BETA

Activities of Stéphane SÉJOURNÉ related to 2020/0374(COD)

Shadow opinions (1)

OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Contestable and fair markets in the digital sector (Digital Markets Act)
2021/11/05
Committee: JURI
Dossiers: 2020/0374(COD)
Documents: PDF(399 KB) DOC(251 KB)
Authors: [{'name': 'Tiemo WÖLKEN', 'mepid': 185619}]

Amendments (205)

Amendment 91 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) In particular, online intermediation services, online search engines, web browsers, operating systems, online social networking, video sharing platform services, number- independent interpersonal communication services, cloud computing services and online advertising services all have the capacity to affect a large number of end users and businesses alike, which entails a risk of unfair business practices. They therefore should be included in the definition of core platform services and fall into the scope of this Regulation. Online intermediation services should be covered irrespective of the technology used to provide such services. In this regard, virtual or voice activated assistants and other connected devices should fall within the scope of this Regulation irrespective of the software used as an operating system, an online intermediation service or a search engine. Online intermediation services may also be active in the field of financial services, and they may intermediate or be used to provide such services as listed non-exhaustively in Annex II to Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council32 . In certain circumstances, the notion of end users should encompass users that are traditionally considered business users, but in a given situation do not use the core platform services to provide goods or services to other end users, such as for example businesses relying on cloud computing services for their own purposes. __________________ 32Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 September 2015 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical regulations and of rules on Information Society services, OJ L 241, 17.9.2015, p. 1.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 106 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
(31) To ensure the effectiveness of the review of gatekeeper status as well as the possibility to adjust the list of core platform services provided by a gatekeeper, the gatekeepers should inform the Commission of all of their intended and concluded acquisitions of other providers of core platform services or any other services provided within the digital sectorprior to their application. Such information should not only serve the review process mentioned above, regarding the status of individual gatekeepers, but will also provide information that is crucial to monitoring broader contestability trends in the markets where gatekeepers operate, in particular in the digital sector and can therefore be a useful factor for consideration in the context of the market investigations foreseen by this Regulation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 108 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
(33) The obligations laid down in this Regulation are limited to what is necessary and justified to address the unfairness of the identified practices by gatekeepers and to ensure contestability in relation to core platform services provided by gatekeepers. Therefore, the obligations should correspond to those practices that are considered unfair by taking into account the features of the digital sector and where experience gained, for example in the enforcement of the EU competition rules, shows that they have a particularly negative direct impact on the business users and end users. The obligations laid down in the Regulation may specifically take into account the nature of the core platform services provided. In addition, it is necessary to provide for the possibility of a regulatory dialogue with gatekeepers to tailor those obligations that are likely to require specific implementing measures in order to ensure their effectiveness and proportionality. The obligations should only be updated after a thorough investigation on the nature and impact of specific practices that may be newly identified, following an in-depth investigation, as unfair or limiting contestability in the same manner as the unfair practices laid down in this Regulation while potentially escaping the scope of the current set of obligations. In order to enhance the effectiveness of the updating process, the Commission should also use the reporting mechanism involving competitors, business users, end-users and competent national authorities, that would inform the Commission in the event of any of those detected practices.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 112 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
(37) Because of their position, gatekeepers might in certain cases restrict the ability of business users of their online intermediation services to offer their goods or services to end users under more favourable conditions, including price, through other online intermediation services, their own interface or direct channel. Such restrictions have a significant deterrent effect on the business users of gatekeepers in terms of their use of alternative online intermediation services, limiting inter-platform contestability, which in turn limits choice of alternative distribution channels including alternative online intermediation channels for end users. To ensure that business users of online intermediation services of gatekeepers can freely choose alternative online intermediation services and differentiate the conditions under which they offer their products or services to their end users, it should not be accepted that gatekeepers limit business users from choosing to differentiate commercial conditions, including price. Such a restriction should apply to any measure with equivalent effect, such as for example increased commission rates or de-listing of the offers of business users.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 115 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
(38) To prevent further reinforcing their dependence on the core platform services of gatekeepers, the business users of these gatekeepers should be free in promoting and choosing the distribution channel they consider most appropriate to interact with any end users that these business users have already acquired through core platform services provided by the gatekeeper. Conversely, end users should also be free to choose offers of such business users and to enter into contracts with them either through core platform services of the gatekeeper, if applicable, or from a direct distribution channel of the business user or another indirect distribution channel such business user may use. This should apply to the promotion of offers and conclusion of contracts between business users and end users. Moreover, the ability of end users to freely acquire content, subscriptions, features or other services or items outside the core platform services of the gatekeeper should not be undermined or restricted notably through the use of technical restrictions. In particular, it should be avoided that gatekeepers restrict end users from access to and use of such services vialegally acquired digital content and services via hardware or a software application running on their core platform service. For example, subscribers to online content purchased outside a software application download or purchased from a software application store should not be prevented from accessing such online content on a software application on the gatekeeper’s core platform service simply because it was purchased outside such software application or software application store.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 121 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
(40) Identification and ancillary services are crucial for the economic development of business users to conduct their business, as these can allow them not only to optimise services, to the extent allowed under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council33 , but also to inject trust in online transactions, in compliance with Union or national law. Gatekeepers should therefore not use their position as provider of core platform services to require their dependent business users to include any identification or ancillary services provided by the gatekeeper itself as part of the provision of services or products by these business users to their end users, where other identification services are available to such business users. __________________ 33 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).
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
(41) Gatekeepers should not restrict the free choice of end users by technically preventing switching between or subscription to different software applications and services. Gatekeepers should therefore ensure a free choice irrespective of whether they are the manufacturer of any hardware by means of which such software applications or services are accessed and should not raise artificial technical barriers so as to make switching impossiblmore cumbersome or ineffective. The mere offering of a given product or service to end users, including by means of pre- installation, as well the improvement of end user offering, such as better prices or increased quality, would not in itself constitute a barrier to switching.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
(42) The conditions under which gatekeepers provide online advertising services to business users including both advertisers and publishers are often non- transparent and opaque. This opacity is partly linked to the practices of a few platforms, but is also due to the sheer complexity of modern day programmatic advertising. The sector is considered to have become more non-transparent after the introduction of new privacy legislation, and is expected to become even more opaque with the announced removal of third-party cookies. This often leads to a lack of information and knowledge for advertisers and publishers about the conditions of the advertising services they purchased and undermines their ability to switch to alternative providers of online advertising services. Furthermore, the costs of online advertising are likely to be higher than they would be in a fairer, more transparent and contestable platform environment. These higher costs are likely to be reflected in the prices that end users pay for many daily products and services relying on the use of online advertising. Transparency obligations should therefore require gatekeepers to provide advertisers and publishers to whom they supply online advertising services, when requested and to the extent possible, with easily accessible and real-time information that allows both sides to understand the price paid for each of the different advertising services provided as part of the relevant advertising value chain.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 129 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
(46) A gatekeeper may use different means to favour its own services or products on its core platform service, to the detriment of the same or similar services that end users could obtain through third parties. This may for instance be the case where certain software applications or ancillary services are pre-installed by a gatekeeper. To enable end user choice, gatekeepers should not prevent end users from un- installing any pre-installed software applications on its core platform service and thereby favour their own software applications.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a regulation
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 or a differentiated treatment to their own offering, in terms of ranking, 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.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 136 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
(49) In such situations, the gatekeeper should not engage in any form of differentiated or preferential treatment in ranking on the core platform service, whether through legal, commercial or technical means, in favour of products or services it offers itself or through a business user which it controlsoperates with. To ensure that this obligation is effective, it should also be ensured that the conditions that apply to such ranking are also generally fair and do not allow the gatekeeper’s own services or products to benefit from competition-relevant information about competing products or services. Ranking should in this context cover all forms of relative prominence, including among others display, rating, order, linking or voice results. To ensure that this obligation is effective and cannot be circumvented it should also apply to any measure that may have an equivalent effect to the differentiated or preferential treatment in ranking. The guidelines adopted pursuant to Article 5 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 should also facilitate the implementation and enforcement of this obligation.34 __________________ 34Commission Notice: Guidelines on ranking transparency pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ C 424, 8.12.2020, p. 1).
