2053(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that this system must be accompanied by the creation of a single European register, that it should be characterised by a cross-cutting approach in order to maximise its economic and social impact, and that it should significantly enhance the existing link between products and their area of origin, in order to increase the credibility and authenticity of a product and guarantee its origin and traceability;deleted
2015/05/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 79 #

2015/2053(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
9. Considers, at the same time, that the system should allow reasonable margins of flexibility in order more effectively to meet the need to protect heterogeneous products with diverse specific characteristics;deleted
2015/05/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 82 #

2015/2053(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that the system must be based on compliance with a clear product specification, as in the case of agrofood products, but without discouraging innovation.deleted
2015/05/13
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 3 #

2015/2012(BUD)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Da. Whereas the report of the Court of Auditors adopted on 11 July 2014 states that the potential saving for the Union budget would be about EUR 114 million a year if the Parliament centralised its activities;
2015/03/20
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 618 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) providing assistance in the screening of third-country nationals arriving at the external borders, including the identification, registration, and debriefing of those third-country nationals and, where requested by the Member State, the fingerprinting of third- country nationals;
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 831 #

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3
3. The Code of Conduct for return shall in particular pay attention to the obligation of Member States to provide for an effective forced-return monitoring system as set out in Article 8(6) of Directive 2008/115/EC 44 and to the Fundamental Rights Strategy. __________________ 44deleted OJ L 348, 21.12.2008, p. 98.
2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 243 #

2015/0288(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) be of the quantity, quality and description required by the contract, which includes that where the seller shows a sample or a model to the consumer, the goods shall possess the quality of and correspond to the description of thisat sample or model, which must be free from any defect;
2017/01/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 247 #

2015/0288(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) be fit for any particular purpose for which the consumer requires them and which the consumer made known to the seller at the time of the conclusion of the contract and which the seller has accepted; and
2017/01/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 251 #

2015/0288(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. Any agreement excluding, derogating from or varying the effects of Articles 5 and 6 to the detriment of the consumer ishall be valid only if, at the time of the conclusion of the contract, the consumer knew of the specific condition of the goods and the consumer has expressly accepted thisat specific condition when concluding the contract. It shall not be sufficient to use default options which the consumer is required to reject in order to demonstrate a lack of an express acceptance.
2017/01/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 260 #

2015/0288(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
(c) possess qualities and performance capabilities which are normal inof a satisfactory quality compared to goods of the same type and which the consumer may reasonably expect given the nature of the goods and taking into account any public statement made by or on behalf of the seller or other persons in earlier links of the chain of transactions, including the producer, unless the seller shows that:
2017/01/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 300 #

2015/0288(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point a a (new)
(a a) a repair or replacement has been attempted by the seller, but the good is still faulty and does not conform with the contract;
2017/01/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 313 #

2015/0288(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. This Article does not preclude the consumer from seeking any national remedies which may also be available. Member States may maintain in force national provisions affording other remedies, including the "short-term right to reject".
2017/01/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 317 #

2015/0288(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. Where the seller remedies the lack of conformity with the contract by replacement, the seller shall take back the replaced goods at the seller's expense unless the parties have explicitly agreed otherwise after the lack of conformity with the contract has been brought to the seller's attention by the consumer. Such explicit consent shall not be a default option which the consumer is required to agree to in order to make the purchase.
2017/01/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 350 #

2015/0288(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) the seller shall reimburse to the consumer, using the same payment method as that used by the consumer unless the consumer agrees otherwise, the price paid without undue delay and in any event not later than 14 days from receipt of the notice, and shall bear the cost of the reimbursement;
2017/01/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 361 #

