94 Amendments of Ivars IJABS related to 2020/0374(COD)
Amendment 102 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
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 included irrespective of the technology used to provide such services. For that reason, virtual or voice activated assistants and other connected devices should 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.
Amendment 117 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) A very high number of business users that depend on a core platform service to reach a very high number of monthly active end users allow the provider of that service to influence the operations of a substantial part of business users to its advantage and indicate in principle that the provider serves as an important gateway. The respective relevant levels for those numbers should be set representing a substantive percentage of the entire population of the Union when it comes to end users and of the entire population of businesses using platforms to determine the threshold for business users. Active end users as well as business users should be defined in a way that adequately represents the role and reach of the specific core platform service in question. In order to provide legal certainty for gatekeepers, elements of such definitions per core platform service should be set out in an annex to this Regulation, which should be subject to possible amendment by the Commission by means of delegated act to be able to keep it up to date in the light of technical or other developments.
Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
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.
Amendment 142 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
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. 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 Member States to inform the Commission in the event of any of the identified practices.
Amendment 143 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
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.
Amendment 147 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
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.
Amendment 152 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
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.
Amendment 156 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
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.
Amendment 160 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39 a (new)
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.
Amendment 161 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Identification and payment 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 payment 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).
Amendment 174 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
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 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. The gatekeeper can restrict such un-installation when such applications are essential to the functioning of the operating system or the device.
Amendment 176 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46 a (new)
Recital 46 a (new)
Amendment 183 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) Gatekeepers are often vertically integrated and offer certain products or services to end users through their own core platform services, or through a business user over which they exercise control which frequently leads to conflicts of interest. This can include the situation whereby a gatekeeper offers its own online intermediation services through an online search engine. When offering those products or services on the core platform service, gatekeepers can reserve a better position or 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.
Amendment 184 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48 a (new)
Recital 48 a (new)
(48 a) Gatekeepers can offer software applications or services which could be used on, or in conjunction with, a core service platform, 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.
Amendment 192 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) Gatekeepers may also have a dual role as developers of operating systems and device manufacturers, including any technical functionality that such a device may have. For example, a gatekeeper that is a manufacturer of a device may restrict access to some of the functionalities in this device, such as near-field-communication technology and the software used to operate that technology, which may be required for the effective provision of an ancillary service by the gatekeeper as well as by any potential third party provider of such an ancillary service. Such access may equally be required by software applications related to the relevant ancillary services in order to effectively provide similar functionalities as those offered by gatekeepers. If such a dual role is used in a manner that prevents alternative providers of ancillary services or of software applications to have access under equal conditions to the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision by the gatekeeper of any ancillary services, this could significantly undermine innovation by providers of such ancillary services as well as choice for end users of such ancillary services. The gatekeepers should therefore be obliged to ensure access free of charge under equal conditions to, and interoperability with, the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision of any ancillary services by the gatekeeper. The gatekeeper should not be prevented from taking indispensable measures to ensure that third party ancillary services do not compromise the integrity of the operating system, hardware or software features it provides. The gatekeeper should however be obliged to duly justify suchindispensable measures and provide, free of charge, an alternative access and interoperability solution to enable effective provision of ancillary services.
