213 Amendments of Vincenzo SOFO related to 2022/0277(COD)
Amendment 147 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The definition of audience measurement should cover measurement systems developed as agreed by industry standards within self-regulatory organisations, like the Joint Industry Committees, and measurement systems developed outside such self-regulatory approaches. The latter tend to be deployed by certain online players who self-measure or provide their proprietary audience measurement systems to the market, which do not necessarily abide by the commonly agreed industry standards. Systems developed outside of commonly agreed industry standards should be considered proprietary audience measurement systems. Given the significant impact that such audience measurement systems have on the advertising and media markets, they should be covered by this Regulation. Media service providers which abide by the commonly agreed industry standards shall not be considered as providers of proprietary audience measurement systems.
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The definition of audience measurement should cover measurement systems developed as agreed by industry standards within self-regulatory organisations, like the Joint Industry Committees, and measurement systems developed outside such self-regulatory approaches. The latter tend to be deployed by certain online players who self-measure or provide their proprietary audience measurement systems to the market, which do not necessarily abide by the commonly agreed industry standards. Systems developed outside of commonly agreed industry standards should be considered proprietary audience measurment systems. Given the significant impact that such audience measurement systems have on the advertising and media markets, they should be covered by this Regulation. Media service provoders which abide by the commonly agreed industry standards shall not be considered as providers of proprietary audience measurement systems.
Amendment 181 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Public service media established by the Member States play a particular role in the internal media market, by ensuring that citizens and businesses have access to universal and varied offers including quality information, and balanced and impartial media coverage, as part of their missionremit. However, public service media can be particularly exposed to the risk of interference, given their institutional proximity to the State and the public funding they receive. This risk may be exacerbated by uneven safeguards related to independent governance and balanced coverage by public service media across the Union. This situation may lead to biased or partial media coverage, distort competition in the internal media market and negatively affect access to independent and impartial media services. It is thus necessary, building on the international standards developed by the Council of Europe in this regard, that Member States to put in place legal safeguards for the independent functioning of public service media across the Union. It is also necessary to guarantee that, without prejudice to the application of the Union’s State aid rules, public service media providers benefit from sufficient and stable funding to fulfil their missionremit that enables predictability in their planning. Preferably, such funding should be decided and appropriated on a multi-year basis, in line with the public service missionremit of public service media providers, to avoid potential for undue influence from yearly budget negotiations. The requirements laid down in this Regulation do not affect the competence of Member States totransparency requirements under this Regulation for the appointment procedures for public service media's heads of management and members of governing bodies do not require the disclosure of the candidates' identity. The requirements laid down in this Regulation do not affect the application of the State aid rules as applied on a case by case basis or the competence of Member States to define a broad and dynamic remit, organise and provide for the funding of public service media as enshrined in Protocol 29 on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 186 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Public service media established by the Member States play a particular role in the internal media market, by ensuring that citizens and businesses have access to universal and varied offers including quality information, and balanced and impartial media coverage, as part of their missionremit. However, public service media can be particularly exposed to the risk of interference, given their institutional proximity to the State and the public funding they receive. This risk may be exacerbated by uneven safeguards related to independent governance and balanced coverage by public service media across the Union. This situation may lead to biased or partial media coverage, distort competition in the internal media market and negatively affect access to independent and impartial media services. It is thus necessary, building on the international standards developed by the Council of Europe in this regard, tohat Member States put in place legal safeguards for the independent functioning of public service media across the Union. It is also necessary to guarantee that, without prejudice to the application of the Union’s State aid rules, public service media providers benefit from sufficient and stable funding to fulfil their missionremit that enables predictability in their planning. Preferably, sSuch funding should be decided and appropriated on a multi-year basis, in line with the public service missionremit of public service media providers, to avoid potential for undue influence from yearly budget negotiations. The requirements laid down in this Regulation do not affectbudget negotiations. The transparency requirements under this Regulation for the appointment procedures for public service media's heads of management and members of governing bodies do not require the disclosure of the candidates' identity. The requirements laid down in this Regulation do not affect the application of the State aid rules as applied on a case-by-case basis or the competence of Member States to define a broad and dynamic remit, organise and provide for the funding of public service media as enshrined in Protocol 29 on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 189 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a) Recipients of media services shall have a right to easily identify the media service provider on any device or user interface controlling or managing access to and use of media service. Manufacturers of devices and providers of users interfaces controlling or menaging access to and use of media services shall ensure that the identity of the media service provider bearing the editorial responsability for the content or services is clearly visible alongside the content and the services offered. Manufacturers of devices and providers of user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of media service provider bearing the editorial responsability for the content or services is clearly visible alongside the content and services offered.
Amendment 194 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Independent national regulatory authorities or bodies are key for the proper application of media law across the Union. National regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU are best placed to ensure the correct application of the requirements related to regulatory cooperation and a well-functioning market for media services, envisaged in Chapter III of this Regulation. In order to ensure a consistent application of this Regulation and other Union media law, it is necessary to set up an independent advisory body at Union level gathering such authorities or bodies and coordinating their actions. The European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA), established by Directive 2010/13/EU, has been essential in promoting the consistent implementation of that Directive. The European Board for Media Services (‘the Board’) should therefore build on ERGA and replace it. This requires a targeted amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU to delete its Article 30b, which establishes ERGA, and to replace references to ERGA and its tasks as a consequence. The amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU by this Regulation is justified in this case as it is limited to a provision which does not need to be transposed by Member States and is addressed to the institutions of the Union. Therefore, given the importance and the extensive nature of the new tasks conferred by this Regulation to these authorities, directly or indirectly, it is of utmost importance to ensure that the financial, human and technical resources of the national regulatory authorities or bodies are adequately and sufficiently increased. In this sense, Member States could make use of national resources coming from the auctioning of the spectrum, the digital dividend or the introduction of a levy on regulated entities. Member States should also provide the Commission with all relevant information concerning the increase of financial, human and technical resources. Moreover, within the framework of the applicable public function, and budgetary regulations, the national regulatory authorities should have full authority over the recruitment and management of the staff, who should be hired under clear and transparent rules. The capacity over the management of the staff should include autonomy to decide the required profile, qualification, expertise, and other human resources features, including salary and retribution, with independence from other public bodies. The national regulatory authorities should also have full autonomy and decision-making control in terms of management of internal structure, organization, and procedures for the effective performance of their duties and the effective exercise of their powers. Without prejudice to national budgetary rules and procedures, national regulatory authorities should have allocated a separated annual budget. Member states should ensure that national authorities are granted full autonomy in the spending of the allocated budget for the purpose of carrying out their duties. Any control on the budget of the national regulatory authorities should be exercised in a transparent manner. Annual accounts of regulatory Authorities should have an ex post control by an independent auditor, and should be made public.
Amendment 196 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 a (new)
Recital 22 a (new)
(22a) In order to ensure a consistent application of this Regulation and other Union media law, it is necessary to set up an independent advisory body at Union level gathering such authorities or bodies and coordinating their actions. The European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA), established by Directive 2010/13/EU, has been essential in promoting the consistent implementation of that Directive. The European Board for Media Services (‘the Board’) should therefore build on ERGA and replace it. This requires a targeted amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU to delete its Article 30b, which establishes ERGA, and to replace references to ERGA and its tasks as a consequence. The amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU by this Regulation is justified in this case as it is limited to a provision which does not need to be transposed by Member States and is addressed to the institutions of the Union.
Amendment 197 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Independent national regulatory authorities or bodies are key for the proper application of media law across the Union. National regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU are best placed to ensure the correct application of the requirements related to regulatory cooperation and a well-functioning market for media services, envisaged in Chapter III of this Regulation. In order to ensure a consistent application of this Regulation and other Union media law, it is necessary to set up an independent advisory body at Union level gathering such authorities or bodies and coordinating their actions. The European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA), established by Directive 2010/13/EU, has been essential in promoting the consistent implementation of that Directive. The European Board for Media Services (‘the Board’) should therefore build on ERGA and replace it. This requires a targeted amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU to delete its Article 30b, which establishes ERGA, and to replace references to ERGA and its tasks as a consequence. The amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU by this Regulation is justified in this case as it is limited to a provision which does not need to be transposed by Member States and is addressed to the institutions of the UnionTherefore, given the importance and extensive nature of the new tasks conferred by this Regulation to these authorities, directly or indirectly, it is of utmost importance to ensure that the financial, human and technical resources of the national regulatory authorities or bodies are adequately and sufficientely increased. In thise sense, Member states could make use of national resources coming from the auctioning of the spectrum, the digital dividend or the introduction of levy on regulated entities. Member States should also provide the Commission with all relevant information concerning the increase of financial, human and technical resources. Morover, within the framework of the applicable public function, and budgetary regulations, the NRA should have full authority over the recruitment and management of the staff, who should be hired uder clear and transparent rules. The capacity over the management of the staff should include autonomy to decide the required profile, qualification, expertise, and other human resources features, including salary and retribution, with indipendence from other public bodies. The NRA should also have full authonomy and decision-making control in terms of management of internal structure, organization, and procedures for the effective performance of their duties and the effective exercise of their powers. Without prejudice to national budgetary rules and procedures. NRAs should have allocated a separated annual budget. Member Staes should ensure that national authorities are granted full autonomy in the spending of the allocated budget for the purpose of carrying out their duties. Any control on the budget of NRAs should be exercised in a transparent manner. Annual accounts of regulatory Authorities should have ane ex post control by and indipendent auditor, and should be made public.
Amendment 199 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The Board should bring together senior representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU, appointed by such authorities or bodies. In cases where Member States have several relevant regulatory authorities or bodies, including at regional level, a joint representative should be chosen through appropriate procedures and the voting right should remain limited to one representative per Member State. This should not affect the possibility for the other national regulatory authorities or bodies to participate, as appropriate, in the meetings of the Board. The Board should also have the possibility to invite to attend its meetings, in agreement with the Commission, experts and, on a case-by-case basis, external experts to attend its meetings. The Board, in consultation with the Commission, should have the possibility to designate permanent observers, including in particular regulatory authorities or bodies from candidate countries, potential candidate countries, EEA countries, or to invite ad hoc delegates from other competent national authorities. Due to the sensitivity of the media sector and following the practice of ERGA decisions in accordance with its rules of procedure, the Board should adopt its decisions on the basis of a two-thirds majority of the votes.
Amendment 199 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a) Recipients of media services shall have a right to easily identify the media service provider on any device or user interface controlling or managing access to and use of media services. 2. Manufacturers of devices and providers of user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of media services shall ensure that the identity of the media service provider bearing the editorial responsibility for the content or services is clearly visible alongside the content and services offered. Manufacturers of devices and providers of user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of media services shall ensure that the identity of the media service provider bearing the editorial responsibility for the content or services is clearly visible alongside the content and services offered.
Amendment 203 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Without prejudice to the powers granted to the Commission by the Treaties, it is essential that the Commission and the Board work and cooperate closely. In particular, the Board should actively support the Commission in its tasks of ensuring the consistent application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU. For that purpose, the Board should in particular advise and assist the Commission on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the application of Union law, promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices and draw up opinions ion agreement withits own initiative or upon the Commission or upon it’s request in the cases envisaged by this Regulation. In order to effectively and independently fulfil its tasks, the Board should be able to rely on the expertise and human resources of a secretariat providbody of the Union having legal personality, an independent Bureau dedicated byto the Commission. The Commission secretariatBoard. The Bureau of the European Board for Media Services should provide administrative and organisational support to the Board, and help the Board in carrying out its tasks.