2015/0288(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
The consumer shall be entitled to a remedy for the lack of conformity with the contract of the goods where the lack of conformity becomes apparent within two years as from the relevant time for establishing conformity. If, under national legislation, the rights laid down in Article 9 are subject to a limitation period, that period shall not be shorter than two years from the relevant time for establishing conformity with the contract unless the consumer could reasonably expect the good in question to last for a longer period of time, in which case the limitation period may be increased to a maximum of six years. In order to establish conformity, any fault inherent in a good at the time of purchase shall be assessed by the length of time that a consumer could reasonably expect the good in question to last.
2017/01/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 76 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
(1) The growth potential of e- commerce has not yet been fully exploitrealised. The Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe29 tackles in a holistic mannerhad, as one of its core ambitions, tackling the major obstacles to the development of cross-border e-commerce in the Union in order to unleash this potential. Ensuring better access for consumers to digital content and facilitating businesses to supply digital content is necessary toessential to help boost the Union’s digital economy and stimulate overall growth. _________________ 29 COM (2015) 192 final.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 84 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
(2) For the achievement of a genuine digital single market, the harmonisation of certain aspects concerning contracts for supply of digital content, taking as a base a high level of consumer protection, is necessary and a pro-innovation future-proof approach, is to be welcomed.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 98 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
(3) Differences in national mandatory consumer contract law rules and a lack of clear contract law rules are among the key obstacles which hinder the development of the supply of digital content, as very few tailor-made rules exist at Union level. Businesses face additional costs stemming from differences in national mandatory consumer contract law rules and legal uncertainty when selling digital content across borders. Businesses also face costs when adapting their contracts to specific mandatory rules for the supply of digital content that are already emerging or have been successfully implemented in several Member States, creating differences in scope and content between specific national rules governing these contracts. In those Member States where there are not yet specific rules for the supply of digital content, traders willing to sell cross-border face uncertainty, as they will often not know which rules apply to digital content in the Member State they want to export to, nor the content of those rules and whether they are mandatory.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 108 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
(4) Consumers are not always confident when buying cross border and especially online. One of the major factors for this lack of confidence is uncertainty about their key contractual rights and the lack of a clear contractual framework for digital content. Many consumers of digital content experience problems related to the quality of, or access to, digital content. For instance, they receive wrong or faulty digital content, or they are not able to access the digital content in question. As a result, consumers suffer financial and non- financial detriment.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 113 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
(5) In order to remedy these problems, both businesses and consumers should be able to rely on fully harmonised rules, learnt from best practices in Member States, for the supply of digital content setting out Union-wide contractual rights which are essential for this type of transactions.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 159 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
(11) The Directive should address problems across different categories of digital content and its supply. In order to cater for fast technological developments and to maintain the future-proof nature of the notion of digital content, this notion as used in this Directive should be broader than in Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council.30 In particular it should also cover services which allow the creation, processing or storage of data. While there are numerous ways for digital content to be supplied, such as transmission on a durable medium, downloading by consumers on their devices, web-streaming, allowing access to storage capabilities of digital content or access to the use of social media, this Directive should apply to all digital content independently of the medium used for its transmission. Differentiating between different categories in this technologically fast changing market is not desirable because it would hardly be possible to avoid discriminations between suppliers. A level-playing field between suppliers of different categories of digital content should be ensured. However tThis Directive should notalso apply to all forms of digital content which is embedded in goods in such a way that it operates as an integral part of the goods and its functions are subordinate to the main functionalities of the goods, including all forms of embedded digital content. _________________ 30 OJ L 304, 22.11.2011, p.64.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 171 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
(12) In order to meet the expectations of consumers and ensure a clear-cut and simple legal framework for suppliers of digital content offered on a durable medium, in relation to conformity requirements and remedies available to consumers for non-conformity, this Directive should apply to goods such as DVDs and CDs, incorporating digital content in such a way that the goods function only as a carrier of the digital content. The Directive should apply to the digital content supplied on a duratangible medium, and to embedded digital content, independently whether it is sold at a distance or in face-to-face situations, so as to avoid fragmentation between the different distribution channels. The Directive 2011/83 should continue to apply to those goods, including to obligations related to the delivery of goods, remedies in case of the failure to deliver and the nature of the contract under which those goods are supplied. The Directive is also without prejudice to the distribution right applicable to these goods under copyright law.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 174 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
(13) In the digital economy, information about individuals is often and increasingly seen by market participants as having a value comparable to money. Digital content is often supplied not in exchange for a price but against counter- performance other than money i.e. by giving access to personal data or other data. Those specific business models apply in different forms in a considerable part of the market. Introducing a differentiation depending on the nature of the counter-performance would discriminate between different business models; it would provide an unjustified incentive for businesses to move towards offering digital content against data. A level playing field should be ensured. In addi, diversifying consumer choice and encouraging innovation, d. Defects of the performance features of the digital content supplied against counter-performance other than money mayfree of charge may, in some circumstances, have an impact on the economic interests of consumers. Therefore the applicability of the rules of this Directive should not depend on whether a pric, however remedies should not be the same ias paid for the specific digital content in questionfor paid content.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 187 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
(14) As regards digital content supplied not in exchange for a price but against counter-performance other than money, this Directive should apply only to contracts where the supplier requests and the consumer actively provides data, such as name and e-mail address or photos, directly or indirectly to the supplier for example through individual registration or on the basis of a contract which allows access to consumers' photos. This Directive should not apply to situations where the supplier collects data necessary for the digital content to function in conformity with the contract, for example geographical location where necessary for a mobile application to function properly, or for the sole purpose of meeting legal requirements, for instance where the registration of the consumer is required for security and identification purposes by applicable laws. This Directive should also not apply to situations where the supplier collects information, including personal data, such as the IP address, or other automatically generated information such as information collected and transmitted by a cookie, without the consumer actively supplying it, even if the consumer accepts the cookie. It should also not apply to situations where the consumer is exposed to advertisements exclusively in order to gain access to digital content.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 225 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
(22) The protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data is governed by Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council31, by Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council and by Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council32 which are fully applicable in the context of contracts for the supply of digital content. Those Directives already establish a legal framework in the field of personal data in the Union. The implementation and application of this Directive should be made in full compliance with that legal framework. _________________ 31 OJ L 281, 23/11/1995, p. 31 - 50) [to be replaced by the General Data Protection Regulation, once adopted]. 32 OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37–47. OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37–47.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 246 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
(27) While data-driven services and technologies bring significant benefits, they also create some vulnerabilities. As recognised by the Digital Single Market Strategy a high level of network and information security is essential across the European Union to ensure respect of fundamental rights such as the right to privacy and personal data, to increase user confidence and strengthen their trust in the digital economy. As software becomes pervasive, qualities such as reliability, security and adaptability to evolving needs are also becoming a prime concern. It is therefore increasingly important that those data- driven services and technologies ensure that those qualities are guaranteed, to the extent that is proportionate to the role and function those technologies play. In particular, quality in terms of security and reliability is becoming an important concern for innovative, composite services that have to rely on the interconnection of diverse systems in different domains.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 302 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 37 a (new)
(37 a) This Directive will not require any supplier to take additional data protection measures which are not already covered under Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 305 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38
(38) Upon termination the supplier should also refrain from using the personal data and data and content generated by the consumer. However, in those cases where more than one consumer generated particular content, the supplier is entitled to continue to use the content generated by the consumer where those other consumers make use of it.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 312 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
(39) In order to ensure that the consumer benefits from effective protection in relation to the right to terminate the contract, the supplier should allow the consumer to retrieve all data uploaded by the consumer, produced by the consumer with the use of the digital content or generated through the consumer's use of the digital content. This obligation should extend to data which the supplier is obliged to retain under the contract for the supply of the digital content as well as to data which the supplier has effectively retained in relation to the contractthe significant personal data of the consumer, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 392 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
1 a. 'embedded digital content' means all forms of digital content pre-installed in a good.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 400 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
3. 'supplier' means any natural or legal person, irrespective of whether privately or publicly owned, who is acting, including through any other person acting in his name or on his behalf, for purposes relating to that person’s trade, business, craft, or profession; For the purposes of this Directive, a trader does not supply digital content to a consumer merely because the trader supplies a service by which digital content reaches the consumer;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 424 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8
8. 'digital environment' means hardware, software, digital content and any network connection to the extent that they are within the control of the user;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 441 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11
11. ‘duratangible medium’ means any instrument which enables the consumer or the supplier to store information addressed personally to that person in a way accessible for future reference for a period of time adequate for the purposes of the information and which allows the unchanged reproduction of the information stored.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 447 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive shall apply to any contract where the supplier supplies digital content or a good with embedded digital content to the consumer or undertakes to do so and, in exchange, a price is to be paid or the consumer actively provides counter-performance other than money in the form of personal data or any other data.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 479 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. This Directive shall not apply to digital content provided against counter- performance other than money to the extent the supplier requests the consumer to provide personal data the processing of which is strictly necessary for the performance of the contract or for meeting legal requirements and the supplier does not further process them in a way incompatible with this purposeRegulation (EU) 2016/679. It shall equally not apply to any other data the supplier requests the consumer to provide for the purpose of ensuring that the digital content is in conformity with the contract or of meeting legal requirements, and the supplier does not use that data for commercial purposes.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 504 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 8
8. This Directive is without prejudice to the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data as provided for by Directive 95/46/EC and by Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 514 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Member States shall not maintain or introduce provisions diverging from those laid down in this Directive, including more or less stringent provisions to ensure a different level of consumer protection.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 546 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – title
CRequirements for conformity of the digital content with the contract
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 559 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) conform with the consumer's legitimate expectations and be fit for any particular purpose for which the consumer requires it and which the consumer made known to the supplier at the time of the conclusion of the contract and which the supplier accepted;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 775 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. The consumer shall exercise the right to terminate the contract by notice to the supplier given by any means which have been contractually agreed between the supplier and the consumer.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 783 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. In the case of digital contracts the supplier should be obliged to offer the consumer an easy to access online method of terminating the contract.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 791 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the supplier shall take all measures which could be expected in order to refrain from the use of the counter-performance other than moneyensure that the supplier uses personal data which the consumer has provided in exchange for the digital content and any other data collected by the supplier in relation to the supply of the digital content including any content provided by the consumer with the exceptin accordance with the provisions of the content which has been generated jointly by the consumer and others who continue to make use of the contentRegulation (EU) 2016/679;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 807 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) the supplier shall provide the consumer with technical means to retrieve all content provided by the consumer and any other data produced or generated through the consumer's use of the digital content to the extent that data has been retainpersonal data, as defined under Regulation (EU) 2016/679, provided by the suppliconsumer. The consumer shall be entitled to retrieve the contentdata free of charge, without significant inconvenience, in reasonable time and in a commonly used data format;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 814 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) where the digital content was not supplied on a duratangible medium, the consumer shall refrain from using the digital content or making it available to third parties, in particular by deleting the digital content or rendering it otherwise unintelligible;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 816 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point e – introductory part
(e) where the digital content was supplied on a duratangible medium, the consumer shall:
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 817 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point e – point i
(i) upon the request of the supplier, return, at the supplier's expense, the duratangible medium to the supplier without undue delay, and in any event not later than 14 days from the receipt of the supplier's request; and
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 862 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. The supplier shall be liable to the consumer for any economic damage to the device or to other digital envirconmtent of the consumer caused by a lack of conformity with the contract or a failure to supply the digital content. Damages shall put the consumer as nearly as possible into the position in which the consumer would have been if the digital content had been duly supplied and been in conformity with the contract.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 886 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the consumer is notified reasonably in advance of the modification by an explicit notice on a duratangible medium;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 901 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the supplier shall refrain from the use of the counter-performance other than money which the consumer has provided in exchange for the digital content and any other data collected by the supplier in relation to the supply of the digital content including any content provided by the consumerany personal data which the consumer has provided in accordance with the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 914 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. Where the contract provides for the supply of the digital content for an indeterminate period or where the initial contract duration or any combination of renewal periods exceed 12 months, the consumer shall be entitled to terminate the contract any time after the expiration of the first 12 months period, unless contractually agreed between the supplier and the consumer.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 936 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – point a
(a) the supplier shall take all measures which could be expected in order to refrain from the use of other counter- performance than money which the consumer has provided in exchange for the digital content and any other data collected by the supplier in relation to the supply of the digital content including any content provided by the consumerrefrain from the use of any personal data which the consumer has provided in accordance with the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679;
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 947 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) the supplier shall provide the consumer with technical means to retrieve all any content provided by the consumer and any other data produced or generated through the consumer's use of the digital contentpersonal data provided by the consumer , to the extent this data has been retained by the supplier. The consumer shall be entitled to retrieve the content without significant inconvenience, in reasonable time and in a commonly used data format; and
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 985 #

2015/0287(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall, not later than on [the date of fivthree years after entry into force] review the application of this Directive and submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council. The report shall examine, inter alia, the concept of data as a counter-performance, the case for harmonisation of rules applicable to contracts for the supply of digital content against counter-performance, other than that covered by this Directive, in particular supplied against advertisement or indirect collection of data practicalities of returning data, the limitations on data generated content and the impact on smaller businesses and start-ups. The Commission will, by two years after the date of review, come forward with a proposal to amend the Directive accordingly.
2017/02/15
Committee: IMCOJURI
Amendment 68 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
(4) The terrorist threat has grown and rapidly evolved in recent years. Individuals referred to as "foreign terrorist fighters" travel abroad for terrorism purposes. Returning foreign terrorist fighters pose a heightened security threat to all EU Member States. Foreign terrorist fighters have been linked to several recent attacks or plots, including the attacks in Paris on 13 November 2015 and in Brussels on the 22nd of March 2016. In addition, the European Union and its Member States face increased threats from individuals inspired or instructed by terrorist groups abroad but who remain within Europe.
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 189 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
(19) This Directive respects the principles recognised by Article 2 of the Treaty on the European Union, respects fundamental rights and freedoms and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, including those set out in Chapters II, III, V and VI thereof which encompass inter alia the right to liberty and security, freedom of expression and, freedom of speech, freedom of information, freedom of association and freedom of thought conscience and religion, the general prohibition of discrimination in particular on grounds of race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, the right to respect for private and family life and the right to protection of personal data, the principle of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties, covering also the requirement of precision, clarity and foreseeability in criminal law, the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial, the outcome of which is determined on the individual circumstances of the case, as well as freedom of movement as set forth in Article 21(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Directive 2004/38/EC. This Directive has to be implemented in accordance with these rights and principles.
2016/04/08
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 252 #