Amendment 209 #
(58) This Regulation should aim to ensure contestability and fairness of the digital economy, with a view to promoting innovation, high quality of digital products and services, fair and competitive prices, as well as a high quality and choice for end users in the digital sector. To ensure the effectiveness of the obligations laid down by this Regulation, while also making certain that these obligations are limited to what is necessary and proportionate to ensure contestability and tackling the harmful effects of the unfair behaviour by gatekeepers, it is important to clearly define and circumscribe them so as to allow the gatekeeper to immediately comply with them, in full respect of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC, consumer protection, cyber security and product safety. The gatekeepers should ensure the compliance with this Regulation by design. The necessary measures should therefore be as much as possible and where relevant integrated into the technological design used by the gatekeepers. However, it may in certain cases be appropriate for the Commission, following a dialogue with the gatekeeper concerned, toIn view of that, further specification should be possible where specific modalities of the implementation of an obligation set out in Article 6 can be affected by differences in business models where the provision concerned applies to a broad range of core platform services. To this end, the gatekeeper should be granted the opportunity to engage in a regulatory dialogue whereby the Commission may further specify some of the measures that the gatekeeper concerned should adopt in order to effectively comply with the objectives of those obligations that are susceptible of being further specified. This regulatory dialogue should be limited to the questions around ensuring effective compliance with the obligation in line with the protection of safety, security and privacy. During such regulatory dialogue, the Commission should be able to consult with interested third parties in relation to the measures that the gatekeeper is expected to implement. The Commission will nevertheless retain discretion in deciding when further specification should be provided. This would ensure that the regulatory dialogue is not used to circumvent the present regulation. Furthermore, the regulatory dialogue is without prejudice to the powers of the Commission to adopt a decision pursuant to Articles 25, 26 or 27. Such decisions would be normally adopted when the gatekeeper acts in bad faith during the regulatory dialogue or in case of blatant non-compliance with an obligation. The possibility of a regulatory dialogue should facilitate compliance by gatekeepers and expedite the correct implementation of the Regulation.
Amendment 223 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 62
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.
Amendment 231 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65 a (new)
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.
Amendment 234 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 67 a (new)
Recital 67 a (new)
(67 a) The Commission should, 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.
Amendment 243 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 72
Recital 72
(72) The Commission should be able to take the necessary actions to monitor the effective implementation and compliance with the obligations laid down in this Regulation. Such actions should include the ability of the Commission to appoint independent external experts, such as and auditors to assist the Commission in this process, including where applicable from competent independent authorities, such as data or consumer protection authorities.
Amendment 247 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 75
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.
Amendment 253 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 78
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.
Amendment 255 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 79 a (new)
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.
Amendment 257 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 79 b (new)
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.
Amendment 267 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)
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.
Amendment 269 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5
Article 1 – paragraph 5
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 set out 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.
Amendment 273 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 a (new)
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.
Amendment 283 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) web browsers;
Amendment 284 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c b (new)
(c b) virtual assistants;
Amendment 286 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point g
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point g
(g) cloud computing services, including enterprise software, applications, and solution services;
Amendment 295 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h a (new)
(h a) web browsers;
Amendment 297 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point h b (new)
(h b) virtual assistants;
Amendment 304 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
(3 a) ‘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;
Amendment 305 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
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;
Amendment 308 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new)
(7 a) ‘Virtual assistant’ means software that responds to oral or written commands expressed in natural language by end users and performs tasks or services independently or through IT systems if needed and on behalf of the end user;
Amendment 327 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 18
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;
Amendment 340 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) it operates a core platform service which serves as an important gateway for business users to reach end users or is able to lock the access to its own essential services; and
Amendment 362 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. The Commission shall, without undue delay and at the latest 60 working days after receiving the complete information referred to in paragraph 3, designate the provider of core platform services that meets all the thresholds of paragraph 2 as a gatekeeper, unless that provider, with its notification, presents sufficiently substantiated arguments to demonstrate that, in the circumstances in which the relevant core platform service operates, and taking into account the elements listed in paragraph 6, the provider exceptionally does not satisfy the requirements of paragraph 1 although it meets all the thresholds in paragraph 2.
Amendment 370 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
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 that provider as a gatekeeper based on the facts available.
Amendment 381 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point e a (new)
(e a) the degree of multi-homing among business users and active end users
Amendment 385 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point f
Article 3 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point f
(f) other relevant business or service characteristics, such as a corporate structure or vertical integration of the undertaking providing core platform services, for instance allowing cross subsidisation or combination of data from different sources or other structural market characteristics.
Amendment 397 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. When designating a gatekeeper, the Commission shall specify, under Article 7, which obligations are to be implemented by the gatekeeper, taking into account the business models of the gatekeeper concerned.
