41 Amendments of Danuta Maria HÜBNER related to 2020/0374(COD)
Amendment 210 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) The rules that the gatekeepers set for the distribution of software applications may in certain circumstances restrict the ability of end users to install and effectively use third party software applications or software application stores on operating systems or hardware of the relevant gatekeeper and restrict the ability of end users to access these software applications or software application stores outside the core platform services of that gatekeeper. Such restrictions may limit the ability of developers of software applications to use alternative distribution channels and the ability of end users to choose between different software applications from different distribution channels and should be prohibited as unfair and liable to weaken the contestability of core platform services. In order to ensure that third party software applications or software application stores do not endanger the integrity of the hardware or operating system provided by the gatekeeper the gatekeeper concerned may implement proportionate technical or contractual measures to achieve that goal if the gatekeeper demonstrates that such measures are necessary and justified and that there are no less restrictive means to safeguard the integrity of the hardware or operating systemIn some instances, and in line with the goals of the Digital Services Act, these rules may legitimately help user safety and data protection, as well as the integrity of the hardware or operating system, and contribute to providing user choice in devices markets. However, such restriction should be demonstrated, in order to not unduly limit the ability of business users and of end users to use alternative distribution channels.
Amendment 215 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) Gatekeepers are often vertically integrated and offer certain products or services to end users through their own core platform services, or through a business user over which they exercise control which frequently leads to conflicts of interest. This can include the situation whereby a gatekeeper offers its own online intermediation services through an online search engine. When offering those products or services on the core platform service, gatekeepers can reserve a better position to their own offering, in terms of ranking, display or default settings, as opposed to the products of third parties also operating on that core platform service. This can occur for instance with products or services, including other core platform services, which are ranked in the results communicated by online search engines, or which are partly or entirely embedded in online search engines results, groups of results specialised in a certain topic, displayed along with the results of an online search engine, which are considered or used by certain end users as a service distinct or additional to the online search engine. Other instances are those of software applications which are distributed through software application stores, or products or services that are given prominence and display in the newsfeed of a social network, or products or services ranked in search results or displayed on an online marketplace. In those circumstances, the gatekeeper is in a dual- role position as intermediary for third party providers and as direct provider of products or services of the gatekeeper. Consequently, these gatekeepers have the ability to undermine directly the contestability for those products or services on these core platform services, to the detriment of business users which are not controlled by the gatekeeper.
Amendment 226 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) Gatekeepers may also have a dual role as developers of operating systems and device manufacturers, including any technical functionality that such a device may have. For example, a gatekeeper that is a manufacturer of a device may restrict access to some of the functionalities in this device, such as near-field-communication technology and the software used to operate that technology, which may be required for the effective provision of an ancillary service by the gatekeeper as well as by any potential third party provider of such an ancillary service. Such access may equally be required by software applications related to the relevant ancillary services in order to effectively provide similar functionalities as those offered by gatekeepers. IShould there be no alternative ways to reach end users and if such a dual role is used in a manner that prevents alternative providers of ancillary services or of software applications to have access under equal conditions to the sameequivalent access to operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision by the gatekeeper of any ancillary services, this could significantly undermine innovation by providers of such ancillary services as well as choice for end users of such ancillary services. The gatekeepers should therefore be obliged to ensure access under equal conditionequivalent access to, and interoperability with, the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision of any ancillary services by the gatekeeper. Providing such access should not undermine the capacity of the gatekeeper to protect user.