Amendment 204 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 a (new)
Recital 22 a (new)
(22a) In order to ensure a consistent application of this Regulation and other Union media law, it is necessary to set up an indipendent advisory body at Union level gathering such authorities or bodies and coordinating their actions. The European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA), established by Directive 2010/13/EU, has bee essential in promoting the consistent implementation of the Directive. The European Board for Media Services ('the Board) should therefore build on ERGA and replace it. This requires a targeted amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU to delete its Article 30b, which establishes ERGA, and to replace references to ERGA and its tasts as a consequence. The amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU by this Regulation is justified in this case as it is limited to a provision which does not need to be transposed by Member States and is addressed to the institutions of the Union.
Amendment 207 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The Board should bring together senior representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU, appointed by such authorities or bodies. In cases where Member States have several relevant regulatory authorities or bodies, including at regional level, a joint representative should be chosen through appropriate procedures and the voting right should remain limited to one representative per Member State. This should not affect the possibility for the other national regulatory authorities or bodies to participate, as appropriate, in the meetings of the Board. The Board should also have the possibility to invite to attend its meetings, in agreement with the Commission, experts and, on case by case basis, external experts to attend its meetings. The Board, in consultation with the Commission, should have the possibility to designate permanent observers, including in particular regulatory authorities or bodies from candidate countries, potential candidate countries, EEA countries, or to invite ad hoc delegates from other competent national authorities. Due to the sensitivity of the media sector and following the practice of ERGA decisions in accordance with its rules of procedure, the Board should adopt its decisions on the basis of a two-thirds majority of the votes.
Amendment 209 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) To ensure theAware of these challenges, the European Regulators’ Group for Audiovisual Media Services adopted in 2020 a Memorandum of Understanding, a voluntary framework for cooperation to strengthen cross-border enforcement of media rules on audiovisual media services and video-sharing platforms. Building on this voluntary framework, in order to ensure the comprehensive and effective enforcement of Union media law, to prevent the possible circumvention of the applicable media rules by rogue media service providers and to avoid the raising of additional barriers in the internal market for media services, it is essential to provide for a clear, legally binding framework for national regulatory authorities or bodies to cooperate effectively and efficiently.
Amendment 210 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Due to the pan-European nature of video-sharing platforms, national regulatory authorities or bodies need to have a dedicated tool to protect viewers of video-sharing platform services from certain illegal and harmful content, including commercial communications. In particular, and without prejudice to the country-of-origin principle, a mechanism is needed to allow any relevant national regulatory authority or body to request its peers to take necessary and proportionate actions to ensure enforcement of obligations under this Article by video- sharing platform providers. In case the use of such mechanism does not lead to an amicable solution, the freedom to provide information society services from another Member State can only be restricted if the conditions set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council53 are met and following the procedure set out therein. __________________ 53 Directive 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') (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1-16).
Amendment 212 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Without prejudice to the powers granted to the Commission by the Treaties, it is essential that the Commission and the Board work and cooperate closely. In particular, the Board should actively support the Commission in its tasks of ensuring the consistent application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU. For that purpose, the Board should in particular advise and assist the Commission on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the application of Union law, promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices and draw up opinions ion agreement withits own initiative or upon the Commission or upon it's request in the cases envisaged by this Regulation. In order to effectively and indipendentely fulfil its tasks, the Board should be able to rely on the expertise and human resources of a secretariat provided by the Commission. The Commission secretariatbody of the Union having legal personality, an indipendent Bureau dedicated to the Board. The Bureau of the European Board for Media Services should provide administrative and organisational support to the Board, and help the Board in carrying out its tasks.
Amendment 215 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Independent national regulatory authorities or bodies are key for the proper application of media law across the Union. National regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU are best placed to ensure the correct application of the requirements related to regulatory cooperation and a well-functioning market for media services, envisaged in Chapter III of this Regulation. In order to ensure a consistent application of this Regulation and other Union media law, it is necessary to set up an independent advisory body at Union level gathering such authorities or bodies and coordinating their actions. The European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA), established by Directive 2010/13/EU, has been essential in promoting the consistent implementation of that Directive. The European Board for Media Services (‘the Board’) should therefore build on ERGA and replace it. This requires a targeted amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU to delete its Article 30b, which establishes ERGA, and to replace references to ERGA and its tasks as a consequence. The amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU by this Regulation is justified in this case as it is limited to a provision which does not need to be transposed by Member States and is addressed to the institutions of the Union. Therefore, given the importance and the extensive nature of the new tasks conferred by this Regulation to these authorities, directly or indirectly, it is of utmost importance to ensure that the financial, human and technical resources of the national regulatory authorities or bodies are adequately and sufficiently increased. In this sense, Member States could make use of national resources coming from the auctioning of the spectrum, the digital dividend or the introduction of a levy on regulated entities. Member States should also provide the Commission with all relevant information concerning the increase of financial, human and technical resources. Moreover, within the framework of the applicable public function, and budgetary regulations, the NRA should have full authority over the recruitment and management of the staff, who should be hired under clear and transparent rules. The capacity over the management of the staff should include autonomy to decide the required profile, qualification, expertise, and other human 4/34 \000000EN.doc EN resources features, including salary and retribution, with independence from other public bodies. The NRA should also have full autonomy and decision-making control in terms of management of internal structure, organization, and procedures for the effective performance of their duties and the effective exercise of their powers. Without prejudice to national budgetary rules and procedures, NRAs should have allocated a separated annual budget. Member states should ensure that national authorities are granted full autonomy in the spending of the allocated budget for the purpose of carrying out their duties. Any control on the budget of the NRAs should be exercised in a transparent manner. Annual accounts of regulatory Authorities should have an ex post control by an independent auditor, and should be made public.
Amendment 216 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU have specific practical expertise that allows them to effectively balance the interests of the providers and recipients of media services while ensuring the respect for the freedom of expression. This is key in particular when it comes to protecting the internal market from activities of media service providers originating from outside the Union (either established outside of the UnionEU, established outside of the EU but under jurisdiction of an EU Member State through the Directive 2010/13/EU satellite criteria or established in the EU), irrespective of the means of distribution or access, that target or reach audiences in the Union where, inter alia in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries State authorities over them, they may prejudice or pose risks of prejudice to public security and defence. In this regard, the coordination between national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together possible public security and defence threats stemming from such media services needs to be strengthened and given a legal framework to ensure the effectiveness and possible coordination of the national measures adopted in line with Union media legislation. In order to ensure that media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other means in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law. Additionally, it is necessary to coordinate the national measures that may be adopted to counter public security and defence threats by media services established outside of the Union and targeting audiences in the Union, including the possibility for the Board, in agreement with the Commission, to issue opinions on such measures, as appropriate. In this regard, risks to public security and defence need to be assessed with a view to all relevant factual and legal elements, at national and European level. This is without prejudice to the competence of , including the safeguarding of national security and defence, public health, or where their programs include incitement to violence or hatred or public provocation to commit a terrorist offence. In this regard, the cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together possible threats stemming from such media services needs to be strengthened and given a legal framework to ensure the effectiveness and possible coordination of the national measures adopted in line withe Union under Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Unmedia legislation.
Amendment 219 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 a (new)
Recital 22 a (new)
(22a) In order to ensure a consistent application of this Regulation and other Union media law, it is necessary to set up an independent advisory body at Union level gathering such authorities or bodies and coordinating their actions. The European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA), established by Directive 2010/13/EU, has been essential in promoting the consistent implementation of that Directive. The European Board for Media Services (‘the Board’) should therefore build on ERGA and replace it. This requires a targeted \000000EN.doc 5/34 EN amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU to delete its Article 30b, which establishes ERGA, and to replace references to ERGA and its tasks as a consequence. The amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU by this Regulation is justified in this case as it is limited to a provision which does not need to be transposed by Member States and is addressed to the institutions of the Union.
Amendment 219 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) To ensure theAware of these challenges the European Regulators' Group for Audiovisual Media Services adopted in 2020 a memorandum of Understanding, a voluntary framework for cooperation to strengthen cross-border enforcement of media rules on audiovisual media services and video-sharing platforms. Building on this voluntary framework, in order to ensure the comprehensive and effective enforcement of Union media law, to prevent the possible circumvention of the applicable media rules by rogue media service providers and to avoid the raising of additional barriers in the internal market for media services, it is essential to provide for a clear, legally binding framework for national regulatory authorities or bodies to cooperate effectively and efficiently.
Amendment 220 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 a (new)
Recital 30 a (new)
(30a) In the case of audiovisual media services providers under jurisdiction of EU Member States pursuant to Article 2 of Directive 2010/13/EU, in order to ensure that audiovisual media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other means in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance, pursuant to an opinion of the Board, should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law. Following the request of the authority or body from another Member State, the competent national authority or body could be invited by the opinion of the Board to undertake certain measures, where the threats mentioned above are proven and are prejudicing or presenting a serious and grave risk of prejudice for several Member States or the Union. In this regard, risks to public security and defence need to be assessed with a view to all relevant factual and legal elements, at national and European level. This is without prejudice to the competence of the Union under Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 221 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Due to the pan-European nature of video-sharing platforms, national regulatory authorities or bodies need to have a dedicated tool to protect viewers of video-sharing platform services from certain illegal and harmful content, including commercial communications. In particular, and without prejudice to the country-of-origin principle, a mechanism is needed to allow any relevant national regulatory authority or body to request its peers to take necessary and proportionate actions to ensure enforcement of obligations under this Article by video- sharing platform providers. In case the use of such mechanism does not lead to an amicable solution, the freedom to provide information society services from another Member State can only be restricted if the conditions set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council53are met and following the procedure set out therein. _________________ 53 Directive 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') (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1-16).
Amendment 223 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 b (new)
Recital 30 b (new)
(30b) In order to foster the coherence of decisions and facilitate the eventual cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies, the Board should develop a set of basic criteria on the service provider and the service provided. Those criteria should be used by national regulatory authorities or bodies, when a media service provider originating from outside of the Union seeks jurisdiction in one of the Member States, or when it is already under the jurisdiction of a Member State. The criteria should inter alia cover content, ownership, economic and financial connections, editorial independence or lack thereof from the third country state and should allow relevant authorities or bodies to identify, and if needed prevent, the entry into the EU market, of media service providers which present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and defence, public health, or where their programs contain incitement to violence or hatred or public provocation to commit a terrorist offence.
Amendment 224 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 c (new)
Recital 30 c (new)
(30c) As any measures limiting the freedom of media and of speech can only be envisaged in highly exceptional and justified cases, the implication of the Board should be limited to what is strictly necessary and therefore should be triggered following a request of a minimum number of Board members to be defined in the Board’s Rules of procedure. Once adopted, the opinions of the Board should be taken into utmost account by the national regulatory authorities or bodies concerned.
Amendment 224 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The Board should bring together senior representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU, appointed by such authorities or bodies. In cases where Member States have several relevant regulatory authorities or bodies, including at regional level, a joint representative should be chosen through appropriate procedures and the voting right should remain limited to one representative per Member State. This should not affect the possibility for the other national regulatory authorities or bodies to participate, as appropriate, in the meetings of the Board. The Board should also have the possibility to invite to attend its meetings, in agreement with the Commission, experts and, on a case-by-case basis, external experts to attend its meetings. The Board, in consultation with the Commission, should have the possibility to designate permanent observers, including in particular regulatory authorities or bodies from candidate countries, potential candidate countries, EEA countries, or to invite ad hoc delegates from other competent national authorities. Due to the sensitivity of the media sector and following the practice of ERGA decisions in accordance with its rules of procedure, the Board should adopt its decisions on the basis of a two-thirds majority of the votes.
