30 Amendments of Javier NART related to 2020/2217(INI)
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the EU approach to digitisation should be human-centred, value-oriented and based on the concept of the social market economy; underlines that choosing a third path to digitisation should not mean that the EU becomes without supporting national protectionistm; stresses, therefore, that every non-EU player should still be welcomthird-country market participants should be able to operate in the single European data space as long as they meet the EU’s ethical, technological, privacy and security standards; stresses in this respect the necessity to create a level-playing field between EU and third-country market players;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the EU approach to digitisation should be human-centred, value-oriented and based on the concept of the social market economy; underlines that choosing a third path to digitisation should not mean that the EU becomes without supporting national protectionistm; stresses, therefore, that every non-EU player should still be welcomthird-country market participants should be able to operate in the single European data space as long as they meet the EU’s ethical, technological, privacy and security standards; stresses in this respect the necessity to create a level-playing field between EU and third-country market players;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that the new strategy should be implemented by means of a principle-based and innovation-friendly EU legal framework, which should be proportionate and avoidseek to lower unnecessary administrative burdens, where they exist, for small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and start-ups, and should be combined with concrete measures, guidance, private- public codes of conduct and programmes, strong investments, and, if necessary, new sector- specific laws;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that the new strategy should be implemented by means of a principle-based and innovation-friendly EU legal framework, which should be proportionate and avoidseek to lower unnecessary administrative burdens, where they exist, for small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and start-ups, and should be combined with concrete measures, guidance, private- public codes of conduct and programmes, strong investments, and, if necessary, new sector- specific laws;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the Commission, prior to any legislative initiatives, to perform an in- depth evaluation and mapping of the existing legislation to assess whether adjustments or additional requirements are needed to support the EU data industry and safeguard fair competition for all affected actors and to avoid legal overlaps with potential upcoming legislation to implementing the Data Strategy;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the Commission, prior to any legislative initiatives, to perform an in- depth evaluation and mapping of the existing legislation to assess whether adjustments or additional requirements are needed to support the EU data industry and safeguard fair competition for all affected actors and to avoid legal overlaps with potential upcoming legislation to implementing the Data Strategy;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses the need for consultations and impact assessments prior to legislative proposals, in order to identify possible negative consequences for market participants, notably SMEs and start-ups;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses the need for consultations and impact assessments prior to legislative proposals, in order to identify possible negative consequences for market participants, notably SMEs and start-ups;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the key importance of fostering access to data for EU businesses, especially for SMEs and start-ups; considers that voluntary data sharing between businesses based on fair and transparent contractual arrangements, triggered by incentives in the form of subsidies and tax breaks, would help to achieve this goal would help to achieve this goal; believes that the new data strategy must aim at increased data sharing in the EU and at encouraging investment in data sharing projects, including through balanced public-private partnerships;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the key importance of fostering access to data for EU businesses, especially for SMEs and start-ups; considers that voluntary data sharing between businesses based on fair and transparent contractual arrangements, triggered by incentives in the form of subsidies and tax breaks, would help to achieve this goal would help to achieve this goal; believes that the new data strategy must aim at increased data sharing in the EU and at encouraging investment in data sharing projects, including through balanced public-private partnerships;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Asks the Commission and Member States to ensure that the new data strategy will contribute to a speedy implementation of the Directive on Open Data making public sector and publicly funded data re- usable; considers that, to facilitate that, Member States should be encouraged to communicate best practices among each other;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Asks the Commission and Member States to ensure that the new data strategy will contribute to a speedy implementation of the Directive on Open Data making public sector and publicly funded data re- usable; considers that, to facilitate that, Member States should be encouraged to communicate best practices among each other;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Requests the Commission to evaluate the impact, in particular the increased financial burden, of the prerequisite of requiring open access to publicly funded research data on research institutions, as the important requirements for open access should not result in a drain on publicly funded research in Europe;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Requests the Commission to evaluate the impact, in particular the increased financial burden, of the prerequisite of requiring open access to publicly funded research data on research institutions, as the important requirements for open access should not result in a drain on publicly funded research in Europe;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. States that fair, simple, intelligible, secure, interoperable and affordable voluntary data sharing agreements between companies from the same supply chain and different sectors, that either monetise the participation of data providers or enable ‘give and take’ schemes, will further accelerate the development of the EU data economy; calls on the Commission to further reflect on the concept of data value, as well as to better define and lay down the scope of "data altruism";
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. States that fair, simple, intelligible, secure, interoperable and affordable voluntary data sharing agreements between companies from the same supply chain and different sectors, that either monetise the participation of data providers or enable ‘give and take’ schemes, will further accelerate the development of the EU data economy; calls on the Commission to further reflect on the concept of data value, as well as to better define and lay down the scope of "data altruism";
