Activities of Alexis GEORGOULIS related to 2020/2018(INL)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION with recommendations to the Commission on Digital Services Act: Improving the functioning of the Single Market
Amendments (16)
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers it necessary to adopt uniform, Union-wide rules to combat hatred, online bullying and hate crimes and disinformation and to protect children and youth as well as rules governing online advertising and fair e- commerce and at the same time calls for a strict distinction to be made between illegal and harmful content and cases of disinformation, as different rules are applicable in each case;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Expresses its concern that the information requirements set out in Article 5 of Directive 2000/31/EC cannot be effectively enforced; therefore suggests that they be complemented by a requirement for certain intermediaries to adequately verify the identity of any customers who provide information society services on a commercial basis; considers that this would contribute towards a more trustworthy online environment for the consumers, creators and artists who use these services or whose works are distributed on these services; underlines that any new requirements must fully respect fundamental rights and be in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Strongly believes that online platforms, that fulfil certain criteria of engagement with the content, should be liable and strongly opposes the ''Good Samaritan'' clauses option in the event of voluntary measures; reiterates the emerging need to move past the simple notice in order to safeguard creation and stresses that the obligatory engagement of platforms via liability regimes is necessary; suggests in that respect the simultaneous mediation between rights holders and users in cases where content appears to be illegal or harmful with the view to resolve duly and without further delay the matter;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on platform operators not only to immediately delete illegal content after positive identification, but also to continuously transmit it to the by an independent and impartial authority, but also to collaborate with law enforcement authorities for the purpose of further prosecution, including the metadata necessary for this purpose, respecting the presumption of innocence and personal data of victims;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Insists that the protection and promotion of freedom and diversity of opinion, information, the press and cultural forms of expression, as well as the protection of the privacy of communication between individuals, form the basis of liberal democracy and that this applies online without restriction; demands therefore that the use of all technologically feasible means of combating harmful or illegal content on the internet in this context be subjected to careful prior constitutional vetting and therefore rejects prior checks on content as disproportionate; suggests that when technological means are used especially to enforce decisions by judicial or independent authorities, there is a need for robust safeguards of transparency and accountability as well as highly skilled independent and impartial public oversight;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Highlights the need to ensure that the collection and processing of all personal data carried out which does not fall under the scope of Directive (EU) 2016/680 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purpose of law enforcement, or under the scope of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is done in accordance with the principles of legality, necessity and proportionality, as established by article 9 of the Council of Europe’s Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data (Convention No. 108);
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Believes that platform liability should be tailored in order to respect the size of the operator and a clear distinction on the platform engagement with the content based on clear and verifiable criteria and aspects, such as editorial functions, actual knowledge and a certain degree of control; furthermore believes that any system that will be proposed should be accompanied by a robust set of fundamental rights safeguards and adequate independent and impartial public oversight;
Amendment 44 #
3c. Strongly believes that the issue of platform workers must be addressed by a specific, dedicated, labour-oriented piece of legislation and not in an act dealing with digital services; suggests that platform operators should be responsible as employers for platform workers that should be liable to provide quality work, individual labour rights, social protection training and fulfilling Health & Safety at work requirements; reiterates that, in case of a provision of a legal presumption that platform workers are workers, it would ensure the requisite responsibility of platform operators as employers, to guarantee labour rights and to contribute to social security for platform workers;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Highlights the need to find an effective way to enforce properly and appropriately intellectual property rights thus fostering cultural and creative sectors without interfering with the freedom of expression; believes that this balance should include proactive measures to be employed when necessary in order to ensure that illegal and harmful content is not only taken down from online platforms but also that it stays it down;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Recognises the need to define companies’ human rights responsibilities in line with the ‘respect, protect, remedy’ framework set out under the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, which should be promptly turned into legally binding standards of international law, by requiring in particular a human rights approach to the development of terms of service and community standards as well as policies governing access to and use of their platform;
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Highlights the need to ensure transparency to the maximum extent feasible to all measures taken under the new Act, including those taken by Member State and Union authorities;
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Expresses its concern regarding the undue restrictions on non-profits and small private intermediaries and urges the adoption of criteria that are objective and provide for clear exemptions that would allow content-sharing providers to untap their potential reaching a larger size, and foster a true level-playing field, which in turn would not cause an impediment to the right to science and culture;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Paragraph 4 d (new)
4d. Emphasises the need to establish effective and timely remedies accessible to all, without discrimination, that will be characterised by the qualities of independence and impartiality;
Amendment 73 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 e (new)
Paragraph 4 e (new)
4e. Strongly believes that the new Act should provide for an obligation for digital service interconnectivity and data portability, alongside strict data protection rules and strict protection of data sovereignty;
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 f (new)
Paragraph 4 f (new)
4f. Strongly believes that the E- commerce Directive1a has been a piece of legislation with significant success and 20 years of unfettered operation, thus opines that a codification of jurisprudence by the Court of Justice of EU would be an appropriate way forward; _________________ 1aDirective 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market ('Directive on electronic commerce')
Amendment 78 #
4g. Strongly believes that there is a need to strengthen platform liability when it comes to illegal and unsafe products, thus re-enforcing the digital single market; recalls that in those cases, platform liability should be fit for its purpose considering the consumer safeguards in place which should be observed at all times and the establishment of concomitant redress measures for retailers and consumers; believes that the system could only function if enforcement authorities have sufficient powers, tools and resources to enforce the provisions and efficiently cooperate in cases with a transnational element;