Amendment 229 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) In order to ensure a level playing field in the provision of diverse audiovisual media services in the face of technological developments in the internal market, it is necessary to find common technical prescriptions for devices, including remote controls, controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services or carrying digital signals conveying the audiovisual content from source to destination. In this context, it is important to avoid diverging technical standards creating barriers and additional costs for the industry and consumers while encouraging solutions to implement existing obligations concerning audiovisual media services.
Amendment 233 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Without prejudice to the powers granted to the Commission by the Treaties, it is essential that the Commission and the Board work and cooperate closely. In particular, the Board should actively support the Commission in its tasks of ensuring the consistent application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU. For that purpose, the Board should in particular advise and assist the Commission on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the application of Union law, promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices and draw up opinions ion agreement withits own initiative or upon the Commission or upon it’s request in the cases envisaged by this Regulation. In order to effectively and independently fulfil its tasks, the Board should be able to rely on the expertise and human resources of a secretariat providbody of the Union having legal personality, an independent Bureau dedicated byto the Commission. The Commission secretariatBoard. The Bureau of the European Board for Media Services should provide administrative and organisational support to the Board, and help the Board in carrying out its tasks.
Amendment 233 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU have specific practical expertise that allows them to effectively balance the interests of the providers and recipients of media services while ensuring the respect for the freedom of expression. This is key in particular when it comes to protecting the internal market from activities of media service providers originating from outside the Union (either established outside of the UnionEU, established outside of the EU but under jurisdiction of the EU Member state through the Directive 2010/13/EU satellite criteria or established in the EU), irrispective of the means of distribution or access, that target or reach audiences in the Union where, inter alia in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries State authorities over them, they may prejudice or pose risks of prejudice to public security and defence. In this regard, the coordination between national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together possible public security and defence threats stemming from such media services needs to be strengthened and given a legal framework to ensure the effectiveness and possible coordination of the national measures adopted in line with Union media legislation. In order to ensure that media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other means in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law. Additionally, it is necessary to coordinate the national measures that may be adopted to counter public security and defence threats by media services established outside of the Union and targeting audiences in the Union, including the possibility for the Board, in agreement with the Commission, to issue opinions on such measures, as appropriate. In this regard, risks to public security and defence need to be assessed with a view to all relevant factual and legal elements, at national and European level. This is without prejudice to the competence of , including the safeguarding of national security and defence, public health, or where their programs include incitement to violence or hatred or public provocation to commit a terrorist offence. In this regard, the cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together possible threats stemming from such media services needs to be strengthened and given a legal framework to ensure the effectiveness and possible coordination of the national measures adopted in line withe Union under Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Unmedia legislation.
Amendment 236 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 a (new)
Recital 30 a (new)
(30a) In the case of audiovisual media services providers under jurisdiction of EU Member States pursuant to article 2 of Directive 2010/13/EU, in order to ensure that audiovisual media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other means in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance, pursuant to an opinion of the Board, should also be available to guarantee the 'effet utile' of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law. Following the request of the authority or body from another Member State, the competent national authority or body could be invited by the opinion of the Board to undertake certain measures, where the threats mentioned above are proven and are prejudicing or presenting a serious and grave risk of prejudice for several Member States or the Union. In this regard, risks to public security and defence need to assessed with a view to all relevant factual and legal elements, at national and European level. This is without prejudice to the competence of the Union under Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 238 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 b (new)
Recital 30 b (new)
(30b) .As any measures limiting the freedom of media and of speech can only be envisaged in highly exceptional and justified cases, the implication of the Board should be limited to what is strictly necessary and therefore should be triggered following a request of a minimum number of Board members to be defined in the Board's Rules of procedure. Once adopted, the opinions of the Board should be taken into utmost account by the national regulatory authorities or bodies concerned.
Amendment 241 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) To ensure theAware of these challenges, the European Regulators’ Group for Audiovisual Media Services adopted in 2020 a Memorandum of Understanding, a voluntary framework for cooperation to strengthen cross-border enforcement of media rules on audiovisual media services and video-sharing platforms. Building on this voluntary framework, in order to ensure the comprehensive and effective enforcement of Union media law, to prevent the possible circumvention of the applicable media rules by rogue media service providers and to avoid the raising of additional barriers in the internal market for media services, it is essential to provide for a clear, legally binding framework for national regulatory authorities or bodies to cooperate effectively and efficiently.
Amendment 241 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 c (new)
Recital 30 c (new)
(30c) In order to foster the coherence of decisions and facilitate the eventual cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies, the Board should develop a set of basic criteria on the service provider and the services provided. Those criteria should be used by national regulatory authorities or bodies, when media service provider originating from outside of the Union seeks jurisdiction in one of the Member States, or when it is already under the jurisdiction of a Member State. The criteria should inter alia cover content, ownership, economic and financial connections, editorial independence or lack thereof from the third country state and should allow relevant authorities or bodies to identify, and if needed prevent, the entry into the EU market, of media service providers which present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and defence, public health, or where their programs contain incitement to violence or hatred or public provocation to commit a terrorist offence.
Amendment 244 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Due to the pan-European nature of video-sharing platforms, national regulatory authorities or bodies need to have a dedicated tool to protect viewers of video-sharing platform services from certain illegal and harmful content, including commercial communications. In particular, and without prejudice to the country-of-origin principle,a mechanism is needed to allow any relevant national regulatory authority or body to request its peers to take necessary and proportionate actions to ensure enforcement of obligations under this Article by video- sharing platform providers. In case the use of such mechanism does not lead to an amicable solution, the freedom to provide information society services from another Member State can only be restricted if the conditions set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council53 are met and following the procedure set out therein. _________________ 53 Directive 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') (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1-16).
Amendment 246 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Very large online platforms act for many users as a gateway for access to media services. Media service providers who exercise editorial responsibility over their content play an important role in the distribution of information and in the exercise of freedom of information online. When exercising such editorial responsibility, they are expected to act diligently and provide information that is trustworthy and respectful of fundamental rights, in line with the regulatory or self- regulatory requirements they are subject to in the Member States. Therefore, also in view of users’ freedom of information, where providers of very large online platforms consider that content provided by such media service providers is incompatible with their terms and conditions, while it is not contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act], they should duly consider freedom and pluralism of media, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act] and provide, as early as possible, the necessary explanations to media service providers as their business users in the statement of reasons under Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council54. To minimise the impact of any restriction to that content on users’ freedom of information, very large online platforms should endeavour to submit the statement of reasons prior to the restriction taking effect without prejudice to their obligations underRegulation (EU) 2022/XXX[the Digital Services Ain accordance with Article 4(1) ofRegulation (EU) 2019/1150[the Digital Services Act] and grant the affected media service a right to reply to this statement of reasons prior to the suspention or restriction taking effect]. In particular, this Regulation should not prevent a provider of a very large online platform to take expeditious measures either against illegal content disseminated through its service, or in order to mitigate systemic risks posed by dissemination of certain content through its service, in compliance with Union law, in particular pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX2065[the Digital Services Act]. _________________ 54 Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 57-79).
Amendment 259 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) In order to ensure a level playing field in the provision of diverse audiovisual media services in the face of technological developments in the internal market, it is necessary to find common technical prescriptions for devices, including remote controls, controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services or carrying digital signals conveying the audiovisual content from source to destination. In this context, it is important to avoid diverging technical standards creating barriers and additional costs for the industry and consumers while encouraging solutions to implement existing obligations concerning audiovisual media services.
Amendment 259 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) Recipients of audiovisual media services should be able to effectively choose the audiovisual content they want to watch according to their preferences. Their freedom in this area may however be constrained by commercial practices in the media sector, namely agreements for content prioritisation between manufacturers of devices or providers of user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services, such as connected televisions, and media service providers. Prioritisation can be implemented, for example, on the home screen of a device, through hardware or software shortcuts, applications and search areas, dedicated buttons on remote controls which have implications on the recipients’ viewing behaviour, who may be unduly incentivised to choose certain audiovisual media offers over others. Service recipients should have the possibility to change, in a simple and user- friendly manner, the default settings of a device or user interface controlling and managing access to, and use of, audiovisual media services, without prejudice to measures to ensure the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EC, taken in the pursuit of legitimate public policy considerations.
Amendment 261 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 a (new)
Recital 37 a (new)
(37a) Recipients of media services increasingly face difficulties in identifying who bears the editorial responsibility for the content or services they consume, in particular when they access media services through connected devices or on- line platforms. Failure to clearly indicate editorial responsibility for media content or services (e.g., through incorrect attribution of logos, trademarks, or other characteristic traits) deprives recipients of media services of the possibility to understand and assess the information they receive, which is a prerequisite for forming well-informed opinions and consequently to actively participate in democracy. Recipients of media services should therefore be enabled to easily identify the media service provider bearing the editorial responsibility over any given media service on all devices and user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of media services
Amendment 263 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU have specific practical expertise that allows them to effectively balance the interests of the providers and recipients of media services while ensuring the respect for the freedom of expression. This is key in particular when it comes to protecting the internal market from activities of media service providers originating from outside the Union (either established outside of the UnionEU, established outside of the EU but under jurisidiction of an EU Member State through the Directive 2010/13/EU satellite criteria or established in the EU), irrespective of the means of distribution or access, that target or reach audiences in the Union where, inter alia in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries State authorities over them, they may prejudice or pose risks of prejudice to public security and defence. In this regard, the coordination between national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together possible public security and defence threats stemming from such media services needs to be strengthened and given a legal framework to ensure the effectiveness and possible coordination of the national measures adopted in line with Union media legislation. In order to ensure that media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other means in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law. Additionally, it is necessary to coordinate the national measures that may be adopted to counter public security and defence threats by media services established outside of the Union and targeting audiences in the Union, including the possibility for the Board, in agreement with the Commission, to issue opinions on such measures, as appropriate. In this regard, risks to public security and defence need to be assessed with a view to all relevant factual and legal elements, at national and European level. This is without prejudice to the competence of , including the safeguarding of national security and defence, public health, or where their programs include incitement to violence or hatred or public provocation to commit a terrorist offence. In this regard, the cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together possible threats stemming from such media services needs to be strengthened and given a legal framework to ensure the effectiveness and possible coordination of the national measures adopted in line withe Union under Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Unmedia legislation.
Amendment 267 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 a (new)
Recital 30 a (new)
(30a) In the case of audiovisual media services providers under jurisdiction of EU Member States pursuant to Article 2 of Directive 2010/13/EU, in order to ensure that audiovisual media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other means in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance, pursuant to an opinion of the Board, should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law. Following the request of the authority or body from another Member State, the competent national authority or body could be invited by the opinion of the Board to undertake certain measures, where the threats mentioned above are proven and are prejudicing or presenting a serious and grave risk of prejudice for several Member States or the Union. In this regard, risks to public security and defence need to be assessed with a view to all relevant factual and legal elements, at national and European level. This is without prejudice to the competence of the Union under Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 271 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 b (new)
Recital 30 b (new)
(30b) As any measures limiting the freedom of media and of speech can only be envisaged in highly exceptional and justified cases, the implication of the Board should be limited to what is stricly necessary and therefore should be triggered following a request of a minimum number of Board members to be defined in the Board’s Rules of procedure. Once adopted, the opinions of the Board should be taken into utmost account by the national regulatory authorities or bodies concerned.