2015/0281(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the distribution, or otherwise making available, of a message to the public, with the intent to incite the commission or encourage the preparation or instigation of one of the offences listed in points (a) to (h) of Article 3(2), where such conduct, whether or not directly advocating terrorist offences, causes a danger that one or more such offences may be committed, is punishable as a criminal offence when committed intentionally.
2016/04/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 199 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
(21) The Commission’s proposal for a DirectiveDirective (EU) 2016/2102 of the European Parliament and of the Council34 includes accessibility requirements for a specific set of public sector bodies’ websites and mobile applications. In addition, it proposes to establishes the basis for a monitoring and reporting methodology of the compliance of the relevant websites with the requirements listed in that Directive. Both the accessibility requirements and the monitoring and reporting methodology included in that Directive are to apply to the public sector bodies' websites and mobile applications. With the purpose of, notably, ensuring that relevant authorities implement the same accessibility requirements independently of the type of regulated website or mobile application, the accessibility requirements set out in this Directive should be aligned to those of the proposed Directive on the accessibility of public sector bodies’ websitesDirective (EU) 2016/2102. Activities of ecommerce of public sector websites and mobile applications not covered by that Directive, fall under the scope of this proposalDirective, in order to ensure that the online sale of products and services is accessible for persons with disabilities and older persons, irrespective of their public or private sale. __________________ 34 Proposal for a DirectiveDirective (EU) 2016/2102 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2016 on the accessibility of public sector bodies' websites COM(2012) 721the websites and mobile applications of public sector bodies (OJ L 327, 2.12.2016, p. 1).
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 200 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 22 a (new)
(22a) This Directive should complement the sectorial Union legislation in the aspects not covered by this Directive.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 211 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 24 a (new)
(24a) This Directive should not, however, change the compulsory or voluntary nature of the provisions in those other legislative acts of the Union such as Article 67 of Directive 2014/24/EU on contract award criteria, which contracting authorities can use to determine the most economically advantageous tender. If deemed linked to the subject matter of the procurement in question, the possibility of social aspects can be included. This Directive should thus ensure that, when accessibility requirements are used in accordance with those other legislative acts of the Union, those requirements are the same across the Union.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 212 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 25 a (new)
(25a) 'Design for all' should be understood as the design and composition of an environment, including products and services, so that it can be accessed, understood and used to the greatest extent possible. It is recognised that the 'Design for all' can be achieved by means of additional fully interoperable assistive technology or devices.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 215 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
(28) All economic operators falling within the scope of this Directive and intervening in the supply and distribution chain should ensure that they make available on the market only products which are in conformity with the accessibility requirements of this Directive. It is necessary to provide for a clear and proportionate distribution of obligations which correspond to the role of each operator in the supply and distribution process.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 255 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 53 a (new)
(53a) However, public contracts for supplies, works or services which are subject to Directive 2014/24/EU or Directive 2014/25/EU, and which were awarded before the date of application of this Directive, should continue to be delivered in accordance with the accessibility requirements, if any, specified in those public contracts.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 288 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) air, bus, rail and waterborne passenger transport services; in relation to the following aspects:
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 290 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point c – point i (new)
i) the websites, mobile applications, the mobile device-based services, smart ticketing, real-time information; and
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 291 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point c – point ii (new)
ii) self-service terminals located within the territory of the Union, including ticketing machines and check- in machines used for the provision of passenger transport services;
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 296 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) e-books and access to e-books;
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 301 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point f
(f) e-commerceonline marketplace intended for use by consumers.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 306 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Chapters I, VI and VII of this Directive apply to the following, in relation to products and services set out in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article:
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 307 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) public contracts and concessions which are subject to Directive 2014/23/EU42 Directive 2014/24/EU and Directive 2014/25/EU. __________________ 42 Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the award of concession contracts (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 1)subject to paragraph 3a of this Article, public contracts, including mixed contracts, the object of which is intended for use by natural persons, whether general public or staff of the contracting authority or contracting entity, and that are subject to Directive 2014/24/EU and Directive 2014/25/EU, where technical specifications are drawn up in accordance with those Directives so as to take into account, except in duly justified cases, accessibility criteria for persons with disabilities or design for all users.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 310 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – point a a (new)
(aa) public contracts in accordance with paragraph 3a, where technical specifications related to those contracts are published in a call for competition after the date of application of this Directive, but not in respect of modifications to public contracts where the contract concerned was awarded before that date;
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 311 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – point a b (new)
(ab) programmes in accordance with paragraph 3b adopted after the date of application of this Directive, or programming documentation implementing such programmes, to the extent the documentation is published after that date.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 312 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – point a c (new)
(ac) new, rehabilitated and upgraded transport infrastructure in accordance with paragraph 3d for which design or construction starts after the date of application of this Directive.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 314 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) the preparation and implementation of programmes under the European Structural and Investment Funds that stipulate that accessibility for persons with disabilities shall be taken into account throughout the preparation and implementation of those programmes, as it is currently stipulated in the Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund;43 and Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council.44 __________________ 43 Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 ( OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 320). 44 Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the European Social Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 322 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. This Directive shall be without prejudice to Union and national legislation on copyright and related rights.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 324 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. This Directive is without prejudice to provisions in the following Union legislation when relating to accessibility contained in the Regulation (EC) 1371/2007 with regard to providing certain information on the accessibility of rail services upon request and with regard to providing tickets; Regulation (EU) 1300/2014 with regard to establishment of the technical specification for interoperability relating to certain elements of accessibility of the Union's rail system for persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility; Regulation (EU) 454/2011 on the technical specification for interoperability relating to the subsystem 'telematics applications for passenger services' of the trans-European rail system; Regulation (EU) 181/2011 with regard to providing certain information on access conditions to be provided to passengers; and Regulation (EU) 1177/2010 providing certain information on access conditions to be provided to passengers, and Regulation (EU) 1107/2006 with regard to providing the information therein indicated when travelling by air. This Directive complements those Regulations by providing for additional accessibility requirements concerning aspects that are not covered by those regulations.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 339 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point 6 a (new)
(6a) "access to audiovisual media services" means features necessary for enabling the use of audiovisual media services provided, particularly different means of transmission of audiovisual media services, to the extent that the features are not covered by Directive 2010/13/EU;
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 346 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point 21
(21) “e-commerce” means the online sale of products and services"online marketplace" means a digital service that allows consumers as defined in point (a) of Article 4(1) of Directive 2013/11/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council1a to conclude online sales or service contracts with traders as defined in point (b) of Article 4(1) of that Directive either on the online marketplace's website or on a trader's website that uses computing services provided by the online marketplace; __________________ 1a 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 and Directive 2009/22/EC (Directive on consumer ADR) (OJ L 165, 18.6.2013, p. 63).
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 382 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 9
9. E-commerOnline marketplaces shall comply with the requirements set out in Section VIII of Annex I.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 396 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. When placing their products on the market, manufacturers shall ensure that the products have been designed and manufactured in accordance with the applicable accessibility requirements set out in Article 3 unless the functional requirements are not achievable as the adaptation of product would need a fundamental alteration or would impose a disproportionate burden for the manufacturer.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 397 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The requirements set out in paragraph 1 are deemed to be satisfied also when the manufacturer chooses the use of third party applications, peripheral devices, software, hardware, or customer premises equipment that persons with disabilities can access.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 398 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Manufacturers shall draw up the technical documentation in accordance with Annex II and carry out the conformity assessment procedure set out in that Annex or have it carried out.deleted
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 399 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Manufacturers shall draw up the technical documentation in accordance with Annex II and carry out the conformity assessment procedure set out in that Annex or have it carried outocument how it has reached relevant functional criteria set out in Annex I on the basis of the intended purpose of its product. Manufacturers can determine how to document accordance with Annex I. This could include listing standards used to reach the functional criteria or detailed information on how the functional criteria were fulfilled or to what degree their products fulfil the criteria. Where not relevant to the intended use or achievability of technology an explanation can be provided.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 400 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Where compliance of a product with the applicable accessibility requirements has been demonstrated by that procedure, manufacturers shall draw up an EU declaration of conformity and affix the CE marking.deleted
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 406 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Manufacturers shall ensure that procedures are in place for series production to remain in conformitydocumented. Changes in product design or characteristics and changes in the harmonised standards or in other technical specifications and by reference to which conformity of a product is declaredto which the product refers to shall be adequately taken into account.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 415 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 8
8. Manufacturers who consider or have reason to believe that a product which they have placed on the market is not in conformity with this Directive shall immediately take the necessary corrective measures to bring that product into conformity, or to withdraw it or recall it, if appropriate. Furthermore, where the product presents a risk related to accessibilityis not in conformity with this Directive, manufacturers shall immediately inform the competent national authorities of the Member States in which they made the product available to that effect, giving details, in particular, of the non-compliance and of any corrective measures taken.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 418 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 9
9. Manufacturers shall, further to a reasoned request from a competent national authority, provide it with all the information and documentation necessary to demonstrate the conformityaccordance of the product, in a language which can be easily understood by that authority. They shall cooperate with that authority, at its request, on any action taken to eliminate the risks posed by products which they have placed on the market and to ensure complito ensure accordance with the requirements referred to in Article 3.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 427 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Before placing a product on the market importers shall ensure that the conformity assessment procedure set out in Annex II has been carried out by the manufacturer. They shall ensure that the manufacturer has drawn up the technical documentation required by that Annex, that the product bears the CE marking and is accompanied by the required documentsmanufacturers have documented how it has reached relevant functional criteria set out in Annex I on the basis of the intended purpose of its product and that the manufacturer has complied with the requirements set out in Article 5(2), (5) and (6).
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 434 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Where an importer considers or has reason to believe that a product idoes not in conformity withmeet the accessibility requirements referred to in Article 3, he shall not place the product on the market until it has been brought into conformitymeets the requirements. Furthermore, where the product presents a risk, the importer shall inform the manufacturer and the market surveillance authorities to that effect.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 436 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 7
7. Importers shall keep a register of complaints, of non-conforming products and product recalls, and shall keep distributors informed of such monitoring.deleted
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 438 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 8
8. Importers who consider or have reason to believe that a product which they have placed on the market is not in conformity with the requirements referred to in Article 3 shall immediately take the necessary corrective measures to bring that product into conformity, to withdraw it or recall it, if appropriate. Furthermore where the product presents a risk, importers shall immediately inform the competent national authorities of the Member States in which they made the product available to that effect, giving details, in particular, of the non- compliance and of any corrective measures taken.
2017/02/14
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 449 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Before making a product available on the market distributors shall verify that the product bears the CE marking, that it is accompanied by the required documents and by instructions and information in a language which can be easily understood by consumers and other end-users in the Member State in which the product is to be made available on the market and that the manufacturer and the importer have complied with the requirements set out in Article 5(5) and (6) and Article 7(4).
2017/03/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 458 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 5
5. Distributors who consider or have reason to believe that a product which they have made available on the market idoes not in conformity withmeet the requirements of this Directive shall make sure that the necessary corrective measures are taken to bring that product into conformityaccordance, to withdraw it or recall it, if appropriate. Furthermore, where the product presents a risk, distributors shall immediately inform the competent national authorities of the Member States in which they made the product available to that effect giving details, in particular, of the non-compliance and of any corrective measures taken.
2017/03/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 466 #