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 139 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53
(53) The conditions under which gatekeepers provide online advertising services to business users including both advertisers and publishers are often non- transparent and opaque. This often leads to a lack of information for advertisers and publishers about the effect of a given ad. To further enhance fairness, transparency and contestability of online advertising services designated under this Regulation as well as those that are fully integrated with other core platform services of the same provider, the designated gatekeepers should therefore provide advertisers and publishers, when requested, with free of charg, publishers, or third parties authorised by advertisers and publishers, when requested, with free of charge, continuous, detailed, comprehensive, accessible and real-time access to the performance measuring tools of the gatekeeper and the information necessary, including aggregated data and performance data, for advertisers, advertising agencies acting on behalf of a company placing advertising, as well as for publishers to carry out their own independent verification of the provision of the relevant online advertising services.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 147 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58 a (new)
(58a) During the implementation period of three months, designated gatekeepers should inform the Commission about what they intend to implement and how, in order to ensure effective compliance with their obligations. Such information should be made available to concerned third parties of undertakings, taking into account the protection of trade secrets of designated gatekeepers.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 64
(64) The Commission should investigate and assess whether additional behavioural, or, where appropriate, structural remedies are justified, in order to ensure that the gatekeeper cannot frustrate the objectives of this Regulation by systematic non- compliance with one or several of the obligations laid down in this Regulation, which has further strengthened its gatekeeper position. This would be the case if the gatekeeper’s size in the internal market has further increased, economic dependency of business users and end users on the gatekeeper’s core platform services has further strengthened as their number has further increased and the gatekeeper benefits from increased entrenchment of its position. The Commission should therefore in such cases have the power to impose any remedy, whether behavioural or structural, having due regard to the principle of proportionality. Structural remedies, such as legal, functional or structural separation, including the divestiture of a business, or parts of it, should only be imposed either where there is no equally effective behavioural remedy or where any equally effective behavioural remedy would be more burdensome for the undertaking concerned than the structural remedy. Changes to the structure of an undertaking as it existed before the systematic non- compliance was established would only be proportionate where there is a substantial risk that this systematic non-compliance results from the very structure of the undertaking concerned.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 152 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65 a (new)
(65a) In case of urgency where a risk of serious and immediate damage for business users or end-users of gatekeepers could result from new practices that may undermine contestability of core platform services or may be unfair, it is also important to ensure that the Commission can implement interim measures and thus temporarily impose obligations to the gatekeeper concerned. These interim measures should be proportionate and limited to what is necessary and justified. They should apply pending the conclusion of the market investigation and the corresponding final decision of the Commission.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 153 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 67
(67) Where, in the course of a proceeding into non-compliance or an investigation into systemic non- compliance, a gatekeeper offers commitments to the Commission, the latter should be able to adopt a decision making these commitments binding on the gatekeeper concerned, where it finds that the commitments ensure effective compliance with the obligations of this Regulation. This decie Commission should also find that there are no longer grounds for action by the Commission., where appropriate, be entitled to require the commitments to be tested, including A/B tested in order to optimise their effectiveness. The commitments should be reviewed after they have been in place for an appropriate period. Should the review of the commitments by the Commission show that they have not led to effective compliance, the Commission shall be entitled to require their amendment or revoke them;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 154 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 70
(70) The Commission should be able to directly request that undertakings or association of undertakings provide any relevant evidence, data and information. In addition, the Commission should be able to request any relevant information from any public authority, body or agency within the Member State, or from any natural person or legal person for the purpose of this Regulation. Those public authorities, bodies or agencies within Member States should have the possibility, on their own initiative, to provide the Commission with relevant information. When complying with a decision of the Commission, undertakings are obliged to answer factual questions and to provide documents.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 158 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) In particular, online intermediation services, online search engines, operating systems, online social networking, web browsers, video sharing platform services, number- independent interpersonal communication services, cloud computing services and online advertising services all have the capacity to affect a large number of end users and businesses alike, which entails a risk of unfair business practices. They therefore should be included in the definition of core platform services and fall into the scope of this Regulation. Online intermediation services should be considered irrespective of the technology used to provide such services. In this sense, virtual or voice activated assistants and other connected devices fall within the scope of this Regulation whether their software is considered an operating system, an online intermediation service or a search engine. Online intermediation services may also be active in the field of financial services, and they may intermediate or be used to provide such services as listed non-exhaustively in Annex II to Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council32 . In certain circumstances, the notion of end users should encompass users that are traditionally considered business users, but in a given situation do not use the core platform services to provide goods or services to other end users, such as for example businesses relying on cloud computing services for their own purposes. _________________ 32Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 September 2015 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical regulations and of rules on Information Society services, OJ L 241, 17.9.2015, p. 1.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 164 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall not impose on gatekeepers further obligations by way of laws, regulations or administrative action for the purpose of ensuring contestable and fair markets. This is without prejudice to rules pursuing other legitimate public interests, in compliance with Union law. In particular, nothing in this Regulation precludes Member States from imposing obligations, which are compatible with Union law, on undertakings, including providers of core platform services where these obligations are unrelated to the relevant undertakings having a status of gatekeeper within the meaning of this Regulation in order to protect consumers or to fight against acts of unfair competition and unfair trading practices in business- to-business relationships.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 166 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 6
6. This Regulation is without prejudice to the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU. It is also without prejudice to the application of: national rules prohibiting anticompetitive agreements, decisions by associations of undertakings, concerted practices and abuses of dominant positions; national competition rules prohibiting other forms of unilateral conduct insofar as they are applied to undertakings other than gatekeepers or amount to imposing additional obligations on gatekeepers; Council Regulation (EC) No 139/200438 and national rules concerning merger control; Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and, Regulation (EU) …./.. of the European Parliament and of the Council39 . __________________, Directive 2005/29/EC on unfair commercial practices, Council Directive 93/13/EEC on unfair terms in consumer contracts and Directive 2010/13/EU on the provision of audiovisual media services 1a. __________________ 1a OJ L 95, 15.4.2010, p. 1 38Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) (OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1). 39Regulation (EU) …/.. of the European Parliament and of the Council – proposal on a Single Market For Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 172 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) web browsers;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 173 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point g a (new)
(ga) Payment aggregation services;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 174 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h
(h) advertising services, including any advertising networks, advertising exchanges and any other advertising intermediation services, provided by a provider where the undertaking to which it belongs to is also a provider of any of the core platform services listed in points (a) to (g);
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 185 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
(3a) ‘Virtual assistant’ means software that responds to oral or written commands expressed in a non-technical language by end-users and perform tasks or services by itself or mediates with IT systems if needed and on behalf of the end user;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 186 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new)
(7a) ‘Web browser’ means independent or embedded software applications to access and interact with information hosted on web servers and networks such as the internet;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 188 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
(25) Such an assessment can only be done in light of a market investigation, while taking into account the quantitative thresholds. In its assessment the Commission should pursue the objectives of preserving and fostering the level of innovation, the quality of digital products and services, the degree to which prices are fair and competitive, and the degree to which quality or choice for business users and for end users is or remains high. Elements that are specific to the providers of core platform services concerned, such as extreme scale economies, very strong network effects, an ability to connect many business users with many end users through the multi-sidedness of these services, lock-in effects, a lack of multi- homing or vertical integration, can be taken into account. The potential negative and positive impacts of these elements for business users, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises, and consumers should be taken into consideration. In addition, a very high market capitalisation, a very high ratio of equity value over profit or a very high turnover derived from end users of a single core platform service can point to the tipping of the market or leveraging potential of such providers. Together with market capitalisation, high growth rates, or decelerating growth rates read together with profitability growth, are examples of dynamic parameters that are particularly relevant to identifying such providers of core platform services that are foreseen to become entrenched. The Commission should be able to take a decision by drawing adverse inferences from facts available where the provider significantly obstructs the investigation by failing to comply with the investigative measures taken by the Commission.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 189 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)
(11a) ‘Payment aggregation services’ means technical services as defined in Article 3(j) of Directive (EU) 2015/2366 of the European Parliament and of the Council, which enable any business activity set out in annex I of Directive (EU) 2015/2366 of the European Parliament and of the Council within the framework of contracts between payment aggregation services providers and third- party providers.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 196 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17 a (new)
(17a) ‘Competitor to the gatekeeper’s core platform service’ means any natural or legal person acting in a commercial or professional capacity providing a core platform service in the same category as the one of the gatekeeper;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 198 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 18
(18) ‘Ranking’ means the relative prominence given to goods or services offered through online intermediation services including software application stores and virtual assistants or online social networking services, or the relevance given to search results by online search engines, as presented, organised or communicated by the providers of online intermediation services including software application stores and virtual assistants or of online social networking services or by providers of online search engines, respectively, whatever the technological means used for such presentation, organisation or communication;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 198 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
(31) To ensure the effectiveness of the review of gatekeeper status as well as the possibility to adjust the list of core platform services provided by a gatekeeper, the gatekeepers should inform the Commission of all of their intended and concluded acquisitions of other providers of core platform services or any oprior to their services provided within the digital sectorimplementation. Such information should not only serve the review process mentioned above, regarding the status of individual gatekeepers, but will also provide information that is crucial to monitoring broader contestability trends in the markets where gatekeepers operate, in particular in the digital sector and can therefore be a useful factor for consideration in the context of the market investigations foreseen by this Regulation. and under EU Merger control Regulation
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 201 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 23 a (new)
(23a) ‘National competent authority’ means any national authority that has been designated by a Member State as such within the meaning and for the purpose of this Regulation, notably in respect of Article 17;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 203 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
(33) The obligations laid down in this Regulation are limited to what is necessary and justified to address the unfairness of the identified practices by gatekeepers and to ensure contestability in relation to core platform services provided by gatekeepers. Therefore, the obligations should correspond to those practices that are considered unfair by taking into account the features of the digital sector and where experience gained, for example in the enforcement of the EU competition rules, shows that they have a particularly negative direct impact on the business users and end users. The obligations laid down in the Regulation should specifically take into account the nature of the core platform services provided and the presence of different business models. In addition, it is necessary to provide for the possibility of a regulatory dialogue with gatekeepers to tailor those obligations that are likely to require specific implementing measures in order to ensure their effectiveness and proportionality. The obligations should only be updated after a thorough investigation on the nature and impact of specific practices that may be newly identified, following an in-depth investigation, as unfair or limiting contestability in the same manner as the unfair practices laid down in this Regulation while potentially escaping the scope of the current set of obligations.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 207 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
(35) The obligations laid down in this Regulation are necessary to address identified public policy concerns, there being no alternative and less restrictive measures that would effectively achieve the same result, having regard to the need to safeguard public order, protect privacy and fight fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 208 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
(36) The conduct of combining end user data from different sources or signing in users to different services of gatekeepers gives them potential advantages in terms of accumulation of data, thereby raising barriers to entry. To ensure that gatekeepers do not unfairly undermine the contestability of core platform services, they should enable their end users to freely choose to opt-in to such business practices by offering a less personalised alternativebut equivalent alternative . The less personalized alternative should not be different or of degraded quality compared to the service offered to the end users who provide consent to the combining of their personal data. The possibility should cover all possible sources of personal data, including own services of the gatekeeper as well as third party websites, and should be proactively presented to the end user in an explicit, clear and straightforward manner. Consent should be given in a clear, informed and specific way by the end user who should be informed that a refusal may lead to a less personalized offer but the quality and functionnalities of the core platform service will remain unchanged.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 211 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) it enjoys an entrenched and durable position in its operations or it is foreseeable that it will enjoy such a position in the near future.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 216 #
Proposal for a regulation
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 threone months after those thresholds are satisfied and provide it with the relevant information identified in paragraph 2.. That notification shall include the relevant information relating to the quantitative thresholds 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).