Amendment 272 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 c (new)
Recital 30 c (new)
(30c) In order to foster the coherence of decisions and facilitate the eventual cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies, the Board should develop a set of basic criteria on the service provider and the service provided. Those criteria should be used by national regulatory authorities or bodies, when a media service provider originating from outside of the Union seeks jurisdiction in one of the Member States, or when it is already under the jurisdiction of a Member State. The criteria should inter alia cover content, ownership, economic and financial connections, editorial independence or lack thereof from the third country state and should allow relevant authorities or bodies to identify, and if needed prevent, the entry into the EU market, of media service providers which present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and defence, public health, or where their programs contain incitement to violence or hatred or public provocation to commit a terrorist offence.
Amendment 279 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Very large online platforms act for many users as a gateway for access to media services. Media service providers who exercise editorial responsibility over their content play an important role in the distribution of information and in the exercise of freedom of information online. When exercising such editorial responsibility, they are expected to act diligently and provide information that is trustworthy and respectful of fundamental rights, in line with the regulatory or self- regulatory requirements they are subject to in the Member States. Therefore, also in view of users’ freedom of information, where providers of very large online platforms consider that content provided by such media service providers is incompatible with their terms and conditions, while it is not contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act], they should duly consider freedom and pluralism of media, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act] and provide, as early as possible, the necessary explanations to media service providers as their business users in the statement of reasons under Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council54. To minimise the impact of any restriction to that content on users’ freedom of information, very large online platforms should endeavour tosubmit the statement of reasons prior to the restriction taking effect without prejudin accrodance with Article to their obligations under4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and Article 17(3) of Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX2065 [the Digital Services Act] and grant the affected media service a right to reply to thisstatement of reasons prior to the suspension orrestriction taking effect. In particular, this Regulation should not prevent a provider of a very large online platform to take expeditious measures either against illegal content disseminated through its service, or in order to mitigate systemic risks posed by dissemination of certain content through its service, in compliance with Union law, in particular pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX2065[the Digital Services Act]. _________________ 54 Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 57-79).
Amendment 290 #
(45) Audience measurement has a direct impact on the allocation and the prices of advertising, which represents a key revenue source for the media sector. It is a crucial tool to evaluate the performance of media content and understand the preferences of audiences in order to plan the future production of contentbuying, planning and selling of content and advertising inventory. Accordingly, media market players, in particular media service providers and advertisers, should be able to rely on objective audience data stemming from transparent, unbiased and verifiable audience measurement solutions. However, certain new players that have emerged in the media ecosystem provide their own measurement services without making available information on their methodologies. This could result in information asymmetries among media market players and in potential market distortions, to the detriment of equality of opportunities for media service providers in the market.
Amendment 292 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) In order to enhance the verifiability, comparability and reliability of audience measurement methodologies, in particular online, transparency obligations should be laid down for providers of audience measurement systems that do not abide by the industry benchmarks agreed within the relevant self-regulatory bodies. Under these obligations, such actors, when requested and to the extent possible, should provide advertisers and media service providers or parties acting on their behalf, with information describing the methodologies employed for the measurement of the audience. Such information could consist in providing elements, such as the size of the sample measured, the definition of the indicators that are measured, the metrics, the measurement methods and the margin of error as well as the measurement period. The obligations imposed under this Regulation are without prejudice toIn addition, media service providers should obtain, free cost, data about the audiences of their content and services. The obligations imposed under this Regulation are without prejudice to audiences' right to protection of personal data as provided by article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights read in conjunction with Regulation 2016/678 (General Data Protection Regulation) as well as any obligations that apply to providers of audience measurement services under Regulation 2019/1150 or Regulation (EU) 2022/XX1925 [Digital Markets Act], including those concerning ranking or self- preferencing.
Amendment 298 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) Codes of conduct, drawn up either by the providers of audience measurement systems or by organisations or associations representing them, cantogether with media service providers, their representative organizations and any other interested parties contribute to the effective application of this Regulation and should, therefore, be encouraged. Self- regulation has already been used to foster high quality standards in the area of audience measurement. Its further development could be seen as an effective tool for the industry to agree on the practical solutions needed for ensuring compliance of audience measurement systems and their methodologies with the principles of transparency, impartiality, inclusiveness, proportionality, non- discrimination, comparability and verifiability. When drawing up such codes of conduct, in consultation with all relevant stakeholders and notably media service providers, account could be taken in particular of the increasing digitalisation of the media sector and the objective of achieving a level playing field among media market players.
Amendment 309 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) Recipients of audiovisual media services should be able to effectively choose the audiovisual content they want to watch according to their preferences. Their freedom in this area may however be constrained by commercial practices in the media sector, namely agreements for content prioritisation between manufacturers of devices or providers of user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services, such as connected televisions, and media service providers. Prioritisation can be implemented, for example, on the home screen of a device, through hardware or software shortcuts, applications and search areas, dedicated buttons on remote controls which have implications on the recipients’ viewing behaviour, who may be unduly incentivised to choose certain audiovisual media offers over others. Service recipients should have the possibility to change, in a simple and user- friendly manner, the default settings of a device or user interface controlling and managing access to, and use of, audiovisual media services, without prejudice to measures to ensure the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EC, taken in the pursuit of legitimate public policy considerations.
Amendment 314 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 a (new)
Recital 37 a (new)
(37a) Recipients of media services increasingly face difficulties in identifying who bears the editorial responsibility for the content or services they consume, in particular when they access media services through connected devices or online platforms. Failure to clearly indicate editorial responsibility for media content or services (e.g., through incorrect attribution of logos, trademarks, or other characteristic traits) deprives recipients of media services of the possibility to understand and assess the information they receive, which is a prerequisite for forming well-informed opinions and consequently to actively participate in democracy. Recipients of media services should therefore be enabled to easily identify the media service provider bearing the editorial responsibility over any given media service on all devices and user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of media services.
Amendment 336 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14
(14) ‘audience measurement’ means the activity of collecting, interpreting or otherwise processing data about the number and characteristics of users of media content and services for the purposes of decisions regarding advertising allocation or prices or the related planning, production or distribution of content;
Amendment 348 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Amendment 368 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) Audience measurement has a direct impact on the allocation and the prices of advertising, which represents a key revenue source for the media sector. It is a crucial tool to evaluate the performance of media content and understand the preferences of audiences in order to plan the future production of contentbuying, planning and selling of content and advertising inventory. Accordingly, media market players, in particular media service providers and advertisers, should be able to rely on objective audience data stemming from transparent, unbiased and verifiable audience measurement solutions. However, certain new players that have emerged in the media ecosystem provide their own measurement services without making available information on their methodologies. This could result in information asymmetries among media market players and in potential market distortions, to the detriment of equality of opportunities for media service providers in the market.
Amendment 372 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) In order to enhance the verifiability, comparability and reliability of audience measurement methodologies, in particular online, transparency obligations should be laid down for providers of audience measurement systems that do not abide by the industry benchmarks agreed within the relevant self-regulatory bodies. Under these obligations, such actors, when requested and to the extent possible, should provide advertisers and media service providers or parties acting on their behalf, with information describing the methodologies employed for the measurement of the audience. Such information could consist in providing elements, such as the size of the sample measured, the definition of the indicators that are measured, the metrics, the measurement methods and the margin of error as well as the measurement period. The obligations imposed under this Regulation are without prejudice toIn addition, media service providers should obtain, free of cost, data about the audiences of their content and services. The obligations imposed under this Regulation are without prejudice to audiences’ right to protection of personal data as provided by Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights read in conjunction with Regulation 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation) as well as any obligations that apply to providers of audience measurement services under Regulation 2019/1150 or Regulation (EU) 2022/XX1925 [Digital Markets Act], including those concerning ranking or self- preferencing.
Amendment 379 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) Codes of conduct, drawn up either by the providers of audience measurement systems or by organisations or associations representing them, cantogether with media service providers, their representative organisations and any other interested parties contribute to the effective application of this Regulation and should, therefore, be encouraged. Self- regulation has already been used to foster high quality standards in the area of audience measurement. Its further development could be seen as an effective tool for the industry with the support of national regulatory authorities or bodies to agree on the practical solutions needed for ensuring compliance of audience measurement systems and their methodologies with the principles of transparency, impartiality, inclusiveness, proportionality, non- discrimination, comparability and verifiability. When drawing up such codes of conduct, in consultation with all relevant stakeholders and notably media service providers, account could be taken in particular of the increasing digitalisation of the media sector and the objective of achieving a level playing field among media market players.
Amendment 387 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that the financial, human and technical resources of the national regulatory authorities or bodies havare adequate financial, human and technical resourcly and sufficiently sized and increased to allow the national regulatory authorities or bodies to carry out their new tasks under this Regulationconferred on them by this Regulation. The organisational and functional autonomy of the national regulatory authorities or bodies shall be guaranteed.
Amendment 387 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) detain, sanction, intercept, subject to surveillance or search and seizure, or inspect media service providers or, if applicable, their family members, their employees or their family members, or their corporate and private premises, on the ground that they refuse to disclose information on their sources, unless this is justified by an overriding requirement in the public interest, in accordance with Article 52(1) of the Charter and in compliance with other Union law;
Amendment 389 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Within one year after the entry into application of this Regulation pursuant to Article 28(2), the Commission shall assess the implementation of this Article. To this end, Members States shall send all relevant information to the Commission upon its request.
Amendment 395 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
The Board shall act in full independence when performing its tasks or exercising its powers. In particular, the Board shall, in the performance of its tasks or the exercise of its powers, neither seek nor take instructions from any government, national or European institution, person or body. This shall not affect the competences of the Commission, pursuant to Article 17 of the Treaty on European Union, or the national regulatory authorities or bodies in conformity with this Regulation.
Amendment 397 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) deploy spyware in any device or machine used by media service providers or, if applicable, their family members, or their employees for their family members, purpose of obteining information on the sources of media service providers or their employees unless (i) the deployment is justified, on a case-by-case basis, on grounds of national security and is in compliance with Article 52(1) of the Charter and other Union law or the deployment occurs in serious crimes investigations of one of the aforementioned persons, it is, provided for under national law and is in compliance with Article 52(1) of the Charter and other Union law, and measures adopted pursuant to sub-paragraph (b) would be inadequate and insufficient to obtain the information sought4, paragraph 2 of the TUE as well as with Article 52(1) of the Charter, and (ii) occurs in investigations of serious crimes.
Amendment 398 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall be composed of high-level representatives of national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 401 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. The Board shall be represented by its Chair. The Board shall elect a Chair from amongst its members. The Board shall also elect a Steering Group from amongst its members. The Steering Group shall consist of a Chair, a Vice-Chair and 3 other members, including the outgoing Chair. The Chair and the other members of the Steering Group shall be elected by a two-thirds majority of ithe Board’s members with voting rights. The term of office of the Chair shall be two yearsof one year, renewable once. The Board’s Rules of procedure shall specify the roles, the tasks and the procedures for the appointment of the members of the Steering Group.