2015/0278(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Economic operators shall be able to present the information referred to in paragraph 1 for a period of 10five years after they have been supplied with the product and for a period of 10five years after they have supplied the product.
2017/03/27
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 172 #
2016/04/29
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 330 #

2015/0269(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point b
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 –paragraph 1e
1e. For the purposes of this Directive, "broker" shall mean any natural or legal person, other than a dealer whose trade or business consists wholly or partly in buying, selling or arranging the transfer within a Member State, from one Member State to another Member State or exporting to a third country or importing into a Member State from a third country fully assembled firearms, their parts and ammunition.
2016/04/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 361 #

2015/0269(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point c
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 1 – paragraph 1h
1h. For the purposes of this Directive, "replica firearms" shall mean objects that have the physical appearance of a firearm, but are manufactured in such a way that they cannot be converted to firing a shot or expelling a bullet or projectile by the action of a combustible propellant.deleted
2016/04/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 434 #

2015/0269(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 3
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that any firearm or parand any essential component placed on the market has been marked and registered in compliance with this Directive.
2016/04/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 549 #

2015/0269(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 6
Directive 91/477/EEC
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall provide for standard medical tests for issuing or renewing authorisations as referred to in paragraph 1 and shall withdraw authorisations if any of the conditions on the basis of which it wasthey were granted is no longer met.
2016/04/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 811 #

2015/0269(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 13 – point a – point iii
Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part II – point A – category C – point 5
5. Alarm and signal weaponsFirearms under categories A, B and points 1 to 4 of category C, after having been converted to alarm, signal, salute and, acoustic weapons as well as replicas;, gas, paintball or airsoft, Flobert, or percussion lock weapons.
2016/04/29
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 39 #

2015/0211(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) In light of the very sharp increase that has been experienced since 2014 in the number of applications for international protection made in the Union, and the very low rate of returns of those individuals who do not qualify for international protection, and the resulting unprecedented pressure on Member States’ asylum systems the Union acknowledged the need to strengthen the application of the safe country of origin provisions of Directive 2013/32/EU, as an essential tool to support the swift processing of applications that are likely to be unfounded. In particular, in its conclusions of 25 and 26 June 2015, the European Council referred, in relation to the need to accelerate the treatment of asylum applications, to the intention of the Commission as set out in its Communication on a European Agenda on Migration8 to strengthen these provisions, including the possible establishment of an EU common list of safe countries of origin. Moreover, the Justice and Home Affairs Council in its conclusions on safe countries of origin of 20 July 2015 welcomed the intention of the Commission to strengthen the safe countries of origin provisions in Directive 2013/32/EU, including the possible establishment of an EU common list of safe countries of origin. __________________ 8 COM (2015) 240 final, 13.5.2015. COM (2015) 240 final, 13.5.2015.
2016/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 86 #

2015/0211(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3
3. Any amendment of the EU common list of safe countries of origin shall be adopted in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure.
2016/05/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 13 #

2015/0028(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
(1) Regulation (EC) No 1007/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council2 was adopted with the objective of eliminating obstacles to the functioning of the internal market due to differences in national measures regulating trade in seal products. Those measures were adopted in response to widespread public moral concernsoutrage about the animal welfare aspects of the killing of seals and the possible presence on the market of products obtained from animals killed in a way that causes excessive pain, distress, fear and other forms of suffering. Such concerns wereoutrage was supported by scientific evidence showing that a genuinely humane killing method cannot be consistently and effectively applied and enforced in the specific conditions in which seal hunting takes place. In order to achieve that objective, Regulation (EC) No 1007/2009 introduced, as a general rule, a prohibition of placing on the market of seal products. __________________ 2 Regulation (EC) No 1007/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 on trade in seal products (OJ L 286, 31.10.2009, p 36).
2015/04/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 16 #

2015/0028(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
(2) At the same time, seal hunting is an integral part of the culture and identity of the Inuit and other indigenous communities and makes a major contribution to their subsistence, providing not only food but the other essential element required for subsistence, namely a sustainable and reliable source of income. For those reasons, seal hunts traditionally conducted by Inuit and other indigenous communities do not raise the same public moral concerns as the hunts conducted primarily for commercial purposes. Moreover, it is broadly recognised that the fundamental and social interests of Inuit and other indigenous communities should not be adversely affected, in accordance with United Nations Declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples and other relevant international instruments. For those reasons, by way of exception, Regulation (EC) No 1007/2009 allows the placing on the market of seal products which result from hunts traditionally conducted by Inuit and other indigenous communities and which contribute to their subsistence.
2015/04/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 26 #

2015/0028(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) AIt has been proven by scientific evidence that a genuinely humane killing method cannot be effectively and consistently applied in the hunts conducted by the Inuit and other indigenous communities, just like in the other seal hunts. Nonetheless, it is appropriate, in light of the objective pursued by Regulation (EC) No 1007/2009, to make the placing in the Union market of products resulting from hunts by the Inuit and other indigenous communities conditional upon those hunts being conducted in a manner which reduces pain, distress, fear or other forms of suffering of the animals hunted to the extent possible, while having regard to the traditional way of life and the subsistence needs of the Inuit and other indigenous communities. The exception granted in respect of seal products resulting from hunts conducted by Inuit and other indigenous communities should be limited to hunts that contribute to the subsistence need of those communities and are therefore not conducted primarily for commercial purposes. Thus, the Commission should be enabled to limit, if necessary, the quantity of seal products placed on the market under that exception in order to prevent the use of the exception by products resulting from hunts which are conducted primarily for commercial purposes.
2015/04/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 46 #