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 217 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Where the gatekeeper presents such sufficiently substantiated arguments to demonstrate that it does not satisfy the requirements of paragraph 1, the Commission shall apply paragraph 6 to assess whether the criteria in paragraph 1 are met.deleted
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 217 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
(37) Because of their position, gatekeepers might in certain cases restrict the ability of business users of their online intermediation services to offer their goods or services to end users under more favourable conditions, including price, through other online intermediation services, their own interface or direct channel. Such restrictions have a significant deterrent effect on the business users of gatekeepers in terms of their use of alternative online intermediation services, limiting inter-platform contestability, which in turn limits choice of alternative distributive channels including alternative online intermediation channels for end users. To ensure that business users of online intermediation services of gatekeepers can freely choose alternative online intermediation services and differentiate the conditions under which they offer their products or services to their end users, it should not be accepted that gatekeepers limit business users from choosing to differentiate commercial conditions, including price. Such a restriction should apply to any measure with equivalent effect, such as for example increased commission rates or, de-listing or less favourable ranking of the offers of business users.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 220 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) the ability of the undertaking to implement conglomerate strategies, in particular through its vertical integration or its significant leverage in related markets;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 222 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point f
(f) other structural market characteristics such as the degree of multi- homing among business and end-users of the core platform services provided.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 224 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3
Where the provider of a core platform service that satisfies the quantitative thresholds of paragraph 2 fails to comply with the investigative measures ordered by the Commission pursuant to Chapter V of this Regulation in a significant manner and the failure persists after the provider has been invited to comply within a reasonable time-limit and to submit observations, the Commission shall be entitled to designate that provider as a gatekeeper.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 226 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 4
Where the provider of a core platform service that does not satisfy the quantitative thresholds of paragraph 2 fails to comply with the investigative measures ordered by the Commission pursuant to Chapter V of this Regulation in a significant manner and the failure persists after the provider has been invited to comply within a reasonable time-limit and to submit observations, the Commission shall be entitled to designate that provider as a gatekeeper based on facts available.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 228 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
(38) To prevent further reinforcing their dependence on the core platform services of gatekeepers, the business users of these gatekeepers should be free in promoting and choosing the distribution channel they consider most appropriate to interact with any end users that these business users have already acquired through core platform services provided by the gatekeeper. Conversely, end users should also be free to choose offers of such business users and to enter into contracts with them either through core platform services of the gatekeeper, if applicable, or from a direct distribution channel of the business user or another indirect distribution channel such a business user may use. This should apply to the promotion of offers, any communications and conclusion of contracts between business users and end users. Moreover, the ability of end users to freely acquire content, subscriptions, features or other items outside the core platform services of the gatekeeper should not be undermined or restricted. In particular, it should be avoided that gatekeepers restrict end users from access to and use of such services via a software application running on their core platform service. For example, subscribers to online content purchased outside a software application download or purchased from a software application store should not be prevented from accessing such online content on a software application on the gatekeeper’s core platform service simply because it was purchased outside such software application or software application store.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 231 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) there is new relevant information that was not examined before the adoption of the decision;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 234 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall publish and update the list of gatekeepers and the list of the core platform services for which they need to comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 on an on-going basis and send it to the European Parliament.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 235 #
Proposal for a regulation
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 provided consent in the sense of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In the event that the end user has been presented with the specific choice and has not provided consent, or has withdrawn consent, the gatekeeper shall refrain from offering different or degraded services compared to the services offered to an end user that provided consent, unless such consent is indispensable to ensure the same quality of service;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 235 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39 a (new)
(39 a) The national competition authorities should gather complaints from third parties on unfair behaviours by gatekeepers that fall within the scope of this Regulation and report relevant cases to the Commission. Based on clearly defined conditions and investigation priorities, the Commission should then examine the complaints and act accordingly by, for example, opening a formal market investigation.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 239 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
(40) Identification and ancillary services are crucial for the economic development of business users to conduct their business, as these can allow them not only to optimise services, to the extent allowed under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council33 , [1],but also to inject trust in online transactions, in compliance with Union or national law. Gatekeepers should therefore not use their position as provider of core platform services to require their dependent business users to include any ancillary and identification services provided by the gatekeeper itself as part of the provision of services or products by these business users to their end users, where other identification services are available to such business users. _________________ 33Directive 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).
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 241 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) allow business users to offer the same products or services to end users through third party online intby any other mediation serviceans at prices or conditions that are different from those offered through the online intermediation services of the gatekeeper;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 242 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) refrain from requiring business users to inform the gatekeeper of the differentiated prices or conditions they choose to apply on their own channel of distribution or through any other means;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 243 #
Proposal for a regulation
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 or receive payments for services provided 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;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 246 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) refrain from preventing or restricting business users and end-users from raising issues with any relevant public authority relating to any practice of gatekeepers including through the reporting mechanism for business users and end-users pursuant to Article 21a;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 247 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
(42) The conditions under which gatekeepers provide online advertising services to business users including both advertisers and publishers are often non- transparent and opaque. This opacity is partly linked to the practices of a few platforms, but is also due to the sheer complexity of modern day programmatic advertising. The sector is considered to have become more non-transparent after the introduction of new privacy legislation, and is expected to become even more opaque with the announced removal of third-party cookies. This often leads to a lack of information and knowledge for advertisers and publishers about the conditions of the advertising services they purchased and undermines their ability to switch to alternative providers of online advertising services. Furthermore, the costs of online advertising are likely to be higher than they would be in a fairer, more transparent and contestable platform environment. These higher costs are likely to be reflected in the prices that end users pay for many daily products and services relying on the use of online advertising. Transparency obligations should therefore require gatekeepers to provide advertisers and publishers to whom they supply online advertising services, when requested and to the extent possible, with easily, accessible and real-time information that allows both sides to understand the price paid for each of the different advertising services provided as part of the relevant advertising value chain.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 249 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) refrain from requiring business users to use, offer or interoperate with an identification servicey ancillary service as defined in points (14) and (15) of Article 2 of the gatekeeper in the context of services offered by the business users using the core platform services of that gatekeeper;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 253 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) refrain from requiring business users or end users to subscribe to or register with any other core platform services identias defined pursuant toin Article 32 or which meets the thresholds in Article 3(2)(b)any ancillary services provided by the gatekeeper as a condition to use, access, sign up or register to any of their core platform services identified pursuant to that Article;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 254 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide advertisers and publishers, or third parties authorised by advertisers and publishers, to which it supplies advertising services, upon their request, with and free of charge, with continuous, detailed, comprehensive, real-time and easy to access information concerning the price paid by the advertiser and publisher, as well as the amount or remuneration paid to the publisher, for the publishing of a given ad and for each of the relevant advertising services provided by the gatekeeper. , including aggregated data and performance data in a manner that would allow advertisers and publishers to run their own verification and measurement tools to assess performance of the core services provided for by the gatekeepers;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 258 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) refrain from imposing on business users or end users software applications or services, which are used in the context of or together with core platform services, or contractual licensing agreements, which would limit end users' ability or economic incentive to use third party software applications or service and/or give preferential treatment to the gatekeeper’s own products or services;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 258 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46 a (new)
(46 a) Securing default positions across the main search access points of an operating system, such as the pre-installed browser, the home screen bar widget, or the voice assistant, can entrench the dominant position of an established core platform service and prevent contestability on digital markets. Even where users can change the default manually, they rarely do so, due to behavioral bias. In order to ensure contestability, end users should be able to select their preferred core platform service default through a preference menu when they set up their device. End users should be able to access such preference menu after the device is set up. A gatekeeper may not offer compensation or benefits to hardware manufacturers or network operators, or otherwise require them to offer its core platform service pre- installed or set as a default as these practices prohibit third-party business users to bid for pre-installation or for a default position.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 264 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) refrain from using, in competition with business users, any data not publicly available, which is generated through or in connection with activities by those business users, including by the end users of these business users, of its core platform services or of its ancillary services or which is provided by those business users of its core platform services or its ancillary services or by the end users of these business users;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 266 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) refrain from exclusively enabling its own core platform services as default services when equivalent alternative services which perform the same function can be proposed in non-discriminatory manner;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 268 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) allow and technically enable the installation and effective use and interoperability of third party software applications or software application stores using, or interoperating with, operating systems of that gatekeeper and allow and enable 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 , provided that such proportionate measures are duly justified;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 270 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48 a (new)
(48 a) Gatekeepers can offer software applications or services which may be used on, or in conjunction with, a core platform service, such as operating systems or cloud computing services, offered by the same gatekeeper. If, in such circumstances, the gatekeeper prevents end users being able to use their software applications or services on, or in conjunction with, products or services of alternative providers under equal conditions as with the products or services of the gatekeeper, this could significantly undermine choice for end users and innovation by alternative providers. It should therefore be ensured that gatekeepers do not restrict to their advantage and to the detriment of alternative providers, end users and business users in choosing the products or services of alternative providers which they use in conjunction with the core platform service offered by the gatekeeper.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 272 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) refrain from treating differently or more favourably in ranking, display, installation, activation, 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, installation, activation and default settings;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 275 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) refrain from technically restricting the ability of end users to switch between and subscribe to different software applications and services to be accessed using the operating system or the cloud computing services of the gatekeeper, including as regards the choice of Internet access provider for end users or using its virtual assistant;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 276 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) allow business users, end users and providers of ancillary services access to and interoperability with the same operating system, hardware or software features, including near-field communication antennas or technology related to these antennas, that are available or used in the provision by the gatekeeper of any ancillary services or industry-standard features of its core platform services; in such cases, access and interoperability conditions shall be fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 279 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide advertisers and publishers, upon their request and free of charge, withor third parties authorised by advertisers and publishers, upon their request and free of charge, with continuous, detailed, comprehensive, accessible and real-time access information access to the performance measuring tools of the gatekeeper and the information necessary for advertisers and publishers to carry out their own independent verification of the ad inventory, including aggregated data and performance data in a manner that would allow advertisers and publishers to run their own verification and measurement tools to assess performance of the core services provided for by the gatekeepers;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 281 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) provide effective portability of data provided for or generated through or in the context of the activity of a business user or end user and shall, in particular, provide tools ffree of charge and technically accessible tools for business users, or third parties authorised by business users or end users to facilitate the exercise of data portability, in line with Regulation EU 2016/679, including by the provision of continuous and real-time access;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 285 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) provide business users, or third parties authorised by a business user, free of charge, with effective, high-quality, continuous and real-time access and use of aggregated or non-aggregated data, that is provided for or generated in the context of the use of the relevant core platform services or of ancillary services offered by the gatekeeper by those business users and the end users engaging with the products or services provided by those business users; for personal data, provide access and use only where directly connected with the use effectuated by the end user in respect of the products or services offered by the relevant business user through the relevant core platform service, and when the end user opts in to such sharing with a consent in the sense of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 288 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) apply fair and non-discriminatory general conditions of access for business users to its software application storeor of ancillary services offered by the gatekeeper software application store, cloud computing services, online search engines and online social networking services designated pursuant to Article 3 of this Regulation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 293 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