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of defining fair contractual conditions with the aim of addressing imbalances in market power; underlines that a single European data space will require companies to be allowed to closely cooperate with each other, and therefore considers that safe harbours and block exemptions on cooperation for data sharing and pooling, as well as more guidance for businesses on competition law matters from the Commission, are needed; expects the upcoming Digital Markets Act proposal of the Commission to address those issues; furthermore, stresses the need for the Commission to monitor any market failures and to take adequate action, if and where necessary, including to consider using mandatory access to data as a remedy;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of defining fair contractual conditions with the aim of addressing imbalances in market power; underlines that a single European data space will require companies to be allowed to closely cooperate with each other, and therefore considers that safe harbours and block exemptions on cooperation for data sharing and pooling, as well as more guidance for businesses on competition law matters from the Commission, are needed; expects the upcoming Digital Markets Act proposal of the Commission to address those issues; furthermore, stresses the need for the Commission to monitor any market failures and to take adequate action, if and where necessary, including to consider using mandatory access to data as a remedy;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recommends further strengthening interoperability and establishing consensus-based, industry-led common standards in order to guarantee that the movement of data between different machines and entities can take place in an innovative manner; calls on the Member States to ensure access to public information and high-quality data held by public authorities, notably in the area of justice, without prejudice to the Regulation on general data protection and the ePrivacy Directive;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recommends further strengthening interoperability and establishing consensus-based, industry-led common standards in order to guarantee that the movement of data between different machines and entities can take place in an innovative manner; calls on the Member States to ensure access to public information and high-quality data held by public authorities, notably in the area of justice, without prejudice to the Regulation on general data protection and the ePrivacy Directive;
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Recalls the existing general data protection regime as stipulated in Regulation 2016/679/EU on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data; highlights the need to finalise the revision of the ePrivacy regulation with the aim of creating a level-playing field for EU companies with regards to the acquisition, use, and notably transfer of data;
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Recalls the existing general data protection regime as stipulated in Regulation 2016/679/EU on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data; highlights the need to finalise the revision of the ePrivacy regulation with the aim of creating a level-playing field for EU companies with regards to the acquisition, use, and notably transfer of data;
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that thealthough existing liability principles and technology-neutral liability rules are already fit for the digital economy and most emerging technologies; states that there are nevertheless some cases, such as those concerning operators of AI systems, where newregimes might, in general, be fit for the digital age, there are certain areas, such as the area of Artificial Intelligence and similar technologies, where new or additional liability rules armight be necessary to provi, in order the affected persons with adequate compensation; o enhance legal certainty and to provide for an adequate compensation scheme for the legitimate use of data;
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that thealthough existing liability principles and technology-neutral liability rules are already fit for the digital economy and most emerging technologies; states that there are nevertheless some cases, such as those concerning operators of AI systems, where newregimes might, in general, be fit for the digital age, there are certain areas, such as the area of Artificial Intelligence and similar technologies, where new or additional liability rules armight be necessary to provi, in order the affected persons with adequate compensation; o enhance legal certainty and to provide for an adequate compensation scheme for the legitimate use of data;
Amendment 84 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Recalls that data is the central element for AI development and that AI systems rely on and process large volumes of data and that these systems often utilise structured data; the data strategy should aim at increased data accessibility through tackling existing barriers and promoting the use of modern web and API-based services for convenient and fast retrieval, browsing and processing of available data;
Amendment 84 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Recalls that data is the central element for AI development and that AI systems rely on and process large volumes of data and that these systems often utilise structured data; the data strategy should aim at increased data accessibility through tackling existing barriers and promoting the use of modern web and API-based services for convenient and fast retrieval, browsing and processing of available data;
Amendment 92 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Highlights that in order to unlock the potential of digital technologies, it is necessary to remove unnecessary legal barriers, so as not to hamper the growth of or innovation in the Union’s developing data economy;
Amendment 92 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Highlights that in order to unlock the potential of digital technologies, it is necessary to remove unnecessary legal barriers, so as not to hamper the growth of or innovation in the Union’s developing data economy;
Amendment 96 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Is of the belief that the data-drivenCalls for prior impact assessments to be conducted in the context of new digital tecohnomy does not require major changes to the existing IPR framework and thus notes that the Commission should carefully assess what legal adjustments are really necessary; welcomes, in this regard,logies prior to new legislative proposals or proposed changes to existing legislation; welcomes the Commission’s intention to revise the Database Directive and to possibly further clarify the application of the Trade Secrets Directivedirective on the protection of trade secrets;
Amendment 96 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Is of the belief that the data-drivenCalls for prior impact assessments to be conducted in the context of new digital tecohnomy does not require major changes to the existing IPR framework and thus notes that the Commission should carefully assess what legal adjustments are really necessary; welcomes, in this regard,logies prior to new legislative proposals or proposed changes to existing legislation; welcomes the Commission’s intention to revise the Database Directive and to possibly further clarify the application of the Trade Secrets Directivedirective on the protection of trade secrets;