2015/0028(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 3 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1007/2009
Article 5 a (new)
(3a) The following article is inserted: "Article 5a Public information 1. The Commission shall ensure, at a reasonable and non-excessive cost, that the public is properly informed that the seal products placed on the market originating from hunts conducted by Inuit and other indigenous communities in accordance with Article 3(1), comply with applicable legal rules. 2. The Commission shall ensure that awareness-raising campaigns referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article are also conducted under Objective II set out in point (b) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 254/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council*. _____________ * Regulation (EU) No 254/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on a multiannual consumer programme for the years 2014- 20 and repealing Decision No 1926/2006/EC (OJ L 84, 20.3.2014, p.42)"
2015/04/28
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 20 #

2014/2256(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that copyright and related rights play an important role, as they protect and stimulate both the development and marketing of new products and services and the creation and exploitation of their creative content, thereby contributing to improved competitiveness, employment and innovation across several industry sectors in the EU; stresses that copyright is only as effective as the enforcement measures in place to protect it and that in order to ensure a flourishing and innovative creative sector copyright enforcement must be robust;
2015/02/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 22 #

2014/2256(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Believes that the modernisation of copyright rules in the EU would be incomplete without an update of Directive 2000/31/EC on electronic commerce and suggests that the European Commission should consider actions in this direction;
2015/02/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 23 #

2014/2256(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Recognises the need to ensure apprat the purpose of copyriate remuneration andght is to protect the rights of all categories of right holders in a better way and to allow creators to gain appropriate remuneration for their efforts through others making use of their work, and therefore to encourage future creativity; recalls that while the cultural and creative industries (CCI) employ more than seven million people and contribute 4.5% of EU GDP annually, and that even though the services, technologies and options permitting the general public to access creative works grow every day, the earnings of right holders in the CCI sector keep decreasing;
2015/02/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 36 #

2014/2256(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights the fact that Member States’ provisions on copyright and related rights vary considerably, and that the exclusivity which copyright grants its owner is, in principle, limited to the territorial boundaries of the Member State where the right has been granted, which may leads to market fragmentation across the EU;
2015/02/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 39 #

2014/2256(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Believes that common effort should be made in combatting copyright infringements in the EU in order to ensure the protection of copyright and fair remuneration for authors of copyrighted online content;
2015/02/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 42 #

2014/2256(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that territorial fragmentation may require users aspiring to offer content- related services across the EU to secure multiple licenses; emphasises the factnotes that differences in limitations and exceptions may create additional legal costs and legal uncertainty; recalls that consumers may be denied access to certain content services on geographical grounds; believes that consumers should be able to buy online content from another Member State when it is not easily accessible from a home provider; stresses that clear information should be provided to consumers at the time of purchase of a digital content license on the geographical limitations of the use of that content; highlights that Europe's creative output is one of its richest resources, and those who want to enjoy it should be able to pay to do so, even when it is only sold in another Member State;
2015/02/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 66 #

2014/2256(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
9. Urges the Commission to promote a flexible and balanced framework for exceptions and limitations that does not cause any harm to right holders and that conforms with consumer expectationshigher level of common approaches towards narrow, targeted and format- neutral exceptions and limitations that do not weaken copyright protection as part of a balanced framework for exceptions and limitations that does not cause any harm to right holders and that conforms with consumer expectations; encourages Member States to make use of those exceptions in a narrow, targeted and technology-neutral way where evidence demonstrates they would be necessary to promote access to creative content and support creativity; emphasises the important role that exceptions and limitations agreed on for public-interest reasons, for the purpose of education and teaching, play in providing access to knowledge as well as in encouraging cultural and societal participation; highlights the importance of copyright exceptions that allow enhanced accessibility to digital content for persons with disabilities; urges the Commission and the Member States to consider e-books as part of public lending schemes, provided that all necessary agreements with the relevant right holders have been reached beforehand;
2015/02/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 81 #

2014/2256(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
11. Highlights the importance of promoting greater interoperability for software, as lack of interoperability hampers innovation and reduces competition in the EU; believes that lack of interoperability may lead to market dominance of one particular product, which in turn stifles competition and limits consumer choice in the EU; highlights the importance of copyright exceptions that allow enhanced accessibility to digital content for persons with disabilities; recognises that the inability to purchase content in an appropriate format for users with disabilities also creates a barrier to trade for enterprises; recognises that a number of these issues are linked to competition law and highlights that healthy competition along with the protection of intellectual property rights are essential for doing business with legal content; further recognises that the inability to purchase content in an appropriate format that can support users with disabilities reduces the cultural output and content offer available across the Member States.
2015/02/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 43 #

2014/2241(INI)

4. Recommends the creation of an EU online application containing European travel maps, which could help to promote Europe as a tourist destination and to improve the amount and quality of information available to consumers; stresses that costs incurred in the creation and maintenance of this application should be kept to a minimum, without a Union budget increase;
2015/06/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 48 #

2014/2241(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the need to have a more coordinated approach among Member States in tourism-related policy areas, such as innovation, transport, taxation, service quality and the visa regime, while respecting the principle of subsidiarity;
2015/06/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 71 #

2014/2241(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Recommends the abolition of Air Passenger Duty in the EU in order to encourage tourism into Europe and increase economic growth;
2015/06/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 7 #

2014/2228(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Demands that the main outcome of the negotiations be an ambitious and comprehensive agreement, bringing a significant new market openingaccess opportunities for EU companies, including SMEs;
2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 27 #

2014/2228(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Is convinced, however, that TTIP should not only cut down barriers but also aim at promoting European high levels of consumer protection; observes that in most sectors EU and US standards and regulatory environments ensure this high level; considers, therefore, that approximating our regulations represents a unique chance to establish high-quality standards and laws for consumers, which will be the de facto international standardscould form a new global benchmark in terms of consumer protection;
2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 87 #

2014/2228(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for mutual recognition of professional qualifications between the Parties, but especially at a state level in the US and for the aboliexamination of work permit requirements forthe possibility of facilitating the movement of highly-skilled workers in sectors covered by TTIP, so as to create maximum mobility of professionals between the EU and the US;
2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 101 #

2014/2228(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Urges the Commission to ensure that European companies, including SMEs, are not discriminated against whenhave the ability to tendering for public contracts on a non-discriminatory basis on the US market at all government levels, including in the fields of public utilities, and to ensure transparent access at a level equal to or higher than that applying to US companies today in Europe under the new EU procurement rules; in this regard, asks that the Commission examine the possibility of EU companies being granted exemptions from Buy America clauses in federal, and where possible, state legislation;
2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 110 #

2014/2228(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Demands that TTIP builds on the outcome of the Government procurement Agreement (GPA) in terms of coverage, rules and disciplines and that it simplifies and streamlines procedures while providing for increased transparency;
2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 135 #

2014/2228(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for the setting-up of an ambitious and effective cooperation and dialogue mechanism aimed at creating common standards where possible in existing procedures, and to ensure that there is no unintended divergence in future standards in key sectors; believes that EU- US common standards should be promoted in all international forumsa; considers that provisions agreed in the draft CETA should be considered a useful point of departure in this regard;
2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 169 #

2014/2228(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
10. Supports the establishment of a mandatory structural dialogue and cooperation between regulators, as well as the confirmation of best regulatory practices, in complete respect of regulatory autonomy, in particular in the engineering sector, comprising electrical and mechanical machinery, appliances and equipment; stresses that this should involve early warning mechanisms and exchanges at the time of preparation of regulations; believes that regulatory divergences are the central non-tariff barrier (NTB) to trade, and that regulators should explore ways to promote compatibility, such as mutual recognition, harmonisation or alignment of requirements;
2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 183 #

2014/2228(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that the recognition of equivalence of the greatest possible number of vehicle safety regulations would be one of the most important achievements of TTIP; stresses that this will require verifying that the EU and US regulations provide for a similar level of protection; believes that this must be a step towards full regulatory convergence for the sector; urges the strengthening of EU-US cooperation in the framework of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), especially regarding new technologies as well as in other international standard setting fora;
2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 209 #

2014/2228(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14
14. Considers that the EU and the US need to establish common rules to define the origin of products, and that such rules should be clear and easily applicable and should consider current and future trends in production. as well as future possible cumulation with countries with which the EU and US have free trade agreements;
2015/02/26
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 4 #

2014/2151(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Recognises that the enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPRs) is not merely a driver for jobs and growth across the Union but is essential for the proper functioning of the single market, especially in view of factors such as share of EU GDP, employment, and the range of industries affected bywhich benefit from and exploit IPRs;
2015/02/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 8 #