(ka) provide its business users and end users with clear, fair and non- discriminatory licensing conditions, including in terms of charges and fees, preventing material changes limiting the use of software applications or services in conjunction with a core platform service, and safeguarding the reasonably expected use of the software application or service, including after its transfer to another end user, where applicable.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 300 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Before implementing any change to fees or fee structures charged to business users and which follow from the gatekeeper’s obligations pursuant to paragraph 1, the gatekeeper shall notify the Commission and the affected business users at least one month in advance of such changes;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 303 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Within six months after its designation pursuant to paragraph 8 of Article 3, the gatekeeper shall provide the Commission with detailed information on the measures to be taken in order to ensure compliance with its obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6. This information shall be provided in the form of a report and shall be updated on an annual basis, whereby a summary of this report shall be published on the Commission’s website without undue delay.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 304 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Where the Commission finds that the measures that the gatekeeper intends to implement pursuant to paragraph 1, or has implemented, do not ensure effective compliance with the relevant obligations laid down in Article 6, it may by decision specify the measures that the gatekeeper concerned shall implement in order to comply with the obligations laid down in Article 6. In view of adopting the decision, the Commission shall take into account the information provided by all relevant stakeholders, such as interested third parties, governments or national authorities. The Commission shall adopt such a decision within six months from the opening of proceedings pursuant to Article 18.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 306 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. In view of adopting the decision under paragraph 2, the Commission shall communicate its preliminary findings within three months from the opening of the proceedings. In the preliminary findings, the Commission shall explain the measures it considers to take or it considers that the provider of core platform services concerned should take in order to effectively address the preliminary findings. Legitimate third parties with direct implication shall be able to provide comments to the national competent authorities with regard to the preliminary findings. Member States shall define the rules to exercise such consultation procedure.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 307 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
(57) ICore platform services provided by gatekeepers, and in particular gatekeepers which provide access to software application stores, serve as an important gateway for business users that seek to reach end users. In view of the imbalance in bargaining power between those gatekeepers and business users of their software application storcore platform services, those gatekeepers should not be allowed to impose general conditions, including pricing conditions, data usage conditions or conditions related to the licensing of rights held by the business user that would be unfair or lead to unjustified differentiation. Pricing or other general access or treatment conditions should be considered unfair if they lead to an imbalance of rights and obligations imposed on business users or confer an advantage on the gatekeeper which is disproportionate to the service provided by the gatekeeper to business users or lead to a disadvantage for business users in providing the same or similar services as the gatekeeper. The following benchmarks can serve as a yardstick to determine the fairness of general access conditions: prices charged or conditions imposed for the same or similar services by other providers of software application storesthe relevant core platform service; prices charged or conditions imposed by the provider of the software application storegatekeeper for different related or similar services or to different types of end users; prices charged or conditions imposed by the provider of the software application storegatekeeper for the same service in different geographic regions; prices charged or conditions imposed by the provider of the software application store for the same service the gatekeeper offers to itself. This obligation should not establish an access right and it should be without prejudice to the ability of providers of software application storcore platform services to take the required responsibility in the fight against illegal and unwanted content as set out in Regulation [Digital Services Act].
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 310 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 7
7. A gatekeeper may request the opening of proceedings pursuant to Article 18 for 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 mayshall, with its request, provide a reasoned submission to explain in particular why the measures that it intends to implement or has implemented are effective in achieving the objective of the relevant obligation in the specific circumstances.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 317 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – 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 grounds in paragraph 2 as well as the effects on the gatekeeper concerned and on third parties. The suspension may be made subject to conditions and obligations to be defined by the Commission in order to ensure a fair balance between the goals pursued by the grounds in paragraph 2 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. The Commission shall review any exemption decision adopted according to paragraph 1 on an annual basis and may amend its decision in accordance with its findings.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 319 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 347 to update the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 where, based on a market investigation pursuant to Article 17, it has identified the need for new obligations addressing practices that limit the contestability of core platform services or are unfair in the same way as the practices addressed by the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 323 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. A gatekeeper shall inform the Commission of any intended concentration within the meaning of Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 involving another provider of core platform services or of any other services provided in the digital sector irrespective of whether it is notifiable to a Union competition authority under Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 or to a competent national competition authority under national merger rules.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 323 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 59 a (new)
(59 a) Within the implementation timeframe of their obligations, designated gatekeepers should inform the Commission about the measures implemented to achieve effectiveness. Such information should be made available to concerned third parties of undertakings regarding the protection of their business secrets.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 326 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
A gatekeeper shall inform the Commission of such a concentration within at least 2 months prior to its implementation and following the conclusion of the agreement, the announcement of the public bid, or the acquisition of a controlling interest. The Commission shall make this information available to relevant national authorities.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 329 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. The notification of information pursuant to paragraph 1 shall at least describe for the acquisition targets their EEA and worldwide annual turnover, for any relevant core platform services their respective EEA annual turnover, their number of yearly active business users and the number of monthly active end users, as well as the rationale of the intended concentration.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 330 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The Commission shall inform the competent national authorities of any information received pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2. With due respect to the protection of trade secrets, the Commission shall publish annually the list of acquisitions of which it has been informed by gatekeepers which have fallen below the notification thresholds of Council Regulation No 139/2004.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 331 #
Proposal for a regulation
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 that the gatekeeper applies to or across its core platform services identified pursuant to Article 3. This descriptionWithout prejudice to trade secrets protection, the gatekeeper shall make an overview of the audited description of applied profiling techniques of consumers publicly available. This description and its publicly available overview shall be updated at least annually.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 331 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 62
(62) In order to ensure the full and lasting achievement of the objectives of this Regulation, the Commission should be able to assess whether a provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper without meeting the quantitative thresholds laid down in this Regulation; whether systematic non- compliance by a gatekeeper warrants imposing additional remedies; and whether the list of obligations addressing unfair practices by gatekeepers should be reviewed and additional practices that are similarly unfair and limiting the contestability of digital markets should be identified; and whether the prior designation of gatekeepers or introduction of obligations has had a significant impact on business users, especially on small and medium-sized enterprises, or consumers. Such assessment should be based on market investigations to be run in an appropriate timeframe, by using clear procedures and deadlines, in order to support the ex ante effect of this Regulation on contestability and fairness in the digital sector, and to provide the requisite degree of legal certainty.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 336 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
(ba) a significant number of unfair practices alerts have been raised by national authorities pursuant the reporting mechanism or other relevant stakeholders.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 336 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 63
(63) Following a market investigation, an undertaking providing a core platform service could be found to fulfil all of the overarching qualitative criteria for being identified as a gatekeeper. It should then, in principle, comply with all of the relevant obligations laid down by this Regulation which are appropriate and necessary to guarantee contestability. However, for gatekeepers that have been designated by the Commission as likely to enjoy an entrenched and durable position in the near future, the Commission should only impose those obligations that are necessary and appropriate to prevent that the gatekeeper concerned achieves an entrenched and durable position in its operations. With respect to such emerging gatekeepers, the Commission should take into account that this status is in principle of a temporary nature, and it should therefore be decided at a given moment whether such a provider of core platform services should be subjected to the full set of gatekeeper obligations because it has acquired an entrenched and durable position, or conditions for designation are ultimately not met and therefore all previously imposed obligations should be waived.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 337 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point b b (new)
(bb) there is new relevant information that was not examined before the adoption of the decision;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 339 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission and national competition authorities may conduct a market investigation for the purpose of examining whether a provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper pursuant to Article 3(6), or in order to identify core platform services for a gatekeeper pursuant to Article 3(7) and Article 3 (8). It shall endeavour to conclude its investigation by adopting a decision in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4) within twelve months from the opening of the market investigation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 340 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 64
(64) The Commission should investigate and assess whether additional behavioural, or, where appropriate, structural remedies are justified, in order to ensure that the gatekeeper cannot frustrate the objectives of this Regulation by systematic non- compliance with one or several of the obligations laid down in this Regulation, which has further strengthened its gatekeeper position. This would be the case if the gatekeeper’s size in the internal market has further increased, economic dependency of business users and end users on the gatekeeper’s core platform services has further strengthened as their number has further increased and the gatekeeper benefits from increased entrenchment of its position. The Commission should therefore in such cases have the power to impose any remedy, whether behavioural or structural, having due regard to the principle of proportionality. Structural remedies, such as legal, functional or structural separation, including the divestiture of a business, or parts of it, should only be imposed either where there is no equally effective behavioural remedy or where any equally effective behavioural remedy would be more burdensome for the undertaking concerned than the structural remedy. Changes to the structure of an undertaking as it existed before the systematic non- compliance was established would only be proportionate where there is a substantial risk that this systematic non- compliance results from the very structure of the undertaking concerned. The Commission should be able to impose interim measures at any time during proceedings to prevent serious or immediate damages for business users or end users.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 341 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. Where the provider of core platform services satisfies the thresholds set out in Article 3(2), but has presented significantly substantiated arguments in accordance with Article 3(4), the Commission shall endeavour to conclude the market investigation within five months from the opening of the market investigation by a decision pursuant to paragraph 1. In that case the Commission shall endeavour to communicate its preliminary findings pursuant to paragraph 2 to the provider of core platform services within three months from the opening of the investigation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 343 #