Amendment 405 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall designate a representative to the Board. The representative of the Commission shall participate in allthe activities and meetings of the Board, without voting rights. The Chair of the Board shall keep the Commission informed about the ongoing and planned activities of the Board. The Board shall consultseek the views of the Commission, in preparation of its work programme and main deliverables. The Board may seek the views of other interested parties.
Amendment 405 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Amendment 413 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6
Article 10 – paragraph 6
6. The Board, ion agreement with the Commission case-by-case basis, may invite experts and observers to attend its meetings.
Amendment 413 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Member States shall ensure that media service providers or, if applicable, their family members, or their employees have an effective remedy in the event of a breach of the rights conferred by this regulation
Amendment 415 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. The Board, in consultation with the Commission, may designate permanent observers from amongst national regulatory authorities with competence in the media field, coming from non-EU countries which have entered into agreements with the Union to that effect. The observers shall not have voting rights.
Amendment 416 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 8
Article 10 – paragraph 8
8. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights, in agreementconsultation with the Commission.
Amendment 421 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. PMember States shall ensure in their national legal fraework and conduct that public service media providers shall provide indipendetely and in an impartial manner a plurality of information and opinions to their audiences, in accordance with their public service missionremit.
Amendment 422 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – title
Article 11 – title
Amendment 426 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall have a secretariat, which shall be provided by the Commissionbe supported by an independent bureau.
Amendment 427 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
(1) The Bureau of the European Board for Media Services (‘Bureau’) is hereby established as a body with legal personality.
Amendment 429 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. The main task of the secretariatBureau shall be to contribute to the execution of the tasks of the Board laid down in this Regulation and in Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 431 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. The secretariatBureau shall also provide administrative and organisational support to the activities of the Board. The secretariat shall also assist the Board in carrying out its tasks.
Amendment 436 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) advise the Commission, on the Board’s own initiative or where requested by ithe Commission, on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent application of this Regulation and implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU as well as all on other matters related to media services within its competence. Where the Commission requests advice or opinions from the Board, it may indicate a time limit, taking into account the urgency of the matter;
Amendment 438 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that public service media providers have adequate and stable financial resources for the fulfilment of their public service mission. Those resourcesremit and to meet the objectives therein. Those resources and the process by which they are allocated shall be such that editorial independence is safeguarded.
Amendment 444 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
(e) in agreement with the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:
Amendment 450 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – point i
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – point i
(i) requests for cooperation and(exchange of information and/or mutual assistance) between national regulatory authorities or bodies, in accordance with Article 13(7) of this Regulation;
Amendment 451 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
(f) on its own initiative or upon request of the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:
Amendment 460 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14
(14) ‘audience measurement’ means the activity of collecting, interpreting or otherwise processing data about the number and characteristics of users of media content and services for the purposes of decisions regarding advertising allocation or prices or the related planning, production or distribution of content;
Amendment 464 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
(ma) In so far as necessary in order to achieve the objectives set out in this Regulation and carry out its tasks, and without prejudice to the competences of the Member States and the institutions of the Union, the Board, in consultation with the Commission, may cooperate with competent Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory groups, with competent authorities of third countries and with international organisations. To that end, the Board may, subject to prior approval by the Commission, establish working arrangements.
Amendment 469 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. A national regulatory authority or body may request (‘requesting authority’) cooperation (exchange of information and/or mutual assistance) at any time from one or more national regulatory authorities or bodies (‘requested authorities’) for the purposes of exchange of information or taking measures relevant for the consistent and effective application of this Regulation or the national measures implementing Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 470 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Requests for cooperation (exchange of information and/or or mutual assistance), including accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, shall contain all the necessary information, including the purpose of and reasons for it, as specified in the Board’s Rules of procedure.
Amendment 471 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the request was not duly justified and proportionate.
Amendment 473 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6
Article 13 – paragraph 6
6. The requested authority shall do its utmost to address and reply to the request without undue delay. The requested authority shall provide intermediary results within the period of 14 calendar days from the receipt of the request, with subsequent regular updates on the progress of execuFurther details on the procedure of the structured cooperation, including the rights and obligations of the request. In case of requests for accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, the requested authority shall address and reply to the request within 14 calendar daysparties as well as the deadlines to be respected, shall be defined in the Board’s rules of procedure.
Amendment 474 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 7
Article 13 – paragraph 7
7. Where the requesting authority does not consider the measures taken by the requested authority to be sufficient to address and reply to its request, it shall inform the requested authority without undue delay, explaining the reasons for its position. If the requested authority does not agree with that position, or if the requested authority’s reaction is missing, either authority may refer the matter to the Board. Within 14 calendar daysa time period to be defined in the Boards' rules of procedure from the receipt of that referral, the Board shall issue, in agreementconsultation with the Commission where deemed relevant, an opinion on the matter, including recommended actions. The requested authority shall do its outmost to take into account the opinion of the Board.
Amendment 479 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay and within 30 calendar daysa maximum time period to be defined in the Boards’ rules of procedure, inform the requesting national authority or body about the actions taken or planned pursuant to paragraph 1, or justify the reasons for which action was not taken.
Amendment 480 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. In the event of a disagreement between the requesting national authority or body and the requested authority or body regarding actions taken or planned, or a refusal to take action, pursuant to paragraph 1, either authority or body may refer the matter to the Board for mediation in view of finding an amicable solution.
Amendment 481 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4
Article 14 – paragraph 4
4. If no amicable solution has been found following mediation by the Board, the requesting national authority or body or the requested national authority or body may request the Board to issue an opinion on the matter. In its opinion the Board shall assess whether the requested authority or body has complied with a request referred to in paragraph 1. If the Board considers that the requested authority has not complied with such a request, but shall do so, the Board shall recommend actions to comply with the request. The Board shall issue its opinion, in agreementconsultation with the Commission, where deemed relevant, without undue delay.
Amendment 486 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5
Article 14 – paragraph 5
5. The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay and within 30 calendar days at the latesta maximum time period to be defined in the Board’s rules of procedure from the receipt of the opinion referred to in paragraph 4, inform the Board, the Commission and the requesting authority or body of the actions taken or planned in relation to the opinion.
Amendment 490 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission, assisted by the Board, may issue an opinion on any matter related to the application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU. The Board shall assist the Commission in this regard, where requested.
Amendment 498 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – title
Article 16 – title
Coordination of measures concerning media service providers establishedoriginating from outside the Union
Amendment 500 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall coordinate measures byfacilitate the cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies related to the dissemination of or access to media services provided by media service providers establishedoriginating from outside the Union that target, irrespective of the means of distribution or access, target or reach audiences in the Union where, inter alia in view of the nature of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, such media services prejudice or present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and de, including the safeguarding of national security and defence, or public health, or where their programs include incitement to violence or hatred or public provocation to commit a terrorist offence.
Amendment 502 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Regarding media services provided by media service providers established outside of the Union, at the request of a minimum number of Board members to be defined in the Board’s Rules of procedure, the Board may issue an opinion on the coordination of measures.
Amendment 503 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Amendment 504 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. The coordination of measures and the opinions of the Board shall be without prejudice to the competence and responsibility of the Member States to assess the risks and threats to their public security and national defence, which may be posed by media services originating from outside the EU.
Amendment 506 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The Board, in agreement with the Commission, may issue opinions on appropriate national measures under paragraph 1. All competent national authorities, including the national regulatory authorities or bodies, shall do their utmost to take into account the opinions of the Board issued according to paragraph 1a and 1b. The competent authority or body shall provide reasons for any refusal to undertake the recommended actions.
Amendment 511 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. When taking a decision regarding the jurisdiction (inter alia through licensing or registration) over an audiovisual media service provider originating from outside of the Union, the competent regulatory authority or body shall, without prejudice to the national legislation, do its utmost to take into account a set of basic principle-based criteria concerning the service and the service provider to be developed by the Board.
Amendment 514 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Member States shall ensure that, when relevant, national regulatory authorities or bodies, when deciding to take action against a media service provider originating from outside of the Union, have the legal basis to take into account: (i) a decision taken against that provider by a national regulatory authority or body from another Member State, and/or (ii) an opinion of the Board relating to that provider and taken on the grounds of this Article.
Amendment 522 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. PMember States shall ensure in their national legal framework and conduct that public service media providers shall provide indipendently and in an impartial manner a plurality of information and opinions to their audiences, in accordance with their public service missionremit.
Amendment 528 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that the financial, human and technical resources of the national regulatory authorities or bodies havare adequate financial, human and technical resourcly and sufficiently sized and increased to allow the national regulatory authorities or bodies to carry out their new tasks under this Regulationconferred on them by this Regulation. The organizational and functional autonomy of the national regulatory authorities or bodies shall be guaranteed.
Amendment 530 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) it is subject to regulatory requirements for the exercise of editorial responsibility in one or more Member States, or adheres to a co-regulatory or self-regulatory mechanism governing editorial standards, widely recognised and accepted in the relevant media sector in one or more Member States. Member States shall ensure that media service providers’ self-declarations can be easily verified. Member States shall also provide an effective and expeditious complaint and redress independent mechanism.
Amendment 532 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) it is included in publicly available registries, databases or lists kept by a public authority or by the self- or co- regulatory body in charge of monitoring the sector. In case such tools do not exist, the recipient must declare that it is subject to the supervision of an independent national regulatory authority or body and/or to a self- or co-regulatory mechanism, of which name and contact details shall be stated: in this latter case, the provider of the very large online platform or the provider of the very large search engine shall ask the respective supervising or monitoring entity to confirm the information given by the declarant. The declaration of a media service provider shall only be deemed valid if the supervising or monitoring entities exist and can confirm the adherence to the regulations and/or codes of practice by the declarant.
Amendment 535 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Within one year after the entry into application of this Regulation pursuant to Article 28(2), the Commission shall assess the implementation of this Article. To this end, Member States shall send all relevant information to the Commission upon its request.
Amendment 536 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. A media service provider whose declaration to a provider of very large online platform or search engine pursuant to paragraph 1 has been rejected or invalidated pursuant to paragraph 1b, shall have the possibility to appeal against this decision. An external complaint mechanism shall be guaranteed in each Member State and handled by one or several independent authorities or bodies.
Amendment 537 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. In order to prevent the misuse of the declaration system, a very large online platform or search engines may invalidate the declaration of a media service provider. Such invalidation shall be executed if the media service provider has repeatedly violated the platform’s terms and conditions or if its content has been frequently suspended or restricted on the basis of a breach of the terms and conditions following the procedure referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article. The provider of a very large online platform or search engine shall inform the supervising or regulatory entity about the invalidation of the declaration.
Amendment 539 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that public service media providers have adequate and stable financial resources for the fulfilment of their public service mission. Those resourcesremit and to meet the objectives therein. Those resources and the process by which they are allocated shall be such that editorial independence is safeguarded.
Amendment 542 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Where a provider of very large online platform decides to suspendithout prejudice to its obligations pursuant to Articles 34 and 35 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, where a provider of very large online platform or very large search engine decides to suspend or otherwise restrict the provision of its online intermediation services in relation to any content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, on the grounds that such content is incompatible with its terms and conditions, without that content contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act], it shall take all possible measures, to the extent consistent with their obligations under Union law, including Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act], to communicate to the media service provider concerned the statement of reasons accompanying that decision, as required by Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150, prior to the suspension taking effectit shall take all possible measures : (a) to communicate to the media service provider concerned the statement of reasons accompanying that decision, as required by Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and Article 17(3) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, (b) to provide the media service provider with 24 hours to reply to the statement of reasons. The content shall not be suspended or otherwise restricted during the 24 hours period referred to in point (b), unless the content infringes national law of the country of origin and/or EU law.