2014/2151(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the Commission’s Action Plan with its emphasis on tackling enforcement on commercial scale infringements by adopting a ‘follow the money’ approach where those who are the greatest offenders willinfringing on a commercial-scale will be targeted and should suffer financial loss;
2015/02/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 11 #

2014/2151(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Recognises the importance of voluntary Memoranda of Understanding that establish firm principles agreed upon during stakeholder dialogues, as they will help reduce commercial scale IPR infringements in the online environment, and looks forward to a report back on the success of any voluntary measures on an annual regular basis;
2015/02/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 12 #

2014/2151(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Believes that the Commission should also consider the effectiveness of existing initiatives and possible future activities with regard to the role of intermediaries in tackling IPR infringement;
2015/02/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 27 #

2014/2151(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Supports the emphasis placed in the Action Plan on the importance of working with Member States, sharing information and best practice, and coordinating activity over crossborder enforcement; welcomes the establishment of the Member State Expert Group on IP Enforcement, as sharing best practice will help with the development of policies and implementation of the Action Plan, building upon data and research prepared nationally and via the Observatory;
2015/02/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 37 #

2014/2151(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to bring forward necessary proposals in line with stakeholders if voluntary measures are found not to be working after the first publication of the ‘IP in the EU economy’ report, which should be published annually.Deleted
2015/02/25
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 8 #

2014/2111(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Regrets that using two locations (Lille and Valenciennes) to carry out its activities exposes the Agency to additional costs and represents an unnecessary waste of taxpayers' money; calls for this issue to be addressed before any increase in the Agency's budget is approved, in order to restore value for money and operational efficiency;
2015/01/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 3 #

2014/2106(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights the Agency’s vital role in ensuring the highest possible level of aviation safety throughout Europe; also notes that the current review of the Single European Sky legislation could lead to greater powers being accorded to the EASA; stresses that, should this be the case, the Agency will need to be given the financial, material and human resources it needs to perform its tasks successfully; but emphasises that the Agency should focus on efficiency savings to ensure maximum value for money for taxpayers before seeking an increased budget.
2015/01/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 2 #

2014/2105(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights the Agency’s vital role as guarantor of maritime safety in Europe, with its competences having been expanded following the adoption of its new basic regulation in February 2013; stresses in this respect that the Agency has to be given the financial, material and human resources it needs to perform its tasks successfully; but reminds the Agency that it has a duty to ensure that through the use of all possible efficiency savings and the intelligent use of existing administrative structures, it can carry out its newly assigned competences without an undue budget increase, being mindful of the fact that the Agency must avoid the unnecessary duplication of the work of national authorities;
2015/01/28
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 48 #

2014/0268(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Notwithstanding the requirements of Article 5(2) and (3) and Article 17(2), Member States shall permit the placing on the market of replacement engines that meet one of the following requirements: (a) engines of category NRE, NRG or NRS that comply with the limit values that the engine which is intended to be replaced had to meet when originally placed on the market; (b) engines of category RLL or RLR that comply with the limit values that the engine which is intended to be replaced had to meet when originally placed on the market, if the engine to be replaced was manufactured on or after 1 January 2012; (c) engines of category RLL or RLR that comply with the limit values that applied to engines within the scope of the respective category on 31 December 2011 for placing on the market if the engine to be replaced was produced on or before that date and the use of a replacement engine that meets the requirements of the latest applicable emissions stage in the railcar or locomotive in question will involve significant technical difficulties.
2015/04/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 55 #

2014/0268(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Without prejudice to Articles 5(3) and 17(2), transition engines and, where applicable, the machinery in which those transition engines are installed may continue to be placed on the market during the transition period on condition that the machine in which the transition engine is installed has a production date prior to 17 years after the start of the transition period.
2015/04/15
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 216 #

2014/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2
Manufacturers shall ensure that the fitting is accompanied by the Fitting conformity certificate containing, amongst others, instructions for incorporation or assembly, adjustment, operation and maintenance in accordance with point 1.7 of Annex I, in a language which can be easily understood by appliance manufacturers. The instructions shall be clear, understandable, as determined by the Member State concerned. However, where a large number of fittings are delivered to a single user, the batch or consignment concerned may be accompanied by a sole issue of the instructions for incorporation or assembly, adjustment, operation and maintelligiblenance in accordance with point 1.7 of Annex I.
2015/03/04
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 217 #

2014/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Before placing a fitting on the market, importers shall ensure that the appropriate conformity assessment procedure in accordance withreferred to in Article 14 has been carried out by the manufacturer. They shall ensure that the manufacturer has drawn up the technical documentation, that the fitting is accompanied by the Fitting conformity certificate containing, amongst others,bears the CE marking and is accompanied by instructions for incorporation or assembly, adjustment, operation and maintenance in accordance with point 1.7 of Annex I, and that the manufacturer has complied with the requirements set out in Article 7(5) and (6) respectively.
2015/03/04
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 219 #

2014/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Importers shall ensure that the fitting is accompanied by the Fitting conformity certificate containing, amongst others, instructions for incorporation or assembly, adjustment, operation and maintenance in accordance with point 1.7 of Annex I, in a language which can be easily understood by appliance manufacturers, as determined by the Member State concerned.
2015/03/04
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 221 #