Proposal for a regulation
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 onlyspecific 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.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 343 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65 a (new)
(65 a) Interim measures can be an important tool to ensure that, while an investigation is ongoing, the infringement being investigated does not lead to serious and immediate damage for business users or end users of gatekeepers. In case of urgency, where a risk of serious and immediate damage for business users or end-users of gatekeepers could result from new practices that may undermine contestability of core platform services, the Commission should be empowered to impose interim measures by temporarily imposing obligations to the gatekeeper concerned. These interim measures should be limited to what is necessary and justified. They should apply pending the conclusion of the market investigation and the corresponding final decision of the Commission pursuant to Article 17.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 344 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. Where the market investigation shows that a gatekeeper has systematically infringed theany obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 and has further strengthened or extended its gatekeeper position in relation to the characteristics under Article 3(1), the Commission may by decision adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4) impose on such gatekeeper any behavioural or structural remedies which are proportionate to the infringement committed and necessary to ensure compliance with this Regulation. The Commission shall, where appropriate, be entitled to require the remedies to be tested to optimise their effectiveness. The Commission shall conclude its investigation by adopting a decision within twelve months from the opening of the market investigation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 347 #
Proposal for a regulation
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.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 349 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
The Commission and competent national authorities may conduct a market investigation with the purpose of examining whether one or more services within the digital sector should be added to the list of core platform services or to detect types of practices that may limit the contestability of core platform services or may be unfair and which are not effectively addressed by this Regulation. It shall issue a public report at the latest within 24 months from the opening of the market investigation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 351 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 67 a (new)
(67 a) The Commission shall, where appropriate, be entitled to require the commitments to be tested, for example, by using split-run tests and other randomised experiments, in order to optimise their effectiveness. The commitments should be reviewed after they have been in place for an appropriate period. Where the review of the commitments by the Commission shows that they have not led to effective compliance, the Commission should be entitled to require amendment or revocation thereof.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 356 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 4
4. Where the Commission requires undertakings and associations of undertakings to supply information by decision, it shall state the purpose of the request, specify what information is required and fix the time-limit within which it is to be provided. Where the Commission requires undertakings to provide access to its data-bases and algorithms, it shall state the legal basis and the purpose of the request, and fix the time- limit within which it is to be provided. ItThe decision shall also indicate the penalties provided for in Article 26 and indicate or impose the periodic penalty payments provided for in Article 27. It shall further indicate the right to have the decision reviewed by the Court of Justice.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 357 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 6
6. At the request of the Commission, the governments and authorities or on their own initiative, relevant public authorities, bodies or agencies within of the Member States shall provide the Commission with all the necessary information to carry out the duties assigned to it by this Regulation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 360 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
The Commission, and competent national authorities, may interview any natural or legal person which consents to being interviewed for the purpose of collecting information, relating to the subject-matter of an investigation, pursuant to Articles 7, 16, 17, 25 and 26, including in relation to the monitoring, implementing and enforcing of the rules laid down in this Regulation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 361 #
Proposal for a regulation
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.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 362 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2
2. On-site inspections may also be carried out with the assistance of auditors or experts appointed by the Commission pursuant to Article 24(2) as well as competent national authorities in the territory of that Member State, where the gatekeeper has its premises.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 363 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 a (new)
Article 21a Reporting mechanism for business users, end-users and relevant stakeholders 1. Business users, competitors and end- users of the core platform services as defined in Article 2(2) may notify to the Commission as well as to the competent national authority any malpractice or behaviour by gatekeepers, which could possibly undermine the contestability of a core platform service, may be unfair pursuant to Article 10 (2) , or give rise to concerns with regard to non-compliance pursuant to Article 25. 2. The Commission shall share the information received pursuant to paragraph 1 with the competent national authorities through the European Competition Network. 3. The Commission may be able to prioritise investigations and may decide to not undertake investigations at all. 4. Without prejudice to Article 33, the competent national authority may request the Digital Markets Advisory Committee to adopt a reasoned opinion in this regard within one month after having received the request. 5. If the reasoned opinion states that the circumstances would justify an enforcement priority, the Commission shall within a further delay of four months examine whether there are reasonable grounds to open such investigation. Where the Commission does not follow the reasoned opinion of the Advisory Committee, it shall give its reasons.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 365 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
1. In case of urgency due to the risk of serious and irreparablmmediate damage for business users or end users of gatekeepers, the Commission may, by decision adopt in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4), order interim measures against a gatekeeper on the basis of a prima facie finding of an infringement of Articles 5 or 6.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 366 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In case of urgency due to the risk of serious and immediate damage for business users or end-users of gatekeepers, resulting from new practices implemented by one or several gatekeepers that may undermine contestability of core platform services or may be unfair pursuant to Article 10 (2), the Commission may, by decision adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4), order interim measures on the concerned gatekeepers in order to avoid the materialization of the said risk.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 367 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. A decision pursuant to paragraph 3 may only be adopted in the context of a market investigation pursuant to Article 17 and within 6 months of the opening of such an investigation. The interim measures shall apply for a specified period of time and, in any case, shall be replaced by the new obligations that may arise under the final decision resulting from the market investigation pursuant to Article 17.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 368 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. If during proceedings under Articles 16 or 25 the gatekeeper concerned offers commitments for the relevant core platform services to ensure compliance with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6, the Commission may by decision adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4) make those commitments binding on that gatekeeper and declare that there are no further grounds for action. The Commission shall, where appropriate, be entitled to require the commitments to be tested to optimise their effectiveness.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 368 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 75
(75) In the context of proceedings carried out under this Regulation, the undertakings concerned should be accorded the right to be heard by the Commission and the decisions taken should be widely publicised. While ensuring the rights to good administration and the rights of defence of the undertakings concerned, in particular, the right of access to the file and the right to be heard, it is essential that confidential informationand sensitive commercial information, which could affect the privacy of trade secrets, be protected. Furthermore, while respecting the confidentiality of the information, the Commission should ensure that any information relied on for the purpose of the decision is disclosed to an extent that allows the addressee of the decision to understand the facts and considerations that led up to the decision. Finally, under certain conditions certain business records, such as communication between lawyers and their clients, may be considered confidential if the relevant conditions are met.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 369 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Commission shall regularly review the commitments with regard to their purpose and where, following investigation, it finds that they are not effective, shall be entitled to require amendments to the commitments or revoke them where appropriate;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 370 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) there is new relevant information that was not examined before the adoption of the decision;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 372 #
Proposal for a regulation
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, including ones from competent national authorities, to monitor the obligations and measures and to provide specific expertise or knowledge to the Commission.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 372 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 78
(78) The Commission should periodically evaluate this Regulation and closely monitor its effects on the contestability and fairness of commercial relationships in the online platform economy, in particular with a view to determining the need for amendments in light of relevant technological or commercial developments. This evaluation should include the regular review of the list of core platform services and the obligations addressed to gatekeepers as well as enforcement of these, in view of ensuring that digital markets across the Union are contestable and fair. In order to obtain a broad view of developments in the sector, the evaluation should take into account the experiences of Member States and relevant stakeholders. The Commission may in this regard also consider the opinions and reports presented to it by the Observatory on the Online Platform Economy that was first established by Commission Decision C(2018)2393 of 26 April 2018, by Eurostat, and by the national statistics offices of the countries where the service providers operate. Following the evaluation, the Commission should take appropriate measures. The Commission should to maintain a high level of protection and respect for the common EU rights and values, particularly equality and non-discrimination, as an objective when conducting the assessments and reviews of the practices and obligations provided in this Regulation.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 373 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2
2. Before adopting the decision pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission shall communicate its preliminary findings to the gatekeeper concerned. In the preliminary findings, the Commission shall explain the measures it considers to take or it considers that the gatekeeper should take in order to effectively address the preliminary findings. The Commission shall take into account the views of relevant third parties such as end-users or business users before adopting a decision.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 374 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) the obligation to provide within the time-limit information that is required for assessing their designation as gatekeepers pursuant to Article 3(2) or supply incorrect, or misleading information;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 375 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Commission may by decision impose on undertakings and associations of undertakings fines not exceeding 1% of the total turnover of the undertakings or association of undertakings concerned in the preceding financial year where they intentionally or negligently:
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 377 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1
1. The powers conferred on the Commission by Articles 26 and 27 shall be subject to a threfive year limitation period.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 379 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 79 a (new)
(79 a) The Commission shall apply the provisions of this Regulation in close cooperation with the competent national competition authorities, acting within the framework of the European Competition Network, to ensure effective enforceability as well as coherent implementation of this Regulation and to facilitate the cooperation with national authorities.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 380 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. If the Commission considers it necessary, it may also hear other natural or legal persons before taking the decision as provided in paragraph 1.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 381 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 79 b (new)
(79 b) Without prejudice to the budgetary procedure and through existing financial instruments, adequate human, financial and technical resources should be allocated to the Commission to ensure that it can effectively perform its duties and exercise its powers as necessary for the enforcement of this Regulation.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 382 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 a (new)
Article 31a Commission cooperation with competent national authorities 1. The Commission may be assisted by the competent national authorities, designated for this purpose by the Member States, with regard to human, financial and organisational resources. 2. The Commission may, in particular, develop a close cooperation with national competent authorities with regard to the enforcement of this Regulation. Competent national authorities shall, at the request of the Commission, be entitled to exercise the powers of Articles 12, 15, 16 and 17. 3. Where requested by the Commission to assist in any investigation pursuant to paragraph 2 of this Article, the competent national authorities shall have the power to enforce the obligations deriving from Articles 19, 20, 21 and 24. 4. Competent national authorities shall also be empowered to receive complaints and information on possible cases of non- compliance by gatekeepers from end users and business users in their territory for transmission to the Commission.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 384 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. When three or more Member States request the Commission to open an investigation pursuant to Articles 15, 16 and 17 or to institute proceedings in respect of possible non-compliance pursuant to Article 25 because they consider that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper, that new services or practices should be included within the scope of this Regulation or that a gatekeeper is not complying with its obligations, the Commission shall within four months examine whether there are reasonable grounds to open such an investigation.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 389 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission may adopt implementing acts concerning: Articles 3, 6, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20, 22, 23, 25 and 30 with respect to:
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 390 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the form, content and other details of the technical measures that gatekeepers shall implement in order to ensure compliance with points (h), (i) and (j) of Article 6(1).