Amendment 245 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) To ensure the effectiveness of the obligations laid down by this Regulation, while also making certain from the very beginning of the compliance period that these obligations are limited to what is necessary to ensure contestability and tackling the harmful effects of the unfair behaviour by gatekeepers, it is important to clearly define and circumscribe them so as to allow the gatekeeper to immediately comply with them, in full respect of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC, consumer protection, cyber security and product safety. The gatekeepers should ensure the compliance with this Regulation by design. The necessary measures should therefore be as much as possible and where relevant integrated into the technological design used by the gatekeepers. However, it may in certain cases be appropriate for the Commission, following a dialogue with the gatekeeper concerned, to further specify some of the measures that the gatekeeper concerned should adopt in order to effectively comply with those obligations that are susceptible of being further specifiedAs business practices and aspects of the core platform, services offered by gatekeepers might differ from one another, it is likely that uncertainties and misinterpretations about appropriateness of the implemented measures arise. To eliminate them even before the compliance period commences, it is necessary that gatekeepers could request the Commission to determine whether the measures that it intends to implement are effective in achieving the objective of the relevant obligation in the specific circumstances. However, it may in certain cases be appropriate for the Commission, following a dialogue with the gatekeeper concerned, to further specify some of the measures that the gatekeeper concerned should adopt in order to effectively comply with those obligations that are susceptible of being further specified. In this process, the Commission may need additional advice, insight knowledge and experience about the market of the core platform service subject to the dialogue. In such cases, the Commission may consult third parties like business users and competitors, civil society organisations, national competent authorities and others, which the Commission has determined as relevant for the respective core platform service. The Commission should act with respect and protection to sensitive business data during these consultations. This possibility of a regulatory dialogue should facilitate compliance by gatekeepers and expedite the correct implementation of the Regulation.
Amendment 248 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) The objectives of this Regulation are to ensure contestability and fairness for the digital sector in general and for business users and end users of core platform services provided by gatekeepers in particular, with a view to promoting innovation, high quality of digital products and services, fair and competitive prices, as well as a high quality and choice for end users in the digital sector. To ensure the effectiveness of the obligations laid down by this Regulation, while also making certain that these obligations are limited to what is necessary to ensure cand proportionatestability and tackling the harmful effects of the unfair behaviour by gatekeepers to meet their objectives as well as the objectives of the Regulation, it is important to clearly define and circumscribe them so as to allow the gatekeeper to immediately comply with them, in full respect of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC, consumer protection, cyber security and product safety. The gatekeepers should ensure the compliance with this Regulation by design. The necessary measures should therefore be as much as possible and where relevant integrated into the technological design used by the gatekeepers. However, it may in certain cases be appropriate for the Commission, following a dialogue with the gatekeeper concerned, to further specify some of the measures that the gatekeeper concerned should adopt in order to effectively comply with those obligations that are susceptible of being further specified. This possibility of a regulatory dialogue should facilitate compliance by gatekeepers and expedite the correct implementation of the Regulation.
Amendment 256 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 61
Recital 61
(61) The data protection and privacy interests of end users are relevant to any assessment of potential negative effects of the observed practice of gatekeepers to collect and accumulate large amounts of data from end users. Ensuring an adequate level of transparency of profiling practices employed by gatekeepers facilitates contestability of core platform services, by putting external pressure on gatekeepers to prevent making deep consumer profiling the industry standard, given that potential entrants or start-up providers cannot access data to the same extent and depth, and at a similar scale. Enhanced transparency should allow other providers of core platform services to differentiate themselves better through the use of superior privacy guaranteeing facilities. To ensure a minimum level of effectiveness of this transparency obligation, gatekeepers should at least provide a description of the basis upon which profiling is performed, including whether personal data and data derived from user activity is relied on, the processing applied, the purpose for which the profile is prepared and eventually used, the impact of such profiling on the gatekeeper’s services, and the steps taken to enable end users to be aware of the relevant use of such profiling, as well as to seek their consent. Artificial Intelligence could be used to nudge users to engage in certain actions or predict their actions without necessarily profiling them. The power of Big Data Artificial Intelligence that is exclusively developed or brought up by undertakings which engage with gatekeepers position and practices should not be neglected.
Amendment 275 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 72
Recital 72
(72) The Commission should be able to take the necessary actions to monitor the effective implementation and compliance with the obligations laid down in this Regulation. Such actions should include the ability of the Commission to appoint independent external experts, such as and auditors to assist the Commission in this process, including where applicable from competent independent authorities, such as data or consumer protection authorities. Considering the large number of business and end users of gatekeepers’ core platform services resulting in exponentially larger number of non- compliance practices, cases and scenarios, a reporting mechanism for business and end users would facilitate the Commission in the swift indentification of systemic non- compliance by gatekeepers. Such a reporting practice would additionally reduce the need for formal litigation practices and thus reduce the burden in national and EU courts of justice.