Amendment 546 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Where a provider of very large online platform decides to restrict and or to suspend the provision of its online intermediation services in relation to content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, on the grounds that such content is incompatible with its terms and conditions, without that content contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act], it shall take all possible measures, to the extent consistent with their obligations under Union law, including Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act], to communicate to the media service provider concerned the statement of reasons accompanying that decision, as required by Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150, prior to the suspension taking effect.
Amendment 549 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
The Board shall act in full independence when performing its tasks or exercising its powers. In particular, the Board shall, in the performance of its tasks or the exercise of its powers, neither seek nor take instructions from any government, national or European institution, person or body. This shall not affect the competences of the Commission, pursuant to article 17 of the Treaty of the European Union, or the national regulatory authorities or bodies in conformity with this Regulation.
Amendment 556 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall be composed of high-level representatives of national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 557 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4
Article 17 – paragraph 4
4. Where a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 considers that a provider of very large online platform frequently restricts or suspends the provision of its services in relation to content provided by the media service provider without sufficient grounds, the provider of very large online platform shall engage in a meaningful and effective dialogue with the media service provider, upon its request, in good faith with a view to finding an amicable solution for terminating unjustified restrictions or suspensions and avoiding them in the future. The media service provider may notify the outcome of such exchanges to the Board. s have always the right to appeal to the court or to the competent National Authority, through the effective and expeditious complaint and redress independent mechanism provided for in paragraph 2. The media service provider may notify the outcome of such exchanges to the Board. Very large online platform shall notify to the Board the outcome of such dialogue and/or the outcome of such complaint and redress independent mechanism.
Amendment 557 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. The Board shall be represented by its Chair. The Board shall elect a Chair from amongst its members. The Board shall also elect a Steering Group from amongst its members. The Steering Group shall consist of a Chair, a Vice-Chair and 3 other members, including the outgoing Chair. The Chair and the other members of the Steering Group shall be elected by a two-thirds majority of ithe Board's members with voting rights. The term of office of the Chair shall be two years. of one year, renewable once. The Board's Rules of procedure shall specify the roles, the tasks and the procedures for the appointment of the members of the Steering group.
Amendment 564 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall designate a representative to the Board. The representative of the Commission shall participate in allthe activities and meetings of the Board, without voting rights. The Chair of the Board shall keep the Commission informed about the ongoing and planned activities of the Board. The Board shall consultseek the view of the Commission in preparation of its work programme and main deliverables. The Board may seek the views of other interested parties.
Amendment 571 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6
Article 10 – paragraph 6
6. The Board, on case by case basis, in agreement with the Commission, may invite experts and observers to attend its meetings.
Amendment 575 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 6
Article 17 – paragraph 6
6. With a view to facilitating the consistent and effective implementation of this Article, the Commission mayshall adopt an implementing act that issues guidelines to establish the form and details of the declaration set out in paragraph 1., including modalities of involvement of relevant civil society organisations in the review of the declarations, in consultation with the relevant independent authority or body of the country of establishment, where relevant, and address any potential abuse of the functionality
Amendment 577 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. The board, in consultation with the Commission, may designate permanent observers from amongst national regulatory authorities with competence in the media field, coming from non-EU countries which have entered into agreements with the Union to that effect. The observers shall not have voting rights.
Amendment 583 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 8
Article 10 – paragraph 8
8. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights, in agreementconsultation with the Commission.
Amendment 586 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – title
Article 11 – title
Amendment 594 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall have a secretariat, which shall be provided by the Commissionbe supported by an indipendent bureau.
Amendment 595 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Bureau of the European Board for Media Services ('Bureau') is hereby established as a body with legal personality.
Amendment 598 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. The main task of the secretariatBureau shall be to contribute to the execution of the tasks of the Board laid down in this Regulation and in Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 599 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. The secretariatBureau shall also provide administrative and organisational support to the activities of the Board. The secretariat shall also assist the Board in carrying out its tasks.
Amendment 607 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) advise the Commission, on the Board's own initiative or where requested by ithe Commission, on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent application of this Regulation and implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU as well as all on other matters related to media services within its competence. Where the Commission requests advice or opinions from the Board, it may indicate a time limit, taking into account the urgency of the matter;
Amendment 620 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
(e) in agreement with the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:
Amendment 625 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – point i
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – point i
(i) requests for cooperation (exchange of information and/or and mutual assistance) between national regulatory authorities or bodies, in accordance with Article 13(7) of this Regulation;
Amendment 631 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
(f) on its own initiative or upon request of the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:
Amendment 653 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that the financial, human and technical resources of the national regulatory authorities or bodies havare adequate financial, human and technical resourcly and sufficiently sized and increased to allow the national regulatory authorities or bodies to carry out their new tasks under this Regulationconferred on them by this Regulation. The organisational and functional autonomy of the national regulatory authorities or bodies shall be guaranteed.
Amendment 658 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Within one year after the entry into application of this Regulation pursuant to Article 28(2), the Commission shall assess the implementation of this Article. To this end, Members States shall send all relevant information to the Commission upon its request.
Amendment 660 #
(ma) In so far as necessary in order to achieve the objectives set out in this Regulation and carry out its tasks, and without prejudice to the competences of the Member States and the institutions of the Union, the Board, in consultation with the Commission, may cooperate with competent Union bodies, officers, agencies and advisory groups, with competent authorities of third countries and with international organizations. Ti that end, the Board may, subject to prior approval by the Commission, establish working arrangements.
Amendment 676 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
The Board shall act in full independence when performing its tasks or exercising its powers. In particular, the Board shall, in the performance of its tasks or the exercise of its powers, neither seek nor take instructions from any government, national or European institution, person or body. This shall not affect the competences of the Commission, pursuant to article 17 of the Treaty on European Union, or the national regulatory authorities or bodies in conformity with this Regulation.
Amendment 676 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. A national regulatory authority or body may request (‘requesting authority’) cooperation (exchange of information and/or or mutual assistance) at any time from one or more national regulatory authorities or bodies (‘requested authorities’) for the purposes of exchange of information or taking measures relevant for the consistent and effective application of this Regulation or the national measures implementing Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 679 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Requests for cooperation (exchange of information and/or mutual assistance), including accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, shall contain all the necessary information, including the purpose of and reasons for it, as specified in the Board's Rules of procedure.
Amendment 682 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the request was not duly justified and proportionate.
Amendment 684 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall be composed of high-level representatives of national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 685 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6
Article 13 – paragraph 6
6. The requested authority shall do its utmost to address and reply to the request without undue delay. The requested authority shall provide intermediary results within the period of 14 calendar days from the receipt of the request, with subsequent regular updates on the progress of execuFurther details on the procedure of the structured cooperation, including the rights and obligations of the request. In case of requests for accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, the requested authority shall address and reply to the request within 14 calendar dayparties as well as the deadlines to be respected, shall be defined in the Board's rules of procedures.
Amendment 686 #
7. Where the requesting authority does not consider the measures taken by the requested authority to be sufficient to address and reply to its request, it shall inform the requested authority without undue delay, explaining the reasons for its position. If the requested authority does not agree with that position, or if the requested authority’s reaction is missing, either authority may refer the matter to the Board. Within 14 calendar daya time period to be defined in the Board's rules of procedures from the receipt of that referral, the Board shall issue, in agreementconsultation with the Commission where deemed relevant, an opinion on the matter, including recommended actions. The requested authority shall do its outmost to take into account the opinion of the Board.
Amendment 689 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. The Board shall be represented by its Chair. The Board shall elect a Chair from amongst its members. The Board shall also elect a Steering Group from amongst its members. The Steering Group shall consist of a Chair, a Vice-Chair and 3 other members, including the outgoing Chair. The Chair and the other members of the Steering Group shall be elected by a two-thirds majority of ithe Board’s members with voting rights. The term of office of the Chair shall be two yearsof one year, renewable once. The Board’s Rules of procedure shall specify the roles, the tasks and the procedures for the appointment of the members of the Steering Group.
Amendment 693 #
2. The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay and within 30 calendar daysa maxumum time period to be defined in the Board's rules of procedure, inform the requesting national authority or body about the actions taken or planned pursuant to paragraph 1, or justify the reasons for which action was not taken.
Amendment 694 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. In the event of a disagreement between the requesting national authority or body and the requested authority or body regarding actions taken or planned, or a refusal to take action, pursuant to paragraph 1, either authority or body may refer the matter to the Board for mediation in view of finding an amicable solution.
Amendment 697 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall designate a representative to the Board. The representative of the Commission shall participate in allthe activities and meetings of the Board, without voting rights. The Chair of the Board shall keep the Commission informed about the ongoing and planned activities of the Board. The Board shall consultseek the views of the Commission, in preparation of its work programme and main deliverables. The Board may seek the views of other interested parties.
Amendment 697 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4
Article 14 – paragraph 4
4. If no amicable solution has been found following mediation by the Board, the requesting national authority or body or the requested national authority or body may request the Board to issue an opinion on the matter. In its opinion the Board shall assess whether the requested authority or body has complied with a request referred to in paragraph 1. If the Board considers that the requested authority has not complied with such a request, but shall do so, the Board shall recommend actions to comply with the request. The Board shall issue its opinion, in agreementconsultation with the Commission, where deemed relevant, without undue delay.
Amendment 703 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5
Article 14 – paragraph 5
5. The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay and within 30 calendar days at the latesta maximum time period to be defined in the Board's rules of procedure from the receipt of the opinion referred to in paragraph 4, inform the Board, the Commission and the requesting authority or body of the actions taken or planned in relation to the opinion.
Amendment 710 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6
Article 10 – paragraph 6
6. The Board, ion agreement with the Commission case-by-case basis, may invite experts and observers to attend its meetings.
Amendment 711 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission, assisted by the Board, may issue an opinion on any matter related to the application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU. The Board shall assist the Commission in this regard, where requested.
Amendment 715 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – title
Article 16 – title
Coordination of measures concerning media service providers establishedoriginating from outside the Union
Amendment 718 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. The Board, in consultation with the Commission, may designate permanent observers from amongst national regulatory authorities with competence in the media field, coming from non-EU countries which have entered into agreements with the Union to that effect. The observers shall not have voting rights.
Amendment 720 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall coordinate measures byfacilitate the cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies related to the dissemination of or access to media services provided by media service providers establishedoriginating from outside the Union that target, irrespective of the means of distribution or access, target or reach audiences in the Union where, inter alia in view of the nature of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, such media services prejudice or present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and de, including the safeguarding of national security and defence, or public health, or where their programs include incitement to violence or hatred or public provocation to commit a terrorist offence.
Amendment 725 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Regarding media services provided by media service providers established oitside of the Union, at the request of a minimum number of Board members to be defined in the Board's Rules of procedure, the Board may issue an opinion on the coordination of measures.