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 390 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) related to electronic communications services as defined in point (4) of Article 2 of Directive (EU) 2018/1972 other than those related to number-independent interpersonal communication services as defined in point (4)(b7) of Article 2 of that Directive.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 391 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the form, content and other details of the regulatory reports delivered pursuant to Article 7.1 a;
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 391 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. This Regulation shall not apply to the data that is used to maintain or improve security of online transactions and prevent fraud.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 392 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) the practical arrangements for the cooperation and coordination between the Commission and competent national authorities, provided for in Article 1(7).
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 392 #
5. In order to ensure the frictionless and coherent application of this Regulation throughout the internal market and to guarantee a fully harmonized approach, the European Commission shall be the sole enforcer and decision maker on the correct application of the rules and obligations outlined in this Regulation. Member States shall not impose on gatekeepers further obligations by way of laws, regulations or administrative action for the purpose of ensuring contestable and fair markets. This is without prejudice to rules pursuing other legitimate public interests, in compliance with Union law. In particular, nothing in this Regulation precludes Member States from imposing obligations, which are compatible with Union law, on undertakings, including providers of core platform services where these obligations are unrelated to the relevant undertakings having a status of gatekeeper within the meaning of this Regulation in order to protect consumers or to fight against acts of unfair competition.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 393 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2
2. the practical arrangements for the cooperation and coordination between the Commission and Member States provided for in Article 1(7).Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4). Before the adoption of any measures pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission shall publish a draft thereof and invite all interested parties to submit their comments within the time limit it lays down, which may not be less than one month.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 396 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 3(65) and 910(1) shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of five years from DD/MM/YYYY. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five-year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 397 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 3
3. The delegation of power referred to in Articles 3(65) and 910(1) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation 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 delegated acts already in force.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 398 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 6
6. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 3(6) and 9(1) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or by the Council within a period of twohree months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and to the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by twohree months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 399 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. In addition to Article 32a, national competition authorities shall notify the Commission at least four weeks before the opening of any formal proceedings against any provider of core platform services if there is any possible overlap with the scope of this Regulation in order to ensure close coordination and cooperation at Union and national level.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 400 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. This Regulation shall apply from sixthree months after its entry into force.
2021/06/30
Committee: JURI
Amendment 411 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 7
7. National authorities shall not take decisions which would run counter to a decision adopted by the Commission under this Regulation. The Commission and Member States shall work in close cooperation and coordination in their enforcement actions on the basis of the principles and rules established in Article 32a.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 433 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h a (new)
(h a) web browsers;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 437 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h b (new)
(h b) virtual assistants;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 443 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)
(3 b) ‘Web browser’ means a client software program that runs against a Web server or other Internet server and enables a user to navigate the World Wide Web to access and display data, including standalone web browsers as well as web browsers integrated or embedded in software or similar;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 445 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
(6) ‘Online search engine’ means a digital service as defined in point 5 of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150, thus excluding the search functions on other online intermediation services;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 499 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) it enjoys an entrenched and durable position in its operations or it is foreseeable that it will enjoy such a position in the near future.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 526 #
Proposal for a regulation
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).
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 535 #
4. The Commission shall, without undue delay and at the latest 60 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,When a provider of a core platform service fails to provide within the deadline the relevant information required to assess its designation as gatekeeper pursuant to Article 3 (2), the Commission shall be entitled to designate theat provider does not satisfy the requirements of paragraph 1as a gatekeeper based on the facts available.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 545 #
6. The Commission may identify as a gatekeeper, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 15, any provider of core platform services that meets each of the requirements of paragraph 1, but does not satisfy each of the thresholds of paragraph 2, or has presented sufficiently substantiated arguments in accordance with paragraph 4.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 554 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
(d a) the ability of the undertaking to implement conglomerate strategies, in particular through its vertical integration or its significant leverage in related markets;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 558 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point e a (new)
(e a) the degree of multi-homing among business users and active end users;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 574 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 8
8. The gatekeeper shall comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 withiand shall notify the Commission of the details of its compliance with those obligations as soon as possible, and in any case no later than six months after a core platform service has been included in the list pursuant to paragraph 7 of this Article.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 584 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Commission shall regularly, and at least every 2 years, review whether the designated gatekeepers continue to satisfy the requirements laid down in Article 3(1), or whether new providers of core platform services satisfy those requirements. The regular review shall also examine whether the list of affected core platform services of the gatekeeper needs to be adjusted and if any business users, especially small and medium-sized enterprises or consumers, have been negatively impacted by the designation of a core platform service as a gatekeeper.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 602 #
Proposal for a regulation
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 provided consent in the sense of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. ;.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 612 #
(b) allow business users to offer the same products or services to end users by any other means, including through third party online intermediation services and through the business users’ own direct online sales channels at prices or conditions that are different from those offered through the online intermediation services of the gatekeeper;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 623 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) allow business users to promote offers to or communicate with end users acquired via the core platform service, within or outside the core platform service, and to conclude contracts with these end users regardless of whether for that purpose they use the core platform services of the gatekeeper or not, and allow end users to access and use, through the core platform services of the gatekeeper, content, subscriptions, features or other items by using the software application of a business user, where these items have been acquired by the end users from the relevant business user without using the core platform services of the gatekeeper, unless the gatekeeper can demonstrate that such access bypasses the security measures of the gatekeeper's core platform service;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 624 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) allow business users to promote offers to end users acquired viaor to otherwise communicate with end users within or outside the core platform service, and to conclude contracts with these end users or receive payments for services provided 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;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 649 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) refrain from requiring business users to use, offer or interoperate with an identificationy ancillary services of the gatekeeper in the context of services offered by the business users using the core platform services of that gatekeeper;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 673 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide individual advertisers and publishers to which it supplies advertising services, upon their request, with information concerningon the visibility and availability of advertisement portfolio as well as pricing conditions concerning the bids placed by advertisers and advertising intermediaries, the price paid by the advertiser and publisher, as well as the amount or remuneration paid to the publisher, for the publishing of a given ad and for each of the relevant advertising services provided by the gatekeeper.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 675 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide advertisers and publishers to which it supplies advertising services, upon their request, and free of charge, with continuous, easy and real-time access with information concerning the price paid by the advertiser and publisher, as well as the amount or remuneration paid to the publisher, for the publishing of a given ad and for each of the relevant advertising services provided by the gatekeeper.,
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 715 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) refrain from using, in competition with business users, any data not publicly available, ,which is generated through or in the context of activities by those business users, including by the end users of these business users, of its core platform services or of its ancillary services or which is provided by those business users of its core platform services or its ancillary services or by the end users of these business users;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 722 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) allow end users to un-install any pre-installed software applications on its core platform service and refrain from exclusively enabling its own core platform services as default services when equivalent alternative services which perform the same function can be proposed, without prejudice to the possibility for a gatekeeper to restrict such un-installation in relation to software applications that are essential for the functioning of the operating system or of the device and which cannot technically be offered on a standalone basis by third- parties;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 723 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) allow end users to un-install any pre-installed software applications, and delete the accompanying collected and stored data, on its core platform service without prejudice to the possibility for a gatekeeper to restrict such un-installation in relation to software applications that are essential for the functioning of the operating system or of the device and which cannot technically be offered on a standalone basis by third- parties;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 743 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) refrain from treating differently or more favourably in ranking, display, installation, activation, 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, installation, activation and default settings;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 761 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) refrain from technically restricting the ability of end users to switch between and subscribe to different software applications and services to be accessed using the operating system or the cloud computing services of the gatekeeper, including as regards the choice of Internet access provider for end users, or using its virtual assistant;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 762 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) refrain from technically restricting the ability of end users to switch between and subscribe to different software applications and services to be accessed using the operating system of the gatekeeper, including as regards the choice of Internet access provider for end users, or using its virtual assistant;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 771 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) allow business users, end users and providers of ancillary services a free of charge access to and interoperability with the same operating system, hardware or software features, that are available or used in the provision by the gatekeeper of any ancillary services; or industry-standard features of its core platform services; in such cases, access and interoperability conditions shall be fair, reasonable and non-discriminator;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 786 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide advertisers and publishers, or third parties authorised by advertisers and publishers, upon their request and free of charge, with access to the performance measuring tools of the gatekeeper and the information necessary for advertisers and publishers to carry out their own independent verification of the ad inventory, including aggregated data and performance data in a manner that would allow advertisers and publishers to run their own verification and measurement tools to assess performance of the core services provided for by the gatekeepers;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 803 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) provide business users, or third parties authorised by a business user, free of charge, with effective, high-quality, continuous and real-time access and use of aggregated or non-aggregated data, that is provided for or generated in the context of the use of the relevant core platform services or of ancillary services offered by the gatekeeper by those business users and the end users engaging with the products or services provided by those business users; for personal data, provide access and use only where directly connected with the use effectuated by the end user in respect of the products or services offered by the relevant business user through the relevant core platform service, and when the end user opts in to such sharing with a consent in the sense of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679; ;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 805 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) provide business users, or third parties authorised by a business user, free of charge, with effective, high-quality, continuous and real-time access and use of aggregated orand non-aggregated data, that is provided for or generated in the context of the use of the relevant core platform services by those business users and the end users engaging with the products or services provided by those business users; for personal data, provide access and use only where directly connected with the use effectuated by the end user in respect of the products or services offered by the relevant business user through the relevant core platform service, and when the end user opts in to such sharing with a consent in the sense of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679; ;