2014/0136(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Before making a fitting available on the market distributors shall verify that the fitting is accompanied by the Fitting conformity certificate containing, amongst others,bears the CE marking and is accompanied by instructions for incorporation or assembly, adjustment, operation and maintenance in accordance with point 1.7 of Annex I, in a language which can be easily understood by appliance manufacturers, and that the manufacturer and the importer have complied with the requirements set out in Article 7(5) and (6) and Article 9(3) respectively.
2015/03/04
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 117 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
(2) Part I of this Directive takes over the provisions of Directive 2009/102/EC as regards all single-member limited liability companies. It requires that in case all shares come to be held by a single shareholder, its identity should be disclosed to the public by the entry in the register. This Directive also provides that decisions taken by the single shareholder exercising the power of the general meeting as well as the contracts between the shareholder and the company should be recorded in writing and kept in digital format, unless they relate to contracts concluded under market conditions in the ordinary course of business.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 119 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
(3) Establishing single-member limited liability companies as subsidiaries in other Member States entails costs due to the diverse legal and administrative requirements which must be met in the Member States concerned. Such divergent requirements continue to exist among Member States and therefore companies might find it costly and difficult to conduct business across borders. The additional financial and administrative burdens and costs related to setting-up companies hamper the full development of business within the internal market.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 120 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
(3) Establishing single-member limited liability companies as subsidiaries in other Member States entails costs due to the diverse legal and administrative requirements which must be met in the Member States concerned. Such divergent requirements continue to exist among Member States and create barriers for companies, in particular SMEs, to establish and operate cross-border.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 121 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
(6) In line with the Europe 2020 strategy, the Review of the Small Business Act for Europe18 advocated further progress in making smart regulation a reality, enhancing market access and promoting entrepreneurship, innovation, job creation and inclusive growth. __________________ 18 COM(2011) 78 final, 23.2.2011.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 122 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
(7) In order to foster more entrepreneurship in Europe and to facilitate the cross-border activities of SMEs and the establishment of single- member companies as subsidiaries in other Member States, the costs and administrative burdens involved in setting- up these companies should be reduced and the rules for businesses on the internal market of the Union should be simplified.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 123 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
(7) In order to facilitate the cross-border activities of SMEs and the establishment of single-member companies as subsidiaries in other Member States, the costs and administrative burdens involved in setting- up these companies should be reduced. The Commission should actively promote entrepreneurship by creating funding schemes, offering new SMEs a grant of 1000 EUR to help with the setting up costs, with the cost of these grants being offset by reductions in other areas of the Union budget.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 127 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
(9) Single-member private limited liability companies formed and operating in compliance with this Directive should add to their names a common, easily identifiable abbreviation – SUP (Societas Unius Personae), which provides important legal clarity to companies and Member States.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 128 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
(9) Single-member private limited liability companies formed and operating in compliance with Part 2 of this Directive should add to their names a common, easily identifiable abbreviation – SUP (Societas Unius Personae).
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 130 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) To ensure consistency, the rules applicable to private limited liability companies in the Member State of registration of the SUP should apply to SUPs, including Directive 2009/101/EC and Directive 2013/34/EU. This Directive should be without prejudice to any national provisions governing matters outside its scope, such as matters related to labour law, tax law, accounting or insolvency.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 136 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
(13) In order to make it easier and less costly to establish subsidiaries in other Member States, the founders of SUPs should not be obliged to be physically present before any Member State's registration body. The register should be accessible from any Member State and a company founder should be able to make use of existing points of single contact created under Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council19 as a gateway to national on-line registration points. It should, therefore, be possible to establish SUPs from distance and fully by electronic means. This ability to register on-line is crucial to easing the burdens companies face when trying to conduct business across borders. __________________ 19 Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market (OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 36).
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 138 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
(16) In line with the recommendations set out in the European Commission's 2011 Review of the Small Business Act21 to reduce the start-up time for new enterprises, SUPs should receive the certificate of registration in the relevant register of a Member StaMember States should ensure that the registration process is completed within three working days. This facility should only be available to the newly created companies and not to existing entities that wish to convert to SUPs as the registration of such entities by their very nature, may take more time. __________________ 21 COM(2011) 78 final, 23.2.2011. COM(2011) 78 final, 23.2.2011.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 144 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The coordination measures provided for inPart 1 of this Directive shall apply to the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to:
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 149 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point 1
(1) ‘single-member company’ means a company with limited liability whose shares are held by a single person;
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 151 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point 5 a (new)
(5a) 'online registration' means a registration procedure fully completed electronically at a distance without requiring the need of a physical presence of the founder before the authorities of the Member State of registration;
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 156 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall not hinder SUPs from being single-members in other companies. Member States may establish rules prohibiting SUPs from being single- members in other limited liability companies if this leads to cross or circular ownership.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 158 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall provide that the single-member shall not be liable for any amount exceeding the subscribed share capital, without prejudice to other provisions on liability laid down in national law.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 161 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
This Directive is without prejudice to any national laws governing matters outside its scope, such as matters related to labour law, workers' participation in the management or supervisory bodies of companies, and the right to information and consultation, taxation, accounting or insolvency proceedings.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 163 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that an SUP may be formed by the conversion of the types of companies listed in Annex I subject to compliance with the applicable national law.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 164 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that a company shall not become an SUP unless: (a) a resolution of its shareholders is passed or a decision of its single-member is taken authorising the conversion of the company into an SUP; (b) its articles of association comply with the applicable national law; and (c) its net assets are at least equivalent to the amount of its subscribed share capital plus those reserves which may not be distributed according to its articles of association.deleted
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 165 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point a a (new)
(aa) it has a single share and a share capital of at least EUR 1;
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 199 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that the registration procedure for newly incorporated SUPs may be completed electronically in its entirety without it being necessary for the founding member to appearequiring the need of a physical presence of the founder before any authority in the Member State of registration (on-line registration).
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 201 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
4. National on-line registration web-sites shall include links to the registration web- sites in other Member States. Member States shall ensure that the following templates are used for on-line registrationonline registration with the following templates:
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 203 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Member States shall issue a certificate of registration confirming that the registration procedure has been completed. The certificate of registration shall be issued no later thaensure that the registration procedure is completed within three working days from the receipt of all the necessary documentation by the competent authority.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 208 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
5. Member States may lay down rules for verifying the identity of the founding member, and any other person makingWithout prejudice to paragraph 3, the process of registration and possible verification of identification of the founding member, or a representative theat registrationers the SUP on the member's behalf, and the acceptability of the documents and other information submitt shall be governed toby the registration body. Any identification issued in anotherapplicable national law. Member Sstate by the authorities of that State or on their behalf, including identification issued electronically, shall be recognised and accepted for the purposes of the verification by the Member State ofs shall lay down the procedural rules, including the rules on the acceptability of the documents and other information submitted to the registration body.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 213 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall not make the registration of an SUP conditional on obtaining any licence or authorisation. The registratis is without prejudice to provisions of the SUP, all documents provided during the process of registration and subsequent changes to them,national law that make carrying out certain activities after registration conditional on obtaining a licence or authorisation. These activities shall be dlisclosted in the relevant register of companies immediately afternational on-line registration websites.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 214 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The registration of the SUP, all documents provided during the process of registration and subsequent changes to them, shall be disclosed in the relevant register of companies immediately after registration.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 216 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 a (new)
Article 14a Recognition of identification means for the purposes of on-line registration 1. For the purposes of on-line registration of an SUP, the registration authorities shall recognise: (a) electronic identification means issued under an electronic identification scheme approved for the purpose of on-line registration of SUPs by the Member State of registration; (b) an electronic identification means issued in another Member State complying with Article 6 of Regulation (EU) No 910/2014. 2. The registration authorities may also recognise other electronic or non- electronic identification means. When non-electronic identification means, issued in the Member State of registration, are recognised by the registration authorities for the purpose of on-line registration, the same type of non- electronic identification issued in other Member States shall be equally recognised. 3. Member States shall ensure that any measures taken to comply with this Article or Article 14 do not affect the possibility of on-line registration referred to in Article 14(3).
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 222 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that the SUP is not subject to rules requiring the company to build up legal reservWithout prejudice to paragraph 1, Member States may require the SUP to build up legal reserves in accordance with the national law applicable to private limited liability companies listed in Annex I. Member States shall ensure that information on such requirements is provided on the national registration web- sites. Member States shall allow companies to build reserves in accordance with their articles of association.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 224 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall require letter and order forms whether in paper form or in any other medium, to state the capital subscribed and paid up. If the company has a website, that information shall also be made available on it.deleted
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 228 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 21
1. Decisions taken by the single-member of an SUP shall be recorded in writing by the single-member. Records of decisions taken shall be kept for at least five years. 2. A single member shall decide on the following: (a) approval of the annual accounts; (b) distribution to the member; (c) increase of share capital; (d) reduction of share capital; (e) appointment and removal of directors; (f) remuneration, if any, of directors, including when the single member is a director; (g) change of the registered office; (h) appointment and removal of the auditor, where applicable; (i) conversion of the SUP into another company form; (j) dissolution of the SUP; (k) any amendments to the articles of association. The single member may not delegate the decisions referred to in the first subparagraph to the management body. 3. The single-member shall be allowed to take decisions without calling a general meeting. No formal restrictions shall be imposed by Member States on the power of the single member to take decisions, including as regards the place and the time at which such decisions may be taken.Article 21 deleted Decisions of the single member
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 233 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 22
[...]deleted
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 235 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 23
1. The single-member shall have the right to give instructions to the management body. 2. Instructions given by the single- member shall not be binding for any director insofar as they violate the articles of association or the applicable national law.Article 23 deleted Shareholder’s instructions
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 238 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 24
Authority to act and enter into agreements 1. An SUP's management body, comprising one or more directors, shall have the authority to represent the SUP, including when entering into agreements with third parties and in legal proceedings. 2. Directors may represent the SUP individually, including when entering into agreements with third parties and in legal proceedings, unless the articles of association provide for joint representation. Any other limitation of the powers of the directors, by the articles of associatirticle 24 deleted on, by a decision of the single- member or by a decision of the management body, may not be relied upon in any dispute with third parties, even if that limitation has been disclosed. Acts undertaken by the management body shall be binding on the SUP, even if they are not within the object of the SUP. 3. The management body may delegate the right to represent the SUP insofar as it is allowed by the articles of association. The duty of the management body to file for bankruptcy or to commence any similar insolvency procedure shall not be delegated.ehalf of an SUP
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 239 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 25
Conversion of an SUP into another 1. Member States shall ensure that their national law requires SUPs to be dissolved or transformed into another form of company if SUPs cease to comply with the requirements laid down in this Directive. If an SUP fails to take appropriate steps to convert into another company law form, the competent authority shall be granted the powers necessary to dissolve the SUP. 2. An SUP may, at any moment, decide to convert into another company law form following the procedure laid down by applicable national law. 3. A SUP that has been converted into another company law form or dissolved in accordance with paragraphs 1 or 2, shall cease to use the abbreviation SUP.Article 25 deleted company law form
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 240 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that their national law requires an SUPs to be dissolved or transformed into another form of company if SUPsit ceases to comply with the requirements laid down in this Directive. If an SUP fails to take appropriate steps to convert into another company law form, the competent authority shall be granted the powers necessary to dissolve the SUP.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 242 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 28 – title
PenaltieSanctions
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 243 #

2014/0120(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 28 – paragraph 1
Member States shall provide for penaltiesanctions applicable to infringements of the national provisions adopted to implement this Directive and shall take all the measures necessary to ensure that those penaltiesanctions are enforced. The penaltiesanctions provided for shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
2015/03/05
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 170 #

2014/0108(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c – point i (new)
(i) heat (gloves etc.) for which the economic operator does not explicitly claim a protective function against short- term exposure to dangerous heat;
2015/03/03
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 4 #