Amendment 726 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Without prejudice to the possibility of a direct request from the national regulatory authority or body of a country of destination to the competent national regulatory authority or body pursuant to art. 13(2) of this Regulation, where an audiovisual media service provider originating from outside the Union falls under the territorial jurisdiction of an EU Member State according to Article 2 of Directive 2010/13/EU and without prejudice to the procedures foreseen under article 3 of this Directive, a national regulatory authority or body of a country of destination may request the Board to issue an opinion inviting the authorities or bodies of the competent Member State to take appropriate measures against the media service provider. The requests from the national regulatory authority or body of a country of destination to the competent national regulatory authority or body which are addressed to the Board shall contain all the necessary information, including at least the original decision of the national regulatory authority or body of a country of destination accompanied by a translation to a commonly agreed language, as well as the necessary evidence underlying that decision such as recordings. The involvement of the Board shall be triggered following a request of a minimum number of Board members to be defined in the Board's Rules of procedure together with the relevant processes. When preparing its opinion, the Board shall confirm that the following conditions are met: (i) there is substantiated evidence that the audiovisual media service is prejudicing or presenting a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security, including the safeguarding of national security and defence, public health or the content of the audiovisual media service provider manifestly, seriously and gravely infringes article 6(1) of Directive 2010/13/EU. (ii) the audiovisual media service is prejudicing or presenting a serious and grave risk of prejudice for several Member States or the Union.
Amendment 727 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. The coordination of measures and opinions of the Board shall be without prejudice to the competence and responsibility of the Member States to assess the risks and threats to their public security and national defence; which may be posed by media services originating from outside the EU.
Amendment 729 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 8
Article 10 – paragraph 8
8. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights, in agreementconsultation with the Commission.
Amendment 731 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The Board, in agreement with the Commission, may issue opinions on appropriate national measures under paragraph 1. All competent national authorities, including the national regulatory authorities or bodies, shall do their utmost to take into account the opinions of the Board issued according to paragraph 1a and 1b. The competent authority or body shall provide reasons for any refusal to undertake the recommended actions.
Amendment 732 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. When taking a decision regarding the jurisdiction (inter alia through licensing or registration) over and audiovisual media service provider originating from outside of the Union, the competent regulatory authority or body shall, without prejudice to the national legislation, do its utmost to take into account a set of basic principle-based criteria concerning the service and the service provider to be developed by the Board.
Amendment 733 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – title
Article 11 – title
Amendment 736 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Amendment 742 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall have a secretariat, which shall be provided by the Commissionbe supported by an independent bureau.
Amendment 744 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point 1 (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point 1 (new)
(1) The Bureau of the European Board for Media Services (‘Bureau’) is hereby established as a body with legal personality.
Amendment 744 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) In order to prevent the misuse of the declaration system, a very large online platform or search engines may invalidate the declaration of a media service provider. Such invalidation shall be executed if the media service provider has repeatedly violated the platform's terms and conditions or if its content has been frequently suspended or restricted on the basis of a breach of the terms and conditions following the procedure referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article. The provider of a very large online platform or search engine shall inform the supervising or regulatory entity about the invalidation of the declaration.
Amendment 746 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) it is subject to regulatory requirements for the exercise of editorial responsibility in one or more Member States, or adheres to a co-regulatory or self-regulatory mechanism governing editorial standards, widely recognised and accepted in the relevant media sector in one or more Member States. Member States shall ensure that media service providers self-declarations can be easily verified. Member States shall also provide an effective and expeditious complaint and redress independent mechanism.
Amendment 747 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) it is included in publicly available registries, databases or lists kept by a public authority or by the self- or co- regulatory body in charge of monitoring the sector. In case such tools do not exist, the recipient must declare that it is subject to the supervision of an independent national regulatory authority or body and/or to a self- or co-regulatory mechanism, of which name and contact details shall be stated: in this latter case, the provider of the very large online platform or the provider of the very large search engine shall ask the respective supervising or monitoring entity to confirm the information given by the declaration. The declaration of a media service provider shall only be deemed valid if the supervising or monitoring entities exist and can confirm the adherence to the regulations and/or codes of practice by the declarant.
Amendment 748 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. A media service provider whose declaration to a provider of very large online platform or search engine pursuant to paragraph 1 has been rejected or invalidated pursuant to paragraph 1b, shall have the possibility to appeal against this decision. An external complaint mechanism shall be guaranteed in each Member State and handled by one or several independent authorities or bodies.
Amendment 752 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. The main task of the secretariatBureau shall be to contribute to the execution of the tasks of the Board laid down in this Regulation and in Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 753 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. The secretariatBureau shall also provide administrative and organisational support to the activities of the Board. The secretariat shall also assist the Board in carrying out its tasks.
Amendment 757 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Where a provider of very large online platform decides to suspendithout prejudice to its obligations pursuant to Articles 34 and 35 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, where a provider of very large online platform or a very large search engine decides to suspend or otherwise restrict the provision of its online intermediation services in relation to any content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, on the grounds that such content is incompatible with its terms and conditions, without that content contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act], it shall take all possible measures, to the extent consistent with their obligations under Union law, including Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act],it shall take all possible measures: a) to communicate to the media service provider concerned the statement of reasons accompanying that decision, as required by Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150, prior to the suspension taking effect and Article 17(3) of 32/34\000000EN.doc EN Regulation (EU) 2022/2065; b) to provide the media service provider with 24 hours to reply to the statement of reasons. The content shall not be suspended or otherwise restricted during 24 hours period referred to in point (b), unless the content infringes national law of the country of origin and/or EU law.
Amendment 762 #
3. Providers of very large online platforms shall take all the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that complaints under Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and/or Article 20 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 [Digital Services Act] by media service providers that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article are processed and decided upon with priority and no later than 24 hours after submission of the complaint. If the very large online platform fails to adhere to this time limit, it shall reinstate the content or service and without undue delay.
Amendment 768 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4
Article 17 – paragraph 4
4. Where a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 considers that a provider of very large online platform frequently restricts or suspends the provision of its services in relation to content or services provided by the media service provider without sufficient grounds, the provider of very large online platform shall engage in a meaningful and effective dialogue with the media service provider, upon its request, in good faith with a view to finding an amicable solution for terminating unjustified restrictions or suspensions and avoiding them in the future. The media service provider may notify the outcome of such exchanges to the Boardhave always the right to appeal to the court or to the competent National Authority, through the effective and expeditious complaint and redress independent mechanism provided for paragraph 2. The media service provider may notify the outcome of such exchanges to the Board. Very large online platform shall notify the Board the outcome of such dialogue and/or the outcome of such complaint and redress independent mechanism. If no amicable solution is found, the media service provider may lodge a complaint before a certified out- of-court dispute settlement body in accordance with Article 21 of Regulation 2022/2065 without prejudice and in addition to its right to effective judicial protection.
Amendment 777 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) advise the Commission, on the Board’s own initiative or where requested by ithe Commission, on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent application of this Regulation and implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU as well as all on other matters related to media services within its competence. Where the Commission requests advice or opinions from the Board, it may indicate a time limit, taking into account the urgency of the matter;
Amendment 780 #
(a) the number of instances where they imposed any restriction or suspension on the grounds that the content or service provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article is incompatible with their terms and conditions; and
Amendment 784 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 6
Article 17 – paragraph 6
6. With a view to facilitating the consistent and effective implementation of this Article, the Commission mayshall adopt an implementing act that issues guidelines to establish the form and details of the declaration set out in paragraph 1, including modalities of involvement of relevant civil society organizations in the review of the declarations, in consultation with the relevant independent authority or body of the country of establishment, where relevant, and address any potential abuse of the functionality.
Amendment 789 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
(e) in agreement with the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:
Amendment 797 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. Users shall have a right to easily change the default settings of any device or user interface and remote control controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services in order to customise the audiovisual media offer according to their interests or preferences in compliance with the law. This provision shall not affect national measures implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 798 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – point i
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – point i
(i) requests for cooperation and(exchange of information and/or mutual assistance) between national regulatory authorities or bodies, in accordance with Article 13(7) of this Regulation;
Amendment 798 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2
Article 19 – paragraph 2
2. When placing the devices, remote controls and user interfaces referred to in paragraph 1 on the market, manufacturers and developers shall ensure that they include a functionality enabling users to freely and easily change the default settings controlling or managing access to and use of the audiovisual media services offered.
Amendment 804 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
(f) on its own initiative or upon request of the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:
Amendment 846 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
(ma) In so far as necessary in order to achieve the objectives set out in this Regulation and carry out its tasks, and without prejudice to the competences of the Member States and the institutions of the Union, the Board, in consultation with the Commission, may cooperate with competent Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory groups, with competent authorities of third countries and with international organisations. To that end, the Board may, subject to prior approval by the Commission, establish working arrangements.
Amendment 864 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. A national regulatory authority or body may request (‘requesting authority’) cooperation (exchange of information and/or mutual assistance) at any time from one or more national regulatory authorities or bodies (‘requested authorities’) for the purposes of exchange of information or taking measures relevant for the consistent and effective application of this Regulation or the national measures implementing Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 868 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. Audience measurement systems and methodologies shall comply with principles of transparency, impartiality, inclusiveness, proportionality, non- discrimination, comparability and verifiability.
Amendment 869 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Requests for cooperation (exchange of information and/or or mutual assistance), including accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, shall contain all the necessary information, including the purpose of and reasons for it, as specified in the Board’s Rules of procedure.
Amendment 870 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to the protection of undertakings’ businesstrade secrets, providers of proprietary audience measurement systems shall provide, without undue delay and free of costs, to media service providers and advertisers, as well as to third parties authorised by media service providers and advertisers, accurate, detailed, comprehensive, intelligible and up-to-date information on the methodology used by their audience measurement systems. They shall provide free of charge to each media service provider the audience measurements relating to its content and services. This provision shall not affect the Union’s data protection and privacy rules.
Amendment 874 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the request was not duly justified and proportionate.
Amendment 874 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Article 23 – paragraph 3
3. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall encourage the drawing up of codes of conduct by providers of audience measurement systems, together with media service providers, their representative organisations and any other interested parties shall draw up codes of conduct, with the support of national regulatory authorities or bodies, that are intended to contribute to compliance with the principles referred to in paragraph 1, including by promoting independent and transparent audits.
Amendment 879 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 4
Article 23 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission, assisted by the Board, may issue guidelines on the practical application of paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of this Article, considering national codes of conduct.
Amendment 880 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6
Article 13 – paragraph 6
6. The requested authority shall do its utmost to address and reply to the request without undue delay. The requested authority shall provide intermediary results within the period of 14 calendar days from the receipt of the request, with subsequent regular updates on the progress of execuFurther details on the procedure of the structured cooperation, including the rights and obligations of the request. In case of requests for accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, the requested authority shall address and reply to the request within 14 calendar daysparties as well as the deadlines to be respected, shall be defined in the Board’s rules of procedure.
Amendment 884 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5
Article 23 – paragraph 5
5. The Board shall foster the exchange of best practices related to the deployment of audience measurement systems through a regular dialogue between representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies, representatives of providers of audience measurement system, media service providers and other interested parties.
Amendment 886 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 7
Article 13 – paragraph 7
7. Where the requesting authority does not consider the measures taken by the requested authority to be sufficient to address and reply to its request, it shall inform the requested authority without undue delay, explaining the reasons for its position. If the requested authority does not agree with that position, or if the requested authority’s reaction is missing, either authority may refer the matter to the Board. Within 14 calendar daysa time period to be defined in the Boards' rules of procedure from the receipt of that referral, the Board shall issue, in agreementconsultation with the Commission where deemed relevant, an opinion on the matter, including recommended actions. The requested authority shall do its outmost to take into account the opinion of the Board.