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 814 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) apply fair and non-discriminatory general conditions of access and treatment for business users to its software application storecore platform services including software application store, cloud computing services, online search engines and online social networking services designated pursuant to Article 3 of this Regulation.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 820 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
(k a) provide its end users with clear, fair and non-discriminatory licensing conditions, including in terms of charges and fees, preventing material changes limiting the use of software applications or services which are used on, or in conjunction with a core service platform of the gatekeeper, and securing the reasonable expected use of the software application or services, including after its transfer to another end user if applicable. In principle, these unilateral changes do not prevent undertakings from breaking their contract and migrating to another cloud solution, but in practice this solution appears to be costly and complex and enterprises are forced to accept these contractual changes that are notfavorable to them. The purpose of the amendment is to create a new obligation that allows users to freely use their licenses when using a cloud service.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 822 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
(k a) refrain from imposing on business users or end users software applications or services which are used on, or in conjunction with a core service platform of the gatekeeper, any licensing conditions or economic terms that have the effect of limiting, in a discriminatory manner relative to the gatekeeper’s own offerings, end users’ ability or economic incentive to use software applications or services on, or in conjunction with, products or services that compete with those of the gatekeeper for instance by attributing a preferential treatment to its own offerings which would bring them forward to the attention of the end users or business users.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 847 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Within six months after its designation and in application of paragraph 8 of Article 3, the gatekeeper shall provide the Commission with a report describing in a detailed and transparent manner the measures implemented to ensure compliance with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6. This report shall be updated at least annually.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 849 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Along with the report mentionned in paragraph 1a and within the same timeframe, the gatekeeper shall provide the Commission with anon-confidential summary of its report that will be published by the Commission without delay. The non-confidential summary shall be updated at least annually according to the detailed report.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 852 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Where tThe Commission finds thatmay by decision specify the measures that the gatekeeper intends to implement pursuant to paragraph 1, or has implemented, do not ensure effectiveconcerned shall implement in order to compliancey with the relevant obligations laid down in Article 6, it may by decision specify the measures that the gatekeeper concerned shall implement. The Commission shall adopt such a decision within six months from the opening of proceedings pursuant to Article 18. In view of adopting the decision, the Commission shall take into account the information provided by interested third parties, governments and relevant authorities of the Member States The Commission shall adopt such a decision within six months from the opening of proceedings pursuant to Article 18. The Commission must be supported, where appropriate, by resources and information to address the asymmetry of information with gatekeepers.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 854 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Where the Commission finds that the measures that the gatekeeper intends to implement pursuant to paragraph 1, or has implemented, do not ensure effective compliance with the relevant obligations laid down in Article 6, it may act on its own initiative and may by decision specify the measures that the gatekeeper concerned shall implement. The Commission shall adopt such a decision wias soon as possible, and in any case no later thian six months from the opening of proceedings pursuant to Article 18.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 870 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. In view of adopting the decision under paragraph 2, the Commission shall communicate its preliminary findings within three months from the opening of the proceedings. In the preliminary findings, the Commission shall explain the measures it considers to take or it considers that the provider of core platform services concerned should take in order to effectively address the preliminary findings. Interested third parties that are directly implicated shall be able to provide comments on these preliminary findings.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 872 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. In view of adopting the decision under paragraph 2, the Commission shall communicate its preliminary findings wias soon as possible, and in any case no later thian three months from the opening of the proceedings. In the preliminary findings, the Commission shall explain the measures it considers to take or it considers that the provider of core platform services concerned should take in order to effectively address the preliminary findings.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 890 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission may, on a reasoned request by the gatekeeper, exceptionally suspend, in whole or in part, a specific obligation laid down in Articles 5 and 6 for a core platform service by decision adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4), where the gatekeeper demonstrates that compliance with that specific obligation would endanger, due to exceptional circumstances beyond the control of the gatekeeper, the economic viability of the operation of the gatekeeper in the Union, and only to the extent necessary to address such threat to its viability. The Commission shall aim to adopt the suspension decision without delay and at the latest 3 months following receipt of a complete reasoned request. The suspension decision shall be accompanied by a reasoned statement explaining the grounds for the suspension.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 899 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Where the suspension is granted pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission shall review its suspension decision every year. Following such a review the Commission shall either in whole or in part lift the suspension or decide that the conditions of paragraph 1 continue to be met.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 902 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
In assessing the request, the Commission shall take into account, in particular, the impact of the compliance with the specific obligation on the economic viability of the operation of the gatekeeper in the Union as well as on third parties, in particular smaller business users and consumers. The suspension may be made subject to conditions and obligations to be defined by the Commission in order to ensure a fair balance between these interests and the objectives of this Regulation. Such a request may be made and granted at any time pending the assessment of the Commission pursuant to paragraph 1.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 911 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Where the exemption is granted pursuant paragraph 1, the Commission shall review its exemption decision every year. Following such a review, the Commission shall either lift the exemption or decide that the conditions of paragraph 1 continue to be met.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 919 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The delegated acts that update the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 in accordance with the first subparagraph shall be limited to: (a) extending any obligation that applies to a certain core platform service or to any other core platform service listed in point (2) of Article 2; (b) specifying the manner in which the obligations of the gatekeepers under Articles 5 and 6 are to be implemented, including through the incorporation of specifications under point (2) of Article 7 into the obligations; (c) extending any obligation that identifies a certain subset of users as beneficiaries to any other subset of users as beneficiaries; (d) supplementing or amending the obligations with a view to improving the effectiveness of the application of those obligations and preventing their circumvention.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 927 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) there is an imbalance of rights and obligations on business users andor the gatekeeper is obtaining an advantage from business users that is disproportionate to the service provided by the gatekeeper to business users; or
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 936 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. A gatekeeper shall ensure that the obligations of Articles 5 and 6 are fully and effectively complied with. While the obligations of Articles 5 and 6 apply in respect of core platform services designated pursuant to Article 3, their implementation shall not be undermined by any behaviour of thea gatekeeper, including any undertaking to which the gatekeeper belongs, shall not engage in any behaviour regardless of whether this behaviour is of a contractual, commercial, technical or any other nature that would undermine these obligations.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 947 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. A gatekeeper shall not degrade the conditions or quality of any of the core platform services provided to business users or end users who avail themselves of the rights or choices laid down in Articles 5 and 6, or make the exercise of those rights or choices unduly difficult, including by offering choices to the end- user in a non-neutral manner, or by subverting user's autonomy, decision- making, or choice via the structure, function or manner of operation of a user interface or a part thereof.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 955 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. A gatekeeper shall inform the Commission of any intended concentration within the meaning of Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 involving another provider of core platform services or of any other services provided in the digital sector irrespective of whether it is notifiable to a Union competition authority under Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 or to a competent national competition authority under national merger rules.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 960 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
A gatekeeper shall inform the Commission of such a concentration at least 2 months prior to its implementation and following the conclusion of the agreement, the announcement of the public bid, or the acquisition of a controlling interest.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 962 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The Commission shall make this information available to national competition authorities.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 965 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. The notification of information pursuant to paragraph 1 shall at least describe for the acquisition targets their EEA and worldwide annual turnover, for any relevant core platform services their respective EEA annual turnover, their number of yearly active business users and the number of monthly active end users, as well as the rationale of the intended concentration.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 973 #
Proposal for a regulation
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 that the gatekeeper applies to or across its core platform services identified pursuant to Article 3. The gatekeeper shall make publicly available an overview of the audited description taking into account the limitations imposed by the requirements of business secrecy. This description and its publicly available overview shall be updated at least annually. This description shall be updated at least annually.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 986 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. In the course of a market investigation pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission shall endeavour to communicate its preliminary findings to the provider of core platform services concerned wias soon as possible, and in any case no later thian six months from the opening of the investigation. In the preliminary findings, the Commission shall explain whether it considers, on a provisional basis, that the provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper pursuant to Article 3(6).