Amendment 399 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 8
Article 3 – paragraph 8
8. The gatekeeper shallCommission 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 within six months after a core platform service has been included in the list pursuant to paragraph 7 of this Articleon an ongoing basis and send the lists, and each update thereof, to the European Parliament.
Amendment 403 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
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.
Amendment 420 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(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 channel sat prices or conditions that are different from those offered through the online intermediation services of the gate keeper;
Amendment 427 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) refrain from requiring business users to inform the gatekeeper of differentiated prices or conditions they choose to apply to their own channel of distribution or through third party online intermediation services;
Amendment 428 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) allow business users to promote offers to end users acquired via the core platform serviceor to otherwise communicate with end users within or outside the core platform service, or through other channels, 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;
Amendment 442 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) refrain from requiring business users to use, offer or interoperate with an identification service and a payment service, or a technical service supporting the provision of payment services of the gatekeeper in the context of services offered by the business users using the core platform services of that gatekeeper;
Amendment 452 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) provide each advertisers and publishers to which it supplies advertising services, upon their request, withservices with free of charge, high-quality, and effective access to information concerning the price paid by the advertiser and publisheror advertising intermediary, 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.
Amendment 456 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(g a) refrain from restricting or obstructing the ability of end users to use their own software license when using the cloud computing service of the gatekeeper.
Amendment 489 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
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;
Amendment 495 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) allow and technically enable the installation and effective use of third party software applications or software application stores using, or interoperating with, operating systems of that gatekeeper and allow these software applications or software application stores to be accessed by means other than the core platform services of that gatekeeper. The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking proportionate measures to ensure that third party software applications or software application stores do not endanger the integrity of the hardware or operating system provided by the gatekeeper, provided that such proportionate measures are duly justified;
Amendment 499 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
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;
Amendment 502 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
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 service provider for end users, or using its virtual assistant;
Amendment 507 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) allow business users and providers of ancillary services 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 anyor other features, including near-field- communication antennas or technology related to those antennas, that are available or used in the provision 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. The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking in dispensable measures to ensure that third party ancillary services do not endanger or compromise the integrity of the operating system, hardware or software features provided by the gatekeeper, provided that such indispensable measures are duly justified by the gatekeeper, while providing free of charge alternative access and interoperability to enable effective provision of ancillary services;
Amendment 518 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
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 effective and real time 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 by the gatekeepers;
Amendment 525 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) provide effective portability of data generated through the activity of a business user or end user and shall, in particular, provide tools forfree of charge and technically accessible tools for business users, or third parties authorised by a business user, and 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 ;
Amendment 532 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i
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, including personal 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 that data is 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; ;
Amendment 537 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) apply fair and non-discriminatory general conditions of access and treatment for business users to its software application store core 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.
Amendment 540 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
(k a) provide its end users with clear, fair and non-discriminatory licensing conditions, including charges and fees, preventing material changes that limit the use of software applications or services which are used on, or in conjunction with acore service platform of the gatekeeper, and enabling the reasonable expected use of the software application or services,including after its transfer to another end user, if applicable.
Amendment 544 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k b (new)
(k b) 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.
Amendment 555 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Within six months after its designation and in application of Article 3(8), 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 set out in Articles5 and 6. This report shall be updated by the gatekeeper at least annually.
Amendment 557 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Within six months after its designation pursuant to Article 3, the gatekeeper shall publish and provide the Commission with a non-confidential summary of the report referred to in paragraph 1a of this Article. The Commission shall publish without delay the non-confidential summary of the report. This non-confidential summary shall be updated each time the report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article is updated.
Amendment 559 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
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.
Amendment 563 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. In order to effectively comply with the obligations laid down in Article 6, the gatekeeper shall be granted the opportunity to engage in a regulatory dialogue, whereby the Commission can further specify relevant measures that the gatekeeper concerned shall adopt in order to effectively comply with those obligations. When doing so, the Commission may decide to consult third parties whose views it considers necessary in relation to the measures that the gatekeeper is expected to implement. Further specification of obligations laid down in Article 6 shall be limited to issues relating to ensuring effective compliance with the obligation while protecting safety, security and privacy and where the modalities of implementation of an obligation can be affected by differences in business models. The Commission shall retain discretion in deciding whether to engage in such a dialogue.