Amendment 352 #
(23 a) "Provider of a core platform service" means an entity or entities or part thereof, irrespective of their legal form, which provide any of the core platform services listed in paragraph 2 to business users or end users.
Amendment 365 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the requirement in paragraph 1 point (a) where the undertaking to which it belongs achieves an annual EEA turnover equal to or above EUR 6.5 billion in the last three financial years, or where the average market capitalisation or the equivalent fair market value of the undertaking to which it belongs amounted to at least EUR 65 billion in the last financial year, and it provides a core platform service in at least threewo Member States;
Amendment 380 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Where a provider of core platform services meets all the thresholds in paragraph 2, it shall notify the Commission thereof within threewo months after those thresholds are satisfied and provide it with the relevant information identified in paragraph 2.. That notification shall include the relevant information identified in paragraph 2 for each of the core platform services of the provider that meets the thresholds in paragraph 2 point (b). The notification shall be updated whenever other core platform services individually meet the thresholds in paragraph 2 point (b).
Amendment 388 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. The Commission shall, without undue delay and at the latest 640 days after receiving the complete information referred to in paragraph 3, designate the provider of core platform services that meets all the thresholds of paragraph 2 as a gatekeeper, unless that provider, with its notification, presents sufficiently substantiated arguments to demonstrate that, in the circumstances in which the relevant core platform service operates, and taking into account the elements listed in paragraph 6, the provider does not satisfy the requirements of paragraph 1.
Amendment 405 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point f
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point f
(f) other structural market characteristics including whether there are other gatekeepers identified pursuant to paragraph 2 within the same undertaking.
Amendment 423 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 8
Article 3 – paragraph 8
8. The gatekeeper shall comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 within sixfour months after a core platform service has been included in the list pursuant to paragraph 7 of this Article.
Amendment 440 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) refrain from combining personal data sourced from these core platform services with personal data from any other services offered by the gatekeeper or with personal data from third-party services, and from signing in end users to other services of the gatekeeper in order to combine personal data, unless the end user has been presented with the specific choice and has provided consent in the sense of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. ;
Amendment 449 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) allow business users to promote offers to end users acquired via the core platform service, and to conclude contracts with these end users regardless of whether for that purpose they use the core platform services of the gatekeeper or not, and allow end users to access and use, through the core platform services of the gatekeeper, content, subscriptions, features or other items by using the software application of a business user, where these items have been acquired by the end users from the relevant business user without using the core platform services of the gatekeeper;
Amendment 451 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) refrain from preventing or restricting business users from raising issues with any relevant public authority relating to any practice of gatekeepers, including by contractual obligations between the gatekeeper and the third party business users;
Amendment 506 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) allow the installation and effective use of third party software applications or software application stores using, or interoperating with, operating systems of that gatekeeper and allow these software applications or software application stores to be accessed by means other than the core platform services of that gatekeeper. The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking proportionate measures to ensure that third party software applications or software application stores do not endanger the integrity of the hardware or operating system provided by the gatekeeper, and does not undermine efforts by the gatekeeper to ensure user safety or data protection;
Amendment 515 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) refrain from treating more favourably in ranking, display or default settings services and products offered by the gatekeeper itself or by any third party belonging to the same undertaking compared to similar services or products of third party and apply fair and non- discriminatory conditions to such ranking, display or default settings;
Amendment 522 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) refrain from technically, commercially or operationally restricting the ability of end users to switch between and subscribe to different software applications and services to be accessed using the operating system of the gatekeeper, including as regards the choice of Internet access provider for end users;
Amendment 527 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) allow business users and providers of ancillary services equivalent access to and interoperability with the same operating system, hardware orfeatures and related software features that are available or used in the provision by the gatekeeper of any ancillary services. Such access should not undermine demonstrated any measures that the gatekeeper put in place to ensure user safety, data protection, or protect the integrity of the hardware or operating system provided by the gatekeeper;
Amendment 549 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) provide effective portability of data provided by or generated through the activity of a business user or end user and shall, in particular, provide free of charge tools for end users to facilitate the exercise of datathe portability of personal data, in line with Regulation EU 2016/679, and of non- personal data, including by the provision of continuous and real-time access ;
Amendment 567 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) apply fair and non-discriminatory general conditions of access for business users to its software application storecore platform services designated pursuant to Article 3 of this Regulation.