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 994 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. Where the provider of core platform services satisfies the thresholds set out in Article 3(2), but has presented significantly substantiated arguments in accordance with Article 3(4), the Commission shall endeavour to conclude the market investigation wias soon as possible, and in any case no later thian five months from the opening of the market investigation by a decision pursuant to paragraph 1. In that case the Commission shall endeavour to communicate its preliminary findings pursuant to paragraph 2 to the provider of core platform services wias soon as possible, and in any case no later thian three months from the opening of the investigation.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1005 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission may conduct a market investigation for the purpose of examining whether a gatekeeper has engaged in systematic non-compliance. Where the market investigation shows that a gatekeeper has systematically infringed the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 and has further strengthened or extended its gatekeeper position in relation to the characteristics under Article 3(1), the Commission may by decision adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4) impose on such gatekeeper any behavioural or structural remedies which are proportionate to the infringement committed and necessary to ensure compliance with this Regulation. The Commission shall, where appropriate, be entitled to require the remedies to be tested to optimise their effectiveness. The Commission shall conclude its investigation by adopting a decision wias soon as possible, and in any case no later thian twelve months from the opening of the market investigation.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1014 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission may only impose structural remedies pursuant to paragraph 1 either where there is no equally effective behavioural remedy or where any equally effective behavioural remedy would be more burdensome for the gatekeeper concerned than the structural remedy.deleted
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1028 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall communicate its objections to the gatekeeper concerned wias soon as possible, and in any case no later thian six months from the opening of the investigation. In its objections, the Commission shall explain whether it preliminarily considers that the conditions of paragraph 1 are met and which remedy or remedies it preliminarily considers necessary and proportionate.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1044 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) The Commission shall be entitled to impose interim measures if there is a risk of serious and immediate damage for business users or end users of gatekeepers.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1057 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
The Commission mayand the competent national competition authorities, may, in accordance with Article 32a, interview any natural or legal person which consents to being interviewed for the purpose of collecting information, relating to the subject-matter of an investigation, pursuant to Articles 7, 16, 16, 17, 25 and 26, including in relation to the monitoring, implementing and enforcing of the rules laid down in this Regulation.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1060 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission, upon a prior notice, may conduct on- site inspections at the premises of an undertaking or association of undertakings.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1064 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 a (new)
Article 21 a Reporting mechanism for business users and end-users 1. Business users, competitors and end- users of the core platform services as defined in point 2 of Article 2 may, by means of a complaint, report to the competent national competition authorities any practice or behaviour by gatekeepers that falls into the scope of this Regulation, including non-compliance. The competent national competition authorities shall assess these complaints and report relevant cases to the Commission under the procedure provided for in Article 32a. 2. The Commission shall define the conditions under which the reports referred to in paragraph 1 shall be submitted to it. 3. The Commission shall have the power to set its priorities for the task of examining the reports referred to paragraph 1. Subject to this paragraph and to Article 33, the Commission may decide not to examine a report if it deems that such report is not an enforcement priority. 4. When the Commission considers a report to be an enforcement priority, it may open proceedings pursuant to Article 18 or a market investigation pursuant to Article 14.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1067 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
1. In case of urgency due to the risk of serious and irreparablmmediate damage for business users or end users of gatekeepers, the Commission may, by decision adopt in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4), order interim measures against a gatekeeper on the basis of a prima facie finding of an infringement of Articles 5 or 6.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1069 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In the case of urgency, due to the risk of serious and immediate damage for business users or end users of gatekeepers, resulting from new practices implemented by one or more gatekeepers that could undermine contestability of core platform services or that could be unfair pursuant to Article 10(2), the Commission may impose interim measures on the concerned gatekeepers in order to avoid the materialization of such risk.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1070 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. A decision referred to in paragraph 1 may only be adopted in the context of a market investigation pursuant to Article 17 and within 6 months of the opening of such an investigation. The interim measures shall apply for a specified period of time and, in any case, shall be replaced by any new obligations that may arise under the final decision resulting from the market investigation pursuant to Article 17.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1074 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. If during proceedings under Articles 16 or 25 the gatekeeper concerned offers commitments for the relevant core platform services to ensure compliance with the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6, the Commission may by decision adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 32(4) make those commitments binding on that gatekeeper and declare that there are no further grounds for action. The Commission shall, where appropriate, be entitled to require the commitments to be tested to optimise their effectiveness.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1089 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3
3. In the non-compliance decision adopted pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission shall order the gatekeeper to cease and desist with the non-compliance within an appropriate deadline and to provide explanations on how it plans to comply with the decisionimpose behavioural or structural remedies as necessary and proportionate to the infringement.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1145 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall be assisted by the Digital Markets Advisory Committee. That Committee shall be a Committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. Each Member State shall appoint two representatives to the Committee. If the appointed representatives are unable to attend, other representatives may replace them. At least one of the representatives of a Member State shall be competent in matters of restrictive practices, abuses of dominant positions and other forms of unilateral conduct. Member States shall take all necessary measures to ensure the protection of confidential information by their representatives.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1149 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 a (new)
Article 32 a Coordination with Member States 1. In accordance with the principles laid down in Article 1, the Commission shall be the sole decision maker on the correct application of this Regulation. To ensure effective enforceability and coherent implementation, the Commission shall be supported in every possible way by the expertise of the competent national competition authorities. 2. The Commission may, therefore, ask competent national competition authorities to support any of its market investigations pursuant to this Regulation. However, competent national competition authorities shall not take decisions which run counter to a decision adopted by the Commission. 3. To this end, the Commission shall apply the provisions of this Regulation in close cooperation with the competent national competition authorities, acting within the European Competition Network as defined at point (5) of Article 2 of Directive (EU) 2019/1, in accordance with the provisions of this Article. It shall, in particular and as appropriate, make use of the European Competition Network System referred to in Article 33 of that Directive for the exchange of information. 4. Within this framework, the competent national competition authorities shall perform – inter alia – the following tasks: (a) synchronize national implementation, ensure that decisions based on this Regulation are coherent with related regulations and support the Commission in technical enforcement matters; (b) gather market intelligence on the ground and coordinate data collection and monitoring throughout the internal market including on enforcement, emerging gatekeepers, and technological trends; (c) submit complaints from business users, competitors and end-users as provided for in Article 21a to the Commission and raise awareness of specific concerns or issues emerging at national level; (d) at the request of the Commission, cooperate in the application of Articles 12, 15, 16 and 17 and otherwise assist the Commission in investigations. In this regard, the competent national competition authorities shall be entitled to exercise, mutatis mutandis, the following powers of the Commission: (i) requests for information as set out in Article 19 (ii) power to carry out interviews and take statements as set out in Article 20; and (iii) powers to conduct on-site inspections as set out in Article 21; (e) make recommendations to the Commission on the update of obligations under Articles 5 and 6 and advice the Commission in the preparation of delegated acts according to Article 10; (f) monitor the international context, generate knowledge on the developments outside the Union and share enforcement experience. 5. Member States shall ensure that their competent 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 of this Article; 6. The Commission and the competent national competition authorities enforcing the rules referred to in Article 1(6) shall have the power to provide each other with any matter of fact or of law, including confidential information. The information supplied to the Commission may be made available to the competent national competition authorities of other Member States. The competent national competition authorities may also exchange between themselves information necessary for the assessment of a case that they are dealing with under this Regulation. 7. The competent national competition authorities shall, when acting pursuant to paragraph 3, inform the Commission in writing of the first formal investigative measure, before or immediately after the start of such measure. This information may also be made available to the competent national competition authorities of the other Member States.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1154 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. When three or more Member States request the Commission to open an investigation pursuant to Articles 15, 16 and 17 or institute proceedings in respect of possible non-compliance pursuant to Article 25 because they consider that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper, the Commission shall wiat a gatekeeper is not complying with its obligations as laid down in Articles 5 and 6, that one or more services within the digital sector should be added to the list of core platform services pursuant to point (2) of Article 2 or that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that one or several types of practices are not effectively addressed by this Regulation and can limit the contestability of core platform services or can be unfair, the Commission shall as soon as possible, and in any case no later thian four months examine whether there are reasonable grounds to open such an investigation.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1183 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission may adopt implementing acts concerning articles: 3, 6, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20, 22, 23, 25 and 30 with respect to:
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO
Amendment 1192 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 2
2. The evaluations shall establish whether inclusion of additional rules or deletion of the existing ones, including regarding the list of core platform services laid down in point 2 of Article 2, the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 and their enforcement, may be required to ensure that digital markets across the Union are contestable and fair. Following the evaluations, the Commission shall take appropriate measures, which may include legislative proposals.
2021/07/09
Committee: IMCO