Amendment 564 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. A gatekeeper may request an opening of proceedings pursuant to Article 18 in order 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 shall, in 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.
Amendment 568 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. In view of adopting the decision under paragraph 2, the Commission shall communicate its preliminary findings 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.
Amendment 578 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission may, on a reasoned request by the gatekeeper, exceptionally suspend, in whole or in part, a specific obligation laid down in Articles 5 and 6 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.
Amendment 580 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
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.
Amendment 582 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
In assessing the request, the Commission shall take into account, in particular, the impact of the compliance with the specific obligation on the economic viability of the operation of the gatekeeper in the Union as well as on third 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.
Amendment 583 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 8 – 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.
Amendment 595 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. 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.
Amendment 599 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point a
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
Amendment 604 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. A gatekeeper shall ensure that the obligations of Articles 5 and 6 are fully and effectively complied with. While the obligations of Articles 5 and 6 apply in respect of core platform services designated pursuant to Article 3, their implementation shall not be undermined by any behaviour of 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.
Amendment 608 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. A gatekeeper shall not degrade the conditions or quality of any of the core platform services provided to business users or end users who avail themselves of the rights or choices laid down in Articles 5 and 6, or 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.
Amendment 630 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
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).
Amendment 636 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
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.
Amendment 642 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
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.
Amendment 655 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 5
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.
Amendment 662 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(b a) 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.
Amendment 666 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 6
Article 19 – paragraph 6
6. At the request of the Commission, the governments and authorities of the Member Statcompetent national competition authorities shall provide the Commission with all necessary information to carry out the duties assigned to it by this Regulation.
Amendment 667 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
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, 17, 25 and 26, including in relation to the monitoring, implementing and enforcing of the rules laid down in this Regulation.
Amendment 668 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
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.
Amendment 672 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 a (new)
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 may report to the Commission or national regulators any practice or behaviour by gatekeepers that falls within the scope of this Regulation, including non- compliance. The Commission and Member States shall inform each other of such reports. 2. The Commission shall set its priorities for the task of examining the reports referred to paragraph 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 5 of this Article and of Article 33, the Commission may choose not to examine a report on the grounds that it does not consider such a report to bean enforcement priority. 3. When the Commission considers that a report is an enforcement priority, it may open a proceeding pursuant to Article 18 or a market investigation pursuant to Article 144. Without prejudice to Article 33, a Member State may request the Digital Markets Advisory Committee to adopt an opinion in order to determine if one or several reports should be considered an enforcement priority. The opinion may request the Commission to open a proceeding pursuant to Article 18 or a market. The Advisory Committee shall adopt an opinion within 1 month. In its opinion, it shall state the reasons why the report is considered to be, or not to be, an enforcement priority. If the report considers it to be an enforcement priority, the Commission shall, within four months, examine whether there are reasonable grounds for opening such a proceeding or investigation. 4. Where the Commission does not comply with the request of the Advisory Committee, it shall state the reasons for not initiating a proceeding under Article 18 or a market investigation under Article 14.
Amendment 674 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
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.
Amendment 676 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. 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.
Amendment 677 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
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.
Amendment 693 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3
Article 25 – paragraph 3
3. In the non-compliance decision adopted pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission shall order the gatekeeper to cease and desist with the non-compliance within an appropriate deadline and to provide explanations on how it plans to comply with the decisionimpose behavioural or structural remedies as necessary and proportionate to the infringement.
Amendment 712 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. If the Commission considers it necessary, it may also hear other natural or legal persons before taking the decision as provided for in paragraph 1.
Amendment 727 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
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.
Amendment 731 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 a (new)
Article 32 a (new)
Amendment 735 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. When three or more Member States request the Commission to open an investigation pursuant to 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 withiat 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 than four months examine whether there are reasonable grounds to open such an investigation.
Amendment 749 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
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:
Amendment 758 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 2
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.