Amendment 589 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. The measures implemented by the gatekeeper to ensure compliance with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 shall be effective in achieving the objective of the relevant obligation and the objectives of this Regulation, namely safeguarding contestability and fairness for business users as well as end users. The gatekeeper shall ensure that these measures are implemented in compliance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC and Regulation XX on a Single Market for Digital Services, and with legislation on cyber security, consumer protection and product safety.
Amendment 593 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. The measures implemented by the gatekeeper to ensure compliance with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 shall be effective in achieving the objective of the relevant obligation. The gatekeeper shall enotify these measures thato these measures Commission and ensure that they are implemented in compliance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC, and with legislation on cyber security, consumer protection and product safety.
Amendment 609 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. In view of adopting the decision under paragraph 2, the Commission shall communicate its preliminary findings within threewo months from the opening of the proceedings. In the preliminary findings, the Commission shall explain the measures it considers to take or it considers that the provider of core platform services concerned should take in order to effectively address the preliminary findings.
Amendment 614 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 7
Article 7 – paragraph 7
7. A gatekeeper may request the opening of proceedings pursuant to Article 18 forTo ensure effective compliance with the obligations laid down in this Regulation, within one month after its effective designation, a gatekeeper may request the Commission to determine whether the measures that the gatekeeper intends to implement or has implemented under Article 6 are effective in achieving the objective of the relevant obligation in the specific circumstances. A gatekeeper may, with its request, provide a reasoned submission to explain in particular why the measures that it intends to implement or has implementeare effective in achieving the relevant obligation in the specific circumstances. In the preparation of its position following this request of the gatekeeper, the Commission may consult third pare effective in achieving the objective of the relevant obligaties such as business users and competitors, civil society organisations, national competent authorities and others deemed relevant by the Commission for the respective core platform services subject of the request of the gatekeeper. The Commission may specify the measures that the gatekeeper concerned shall implement and shall submit its final position within the specific circumstancesree months after it has accepted the request of the gatekeeper. As stipulated in Article 3(8) the gatekeeper shall comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 within four months after the conclusion of the procedure described in this article.
Amendment 624 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission may, on a reasoned request by the gatekeeper, exceptionally suspend, in whole or in part, a specific obligation laid down in Articles 5 and 6 or measures related to Article 7(2) for a core platform service by decision adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4), where the gatekeeper demonstrates that: (a) compliance with thata specific obligation would endanger, due to exceptional circumstances beyond the control of the gatekeeper, the economicor measure is technically not feasible; (b) a deviation from these obligations is objectively justified in order to ensure the integrity and security of the gatekeeper’s hardware, operating system or commercial viability of the osperation of the gatekeeper in the Union, and only to the extent necessary to address such threat to its viability. The Commisscific service itself; (c) a deviation from these obligations is necessary to ensure user safety, data protection or compliance with relevant EU laws. The cumulative effect of obligations shall aim to adoplso be taken into account twhe suspension decision without delay and at the latest 3 months following receipt of a complete reasoned requestn assessing the need to suspend obligations in part or in full.
Amendment 627 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
In assessing the request, the Commission shall take into account, in particular, the impact of the compliance with the specific obligation on the economic viability of the operation of the gatekeeper in the Union as well as on third partieconditions of paragraph 1 and the impact on third parties including smaller business users and end-users. The suspension may be made subject to conditions and obligations to be defined by the Commission in order to ensure a fair balance between these interests and the objectives of this Regulation. Such a request may be made and granted at any time pending the assessment of the Commission pursuant to paragraph 1.
Amendment 647 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. A gatekeeper shall ensure that the obligations of Articles 5 and 6 are fully and effectively complied with. While the obligations of Articles 5 and 6 apply in respect of core platform services designated pursuant to Article 3, their implementation shall not be undermined by any behaviour of the undertaking to which the gatekeeper belongs, regardless of whether this behaviour is of a contractual, commercial, technical or any other nature, including through by any form of behavioural techniques and interface design that would undermine the effectiveness of Articles 5 and 6.
Amendment 656 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. A gatekeeper shall not degrade the conditions or quality of any of the core platform services provided to business users or end users who avail themselves of the rights or choices laid down in Articles 5 and 6, or makeobstruct or make discriminatory the exercise of those rights or choices unduly difficult.