2014/0095(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) Following the establishment of the touring visa, Article 20(2) of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement should be amended as it is incompatible with 77(2)(a) and (c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union due to the fact that the common policy on visas cannot be based on the existence or non-existence of bilateral visa waiver agreements concluded by Member States. The authorised length of stay of third-country nationals should not depend on the number and content of such bilateral agreements concluded in the past. Clarity and understanding on this issue needs to be ensured amongst Member State officials.
2015/09/09
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 13 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
(23) Applicants should not be required to present travel medical insurance when lodging an application for a short stay visa because it is a disproportionate burden for visa applicants and there is no evidence that holders of short stay visas present a bigger risk in terms of public medical expenditure in Member States than the visa exempted third country nationals.deleted
2015/09/15
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 15 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
(30) The issuing of visas at the external border should, in principle, remain exceptional. However, to allow Member States to promote short term tourism, they should be authorised to issue visas at the external border based on a temporary scheme and upon notification and publication of the organisational modalities of the scheme. Such schemes should be temporary in nature and the validity of the visa issued should be limited to the territory of the issuing Member State. Potential abuses and inconsistencies in application of these schemes need to be monitored closely, and if necessary, a review as to the necessity of issuing of external border visas should be undertaken.
2015/09/15
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 19 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) if the visit includes more than one destination, or if several separate visits are to be carried out within a period of two months, the Member State whose territory constitutes the main destination of the visit(s) may be determined in terms of the length of stay, counted in days, or alternatively by the main purpose for the applicant's visit, for example a business trip to one Member State; or
2015/09/15
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 20 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. If the Member State that is competent in accordance with paragraph 1, point (a) or (b), is neither present nor represented in the third country where the applicant lodges the application in accordance with Article 6, the applicant is entitled to lodge the application: a) at the consulate of one of the Member States of destination of the envisaged visit, b) at the consulate of the Member State of first entry, if point a) is not applicable, c) in all other cases at the consulate of any of the Member States that are present in the country concerned.deleted
2015/09/15
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 25 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. Points (b), (c) and (d) of paragraph 1 does not apply to applicants who are VIS registered regular travellers and who have lawfully used the two previously obtained visas.
2015/09/15
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 26 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Close relatives of Union citizens referred to in Article 8(3) shall provide only documentary evidence proving the family relationship with the Union citizen, and that they visit or travel together with the Union citizen.deleted
2015/09/15
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 27 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Family members of Union citizens as referred to in Article 3 of Directive 2004/38/EC shall provide only documentary evidence proving that they travel to accompany or join the Union citizen and the family relationship with the Union citizen as referred to in Article 2(2) or the other circumstances referred to in Article 3(2) of that Directive.deleted
2015/09/15
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 32 #

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Applications shall be decided on within 105 calendar days of the date of the lodging of an application which is admissible in accordance with Article 17.
2015/09/15
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 61 #

2014/0012(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 5 – point b
Regulation (EC) No 715/2007
Article 14 – paragraph 4
(b) in paragraph 4, the following subparagraph is added: ‘The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 14a to set out, in addition to the existing limit value for emissions of total NOx, a limit value for emissions of NO2 for vehicles approved as complying with the Euro 6 emission limits set out in table 2 of Annex I. The limit for emissions of NO2 shall be set on the basis of an impact assessment, shall take into consideration the technical feasibility and shall reflect the air quality objectives set out in Directive (EC) No 2008/50 of the European Parliament and of the Council*. __________________ * Directive 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe (OJ L 152, 11.6.2008, p. 1).'deleted
2015/05/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 66 #

2014/0012(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) 715/2007
Article 14a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 2(2), Article 5(3), Article 8 and in Article 14(1) to (5) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of four years from ....*. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of four year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of time from […][Publications Office,an identical duration, unless the European Parliament and Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period. ________________ * OJ: please insert the exact date of entry into force]. of this Regulation.
2015/05/12
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 52 #

2013/0432(COD)

Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set outRejects the Commission proposal;
2016/03/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 54 #

2013/0432(COD)

Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text-examine the necessity of the legislative proposal in the field of customs infringements and sanctions;
2016/03/17
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 99 #

2013/0157(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
The European Parliament rejects the Commission Proposal.
2015/07/02
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 150 #

2013/0157(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) In order to be open and transparent, tThe procedure to select thchoose providers of port services and its result should be made public and full documentation should be communicated toshould be non-discriminatory, transparent and open to all interested parties.
2015/07/02
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 156 #

2013/0157(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 a (new)
(14a) While public service obligations are defined and designated by national authorities, a general obligation set by national or European legislation for a port to accept any vessel physically capable of entering and mooring without discrimination or hindrance should not be understood to be a public service obligation for the purposes of this Regulation.
2015/07/02
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 158 #

2013/0157(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) Where there is a need to limit the numberAny appointment of a port service providers, the decision on that limitation may be entrusted by the Member state to a different authority in order to safeguard competition. Any limitation in the number of providers of port services should follow a procedure which is open, transparent and non-discriminatory. This should however not be the case when public service obligations are to be entrusted directly to a competent authority or where there is a limitation in the number of providers of port services should follow a procedure which is open, transparent and non-discriminatory. In recognition of the diverse models for the organisation of ports within the Union, this should however not be the case in respect of the provision of port services by an internal operator.
2015/07/02
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 191 #

2013/0157(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 a (new)
(22a) The Commission should clarify in writing the notion of State aid with regard to the financing of port infrastructure and, to ensure fair competition, should continue to enforce the principles of state aid.
2015/07/02
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 196 #

2013/0157(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 b (new)
(22 b) The Commission should, in consultation with the ports sector, clearly identify which public financing of road, rail and marine access fall under Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 (General Block Exemption Regulation).
2015/07/02
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 202 #

2013/0157(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
(23) Port service charges applied by providers of port services which are not designated in accordance with an open, transparent and non-discriminatory procedure entail a higher risk of price abuse given their monopolistic or oligopolistic situation and the fact that their market cannot be contested. The same is true for charges levied by internal operators in the meaning of this Regulationexposed to effective competition entail a higher risk of price abuse. For those services, in the absence of fair market mechanisms, arrangements should be established to ensure that the charges they levy reflect the normal conditions of the relevant marketlevied are not disproportionate to the economic value of the services provided and are set in a transparent and non- discriminatory way.
2015/07/02
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 205 #

2013/0157(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 a (new)
(24a) This Regulation should not interfere with the rights, where applicable, of the ports and their customers to agree commercially on confidential discounts. This Regulation is not intended to require the disclosure to the public or to third parties of any such discounts.
2015/07/02
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 268 #

2013/0157(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Member States may decide not to apply this Regulation to seaports where neither the managing body of the port nor the competent authority is in receipt of public funds. These public funds shall be as defined in Article 12(3) but shall exclude existing European wide programmes. Member States shall inform the European Commission of their decision.
2015/07/02
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 405 #

2013/0157(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Having regard to the existing different models for the organisation of port services, in the cases referred to in Article 9, where the internal operator carries out an activity directly exposed to effective competition, the remaining provisions of this Article shall not apply;
2015/07/02
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 413 #

2013/0157(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Any limitation of the number of providers for a port service shall follow a selection procedure which shall be open to all interested parties, non- discriminatory and transparent. The managing body of the port or the competent authority shall communicate to all interested parties information concerning the organisation of the selection procedure and the submission deadline, as well as all relevant award criteria and requirements. This paragraph shall not apply in the cases referred to in Article 9.
2015/07/02
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 421 #

2013/0157(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Member States may decide that their ports of the comprehensive network which do not meet the criteria in point (b) of Article 20(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 may limit the number of service providers for a given port service. In such case, the provisions of this Article shall not apply and the Member States shall inform the Commission thereof.
2015/07/02
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 488 #

2013/0157(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. IOnly in the cases provided for in Article 6 (1) (b), the competent authority may decide to provide a port service under public service obligations itself or to impose such obligations directly ona bis, or in cases where the national legislation of a member state already so permits, the managing body of the port or the competent authority may decide to provide a port service itself or through a legally distinct entity over which it exercises a control similar to that exercised over its own departments. In such a case, the port service provider shall be considered as an internal operator for the purpose of this Regulation.
2015/07/02
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 575 #

2013/0157(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. The payment of the port service charges may be integrated in other payments, such as the payment of the port infrastructure charges. In this case, where the port infrastructure is publicly funded or where the port infrastructure is not exposed to effective competition, the provider of port service and, where appropriate, the managing body of the port shall make sure that the amount of the port service charge remains easily identifiable by the user of the port service.
2015/07/02
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 582 #

2013/0157(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. The payment of the port infrastructure charges may be integrated in other payments, such as the payment of the port service charges. In this case, where the port infrastructure is publicly funded or where the port infrastructure is not exposed to effective competition, the managing body of the port shall make sure that the amount of the port infrastructure charge remains easily identifiable by the user of the port infrastructure.
2015/07/02
Committee: TRAN