Amendment 896 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay and within 30 calendar daysa maximum time period to be defined in the Boards’ rules of procedure, inform the requesting national authority or body about the actions taken or planned pursuant to paragraph 1, or justify the reasons for which action was not taken.
Amendment 901 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. In the event of a disagreement between the requesting national authority or body and the requested authority or body regarding actions taken or planned, or a refusal to take action, pursuant to paragraph 1, either authority or body may refer the matter to the Board for mediation in view of finding an amicable solution.
Amendment 903 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4
Article 14 – paragraph 4
4. If no amicable solution has been found following mediation by the Board, the requesting national authority or body or the requested national authority or body may request the Board to issue an opinion on the matter. In its opinion the Board shall assess whether the requested authority or body has complied with a request referred to in paragraph 1. If the Board considers that the requested authority has not complied with such a request, but shall do so, the Board shall recommend actions to comply with the request. The Board shall issue its opinion, in agreementconsultation with the Commission, where deemed relevant, without undue delay.
Amendment 912 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5
Article 14 – paragraph 5
5. The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay and within 30 calendar days at the latesta maximum time period to be defined in the Board’s rules of procedure from the receipt of the opinion referred to in paragraph 4, inform the Board, the Commission and the requesting authority or body of the actions taken or planned in relation to the opinion.
Amendment 926 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission, assisted by the Board, may issue an opinion on any matter related to the application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU. The Board shall assist the Commission in this regard, where requested.
Amendment 937 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – title
Article 16 – title
Coordination of measures concerning media service providers establishedoriginating from outside the Union
Amendment 940 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall coordinate measures byfacilitate the cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies related to the dissemination of or access to media services provided by media service providers establishedoriginating from outside the Union that target, irrespective of the means of distribution or access, target or reach audiences in the Union where, inter alia in view of the nature of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, such media services prejudice or present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and de, including the safeguarding of national security and defence, or public health, or where their programs include incitement to violence or hatred or public provocation to commit a terrorist offence.
Amendment 946 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Regarding media services provided by media service providers established outside of the Union, at the request of a minimum number of Board members to be defined in the Board’s Rules of procedure, the Board may issue an opinion on the coordination of measures.
Amendment 948 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Without prejudice to the possibility of a direct request from the national regulatory authority or body of a country of destination to the competent national regulatory authority or body pursuant to art.13(2) of this Regulation, where an audiovisual media service provider originating from outside the Union falls under the territorial jurisdiction of an EU Member State according to Article 2 of Directive 2010/13/EU and without prejudice to the procedures foreseen under article 3 of this Directive, a national regulatory authority or body of a country of destination may request the Board to issue an opinion inviting the authorities or bodies of the competent Member State to take appropriate measures against the media service provider. The requests from the national regulatory authority or body of a country of destination to the competent the national regulatory authority or body which are adressed to the Board shall contain all the necessary information, including at least the original decision of the national regulatory authority or body of a country of destination accompanied by a translation to a commonly agreed language, as well as the necessary evidence underlying that decision such as recordings. The involvement of the Board shall be triggered following a request of a minimum number of Board members to be defined in the Board’s Rules of procedure together with the relevant processes. When preparing its opinion, the Board shall confirm that the following conditions are met: (i) there is substantiated evidence that the audiovisual media service is prejudicing or presenting a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security, including the safeguarding of national security and defence, public health or the content of the audiovisual media service provider manifestly, seriously and gravely infringes article 6(1) of Directive 2010/13/EU. (ii) the audiovisual media service is prejudicing or presenting a serious and grave risk of prejudice for several Member States or the Union.
Amendment 950 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. The coordination of measures and the opinions of the Board shall be without prejudice to the competence and responsibility of the Member States to assess the risks and threats to their public security and national defence, which may be posed by media services originating from outside the EU.
Amendment 954 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The Board, in agreement with the Commission, may issue opinions on appropriate national measures under paragraph 1. All competent national authorities, including the national regulatory authorities or bodies, shall do their utmost to take into account the opinions of the Board issued according to paragraph 1a and 1b. The competent authority or body shall provide reasons for any refusal to undertake the recommended actions.
Amendment 960 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. When taking a decision regarding the jurisdiction (inter alia through licensing or registration) over an audiovisual media service provider originating from outside of the Union, the competent regulatory authority or body shall, without prejudice to the national legislation, do its utmost to take into account a set of basic principle-based criteria concerning the service and the service provider to be developed by the Board.
Amendment 963 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Member States shall ensure that, when relevant, national regulatory authorities or bodies, when deciding to take action against a media service provider originating from outside of the Union, have the legal basis to take into account: (i) a decision taken against that provider by a national regulatory authority or body from another Member State, and/or (ii) an opinion of the Board relating to that provider and taken on the grounds of this article
Amendment 985 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) In order to prevent the misuse of the declaration system, a very large online platform or search engines may invalidate the declaration of a media service provider. Such invalidation shall be executed if the media service provider has repeatedly violated the platform’s terms and conditions or if its content has been frequently suspended or restricted on the basis of a breach of the terms and conditions following the procedure referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article. The provider of a very large online platform or search engine shall inform the supervising or regulatory entity about the invalidation of the declaration.
Amendment 989 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) it is subject to regulatory requirements for the exercise of editorial responsibility in one or more Member States, or adheres to a co-regulatory or self-regulatory mechanism governing editorial standards, widely recognised and accepted in the relevant media sector in one or more Member States. Member States shall ensure that media service providers self-declarations can be easily verified. Member States shall also provide an effective and expeditious complaint and redress independent mechanism.
Amendment 992 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) it is included in publicly available registries, databases or lists kept by a public authority or by the self- or co- regulatory body in charge of monitoring the sector. In case such tools do not exist, the recipient must declare that it is subject to the supervision of an independent national regulatory authority or body and/or to a self- or co-regulatory mechanism, of which name and contact details shall be stated: in this latter case, the provider of the very large online platform or the provider of the very large search engine shall ask the respective supervising or monitoring entity to confirm the information given by the declarant. The declaration of a media service provider shall only be deemed valid if the supervising or monitoring entities exist and can confirm the adherence to the regulations and/or codes of practice by the declarant.
Amendment 998 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. A media service provider whose declaration to a provider of very large online platform or search engine pursuant to paragraph 1 has been rejected or invalidated pursuant to paragraph 1b, shall have the possibility to appeal against this decision. An external complaint mechanism shall be guaranteed in each Member State and handled by one or several independent authorities or bodies.
Amendment 1009 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Where a provider of very large online platform decides to suspendithout prejudice to its obligations pursuant to Articles 34 and 35 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, where a provider of very large online platform or very large search engine decides to suspend or otherwise restrict the provision of its online intermediation services in relation to any content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, on the grounds that such content is incompatible with its terms and conditions, without that content contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act], it shall take all possible measures, to the extent consistent with their obligations under Union law, including Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act], to communicate to the media service provider concerned the statement of reasons accompanying that decision, as required by Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150, prior to the suspension taking effectit shall take all possible measures : a) to communicate to the media service provider concerned the statement of reasons accompanying that decision, as required by Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and Article 17(3) of 32/34 \000000EN.doc EN Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, b) to provide the media service provider with 24 hours to reply to the statement of reasons. The content shall not be suspended or otherwise restricted during the 24 hours period referred to in point (b), unless the content infringes national law of the country of origin and/or EU law.
Amendment 1014 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Where a provider of very large online platform decides to restrict and or to suspend the provision of its online intermediation services in relation to content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, on the grounds that such content is incompatible with its terms and conditions, without that content contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act], it shall take all possible measures, to the extent consistent with their obligations under Union law, including Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act], to communicate to the media service provider concerned the statement of reasons accompanying that decision, as required by Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150, prior to the suspension taking effect.
Amendment 1018 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. Providers of very large online platforms shall take all the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that complaints under Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and/or Article 20 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 [Digital Services Act] by media service providers that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article are processed and decided upon with priority and and no later than 24 hours after submission of the complaint. If the very large online platform fails to adhere to this time limit, it shall reinstate the content or service without undue delay.
Amendment 1027 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4
Article 17 – paragraph 4
4. Where a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 considers that a provider of very large online platform frequently restricts or suspends the provision of its services in relation to content or services provided by the media service provider without sufficient grounds, the provider of very large online platform shall engage in a meaningful and effective dialogue with the media service provider, upon its request, in good faith with a view to finding an amicable solution for terminating unjustified restrictions or suspensions and avoiding them in the future. The media service provider may notify the outcome of such exchanges to the Boards have always the right to appeal to the court or to the competent National Authority, through the effective and expeditious complaint and redress independent mechanism provided for in paragraph 2. The media service provider may notify the outcome of such exchanges to the Board. Very large online platform shall notify to the Board the outcome of such dialogue and/or the outcome of such complaint and redress independent mechanism. If no amicable solution is found, the media service provider may lodge a complaint before a certified out- of-court dispute settlement body in accordance with Article 21 of Regulation 2022/2065 without prejudice and in addition to its right to effective judicial protection.
Amendment 1047 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) the number of instances where they imposed any restriction or suspension on the grounds that the content or service provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article is incompatible with their terms and conditions; and
Amendment 1061 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 6
Article 17 – paragraph 6
6. With a view to facilitating the consistent and effective implementation of this Article, the Commission mayshall adopt an implementing act that issues guidelines to establish the form and details of the declaration set out in paragraph 1., including modalities of involvement of relevant civil society organisations in the review of the declarations, in consultation with the relevant independent authority or body of the country of establishment, where relevant, and address any potential abuse of the functionality
Amendment 1086 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. Users shall have a right to easily change the default settings of any device or, user interface and remote control controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services in order to customise the audiovisual media offer according to their interests or preferences in compliance with the law. This provision shall not affect national measures implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 1092 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2
Article 19 – paragraph 2
2. When placing the devices, remote controls and user interfaces referred to in paragraph 1 on the market, manufacturers and developers shall ensure that they include a functionality enabling users to freely and easily change the default settings controlling or managing access to and use of the audiovisual media services offered.
Amendment 1230 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. Audience measurement systems and methodologies shall comply with principles of transparency, impartiality, inclusiveness, proportionality, non- discrimination, comparability and verifiability.
Amendment 1238 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to the protection of undertakings’ businesstrade secrets, providers of proprietary audience measurement systems shall provide, without undue delay and free of costs, to media service providers and advertisers, as well as to third parties authorised by media service providers and advertisers, accurate, detailed, comprehensive, intelligible and up-to-date information on the methodology used by their audience measurement systems. They shall provide free of charge to each media service provider the audience measurements relating to its content and services. This provision shall not affect the Union’s data protection and privacy rules.
Amendment 1249 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Article 23 – paragraph 3
3. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall encourage the drawing up of codes of conduct by providers of audience measurement systems, together with media service providers, their representative organisations and any other interested partProviders, their representative organisations and any other interested parties shall draw up codes of conduct, with the support of national regulatory authorities or bodies, that are intended to contribute to compliance with the principles referred to in paragraph 1, including by promoting independent and transparent audits.
Amendment 1255 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 4
Article 23 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission, assisted by the Board, may issue guidelines on the practical application of paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of this Article, considering national codes of conduct.
Amendment 1259 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5
Article 23 – paragraph 5
5. The Board shall foster the exchange of best practices related to the deployment of audience measurement systems through a regular dialogue between representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies, representatives of providers of audience measurement systems, media service providers and other interested parties.