Amendment 678 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Within six months after its designation pursuant to Article 3, a gatekeeper shall submit to the Commission an independently audited description of any techniques for profiling of consumers and any other digital technology technique used to entice users to engage in certain actions or predict their actions that the gatekeeper applies to or across its core platform services identified pursuant to Article 3. This description shall be updated at least annually. Audits performed pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be performed by organisations which: (a) are independent from the gatekeeper concerned and have not provided any other service to the undertaking to which the gatekeeper belongs in the previous 12 months; (b) have proven expertise in the area of risk management, technical competence and capabilities in the area of digital technologies; (c) have proven objectivity and professional ethics, based in particular on adherence to codes of practice or appropriate standards;and (d) have not provided such an audit to the same gatekeeper for more than 3 consecutive years.
Amendment 698 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. When the Commission pursuant to Article 3(6) designates as a gatekeeper a provider of core platform services that does not yet enjoy an entrenched and durable position in its operations, but it is foreseeable that it will enjoy such a position in the near future, it shall declare applicable to that gatekeeper only obligations laid down in Article 5(b) and Article 6(1) points (e), (f), (h) and (i), as specified in the designation decision. The Commission shall only declare applicable those obligations that are appropriate and necessary to prevent that the gatekeeper concerned achieves by unfair means an entrenched and durable position in its operations. The Commission shall review such a designation in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 4.
Amendment 704 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. Where the market investigation shows that a gatekeeper has systematically infringed the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 and has further strengthened or extended its gatekeeper position in relation to the characteristics under Article 3(1), the Commission may by decision adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4) impose on such gatekeeper any behavioural or structural remedies which are proportionate to the infringement committed and necessary to ensure compliance with this Regulation. The Commission shall conclude its investigation by adopting a decision within twelvnine months from the opening of the market investigation.
Amendment 710 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3
Article 16 – paragraph 3
3. A gatekeeper shall be deemed to have engaged in a systematic non- compliance with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6, where the Commission has issued at least threewo non-compliance or fining decisions pursuant to Articles 25 and 26 respectively against a gatekeeper in relation to any of its core platform services within a period of five years prior to the adoption of the decision opening a market investigation in view of the possible adoption of a decision pursuant to this Article.
Amendment 736 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Commission may, upon request by one or more national competent authorities or on its own initiative, reopen by decision the relevant proceedings, where:
Amendment 739 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – title
Article 24 – title
Amendment 742 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2
Article 24 – paragraph 2
2. The actions pursuant to paragraph 1 may include the appointment of independent external experts and auditors to assist the Commission to monitor the obligations and measures and to provide specific expertise or knowledge to the Commission. These external experts and auditors should have no contractual relations during the 12 months preceding the appointment by the Commission with the undertaking providing the core platform services referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 745 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. A business or an end user of a core platform service of a gatekeeper may submit a report to the Commission concerning a suspected practice of non- compliance with this Regulation by the gatekeeper. The Commission shall within four months of the reception of the report examine and issue an argumented decision whether it intends to open an investigation pursuant to articles 14, 15, 16 or 17. The Commission should notify the original issuer of the report as well as publicly communicate its decision.
Amendment 753 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3
Article 25 – paragraph 3
3. In the non-compliance decision adopted pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission shall order the gatekeeper to cease and desist with the non-compliance within an appropriate deadline, but not longer than three months, and to provide explanations on how it plans to comply with the decision.
Amendment 790 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. When three or more Member States request the Commission to open an investigation pursuant to: (a) Article 15 because they consider that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper; (b) Article 16 because they consider that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a gatekeeper has been in a position of systemic non-compliance with Articles 5 and 6;or (c) Article 17 because they consider that one or more services should be added to the list of core platform services as in Article 2 (2) of this Regulation, the Commission shall within four months examine and decide whether there are reasonable grounds to open such an investigation. The Commission shall add to this decision a detailed argumentation of its choice of action. The decision shall be publicly available and communicated to all National Competent Authorities.
Amendment 818 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 38 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. The Commission shall report on the implementation of this Regulation in its annual report on Competition Policy.