28 Amendments of Inese VAIDERE related to 2020/0361(COD)
Amendment 140 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Therefore, in order to safeguard and improve the functioning of the internal market, a targeted set of uniform, effective and proportionate mandatory rules should be established at Union level. This Regulation provides the conditions for innovative digital services to emerge and to scale up in the internal market. The approximation of national regulatory measures at Union level concerning the requirements for providers of intermediary services is necessary in order to avoid and put an end to fragmentation of the internal market and to ensure legal certainty, thus reducing uncertainty for developers and fostering interoperability. By using requirements that are technology neutral, innovation and the competitiveness of European companies should not be hampered but instead be stimulated.
Amendment 161 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In order to achieve the objective of ensuring a safe, predictable and trusted online environment, for the purpose of this Regulation the concept of “illegal content” should be defined broadly and also covers in connection with information relating to illegal content, products, services and activities. In particular, thatThe illegal nature of such content, products or services is defined by relevant Union law or national law in accordance with Union law. The concept should be understood, for example, to refer to information, irrespective of its form, that under the applicable law is either itself illegal, such as illegal hate speech or terrorist content and unlawful discriminatory content, or that relates to activities that are illegal, such as the sharing of images depicting child sexual abuse, unlawful non- consensual sharing of private images, online stalking, the sale of non-compliant or counterfeit products, the non-authorised use of copyright protected material or activities involving infringements of consumer protection law. In this regard, it is immaterial whether the illegality of the information or activity results from Union law or from national law that is consistent with Union law and what the precise nature or subject matter is of the law in question.
Amendment 174 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In order to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting services, the provider should, upon obtaining actual knowledge or awareness of illegal content, act expeditiously to remove or to disable access to that content. The removal or disabling of access should be undertaken in the observance of the principle of freedom of expression. The provider can obtain such actual knowledge or awareness through, in particular, its own-initiative investigations or notices submitted to it by individuals or entities in accordance with this Regulation, without prejudice to Article 6, in so far as those notices are sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated to allow a diligent economic operator to reasonably identify, assess and where appropriate act against the allegedly illegal content.
Amendment 182 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) In order to create legal certainty and not to discourage activities aimed at detecting, identifying and acting against illegal content, or against content that violates the community rules and guidelines of the intermediary services, that providers of intermediary services may undertake on a voluntary basis, it should be clarified that the mere fact that providers undertake such activities does not lead to the unavailability of the exemptions from liability set out in this Regulation, provided those activities are carried out in good faith and in a diligent manner. In addition, it is appropriate to clarify that the mere fact that those providers take measures, in good faith, to comply with the requirements of Union law, including those set out in this Regulation as regards the implementation of their terms and conditions, should not lead to the unavailability of those exemptions from liability. Therefore, any such activities and measures that a given provider may have taken should not be taken into account when determining whether the provider can rely on an exemption from liability, in particular as regards whether the provider provides its service neutrally and can therefore fall within the scope of the relevant provision, without this rule however implying that the provider can necessarily rely thereon.
Amendment 186 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Since 2000, new technologies have emerged that improve the availability, efficiency, speed, reliability, capacity and security of systems for the transmission and storage of data online, leading to an increasingly complex online ecosystem. In this regard, it should be recalled that providers of services establishing and facilitating the underlying logical architecture and proper functioning of the internet, including technical auxiliary functions, can also benefit from the exemptions from liability set out in this Regulation, to the extent that their services qualify as ‘mere conduits’, ‘caching’ or hosting services. Such services include, as the case may be, wireless local area networks, domain name system (DNS) services, top–level domain name registries, certificate authorities that issue digital certificates, or content delivery networks, that enable or improve the functions of other providers of intermediary services, cloud services or search engines. Likewise, services used for communications purposes, and the technical means of their delivery, have also evolved considerably, giving rise to online services such as Voice over IP, messaging services and web-based e-mail services, where the communication is delivered via an internet access service. Those services, too, can benefit from the exemptions from liability, to the extent thatwhere they qualify as ‘mere conduit’, ‘caching’ or hosting service.
Amendment 216 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) To avoid disproportionate burdens, the additional obligations imposed on online platforms under this Regulation should not apply to micro or small enterprises as defined in Recommendation 2003/361/EC of the Commission,41 unless their reach and impact is such that they meet the criteria to qualify as very large online platforms under this Regulation. The consolidation rules laid down in that Recommendation help ensure that any circumvention of those additional obligations is prevented. The exemption of micro- and small enterprises from those additional obligations should not be understood as affecting their ability to set up, on a voluntary basis, a system that complies with one or more of those obligations. In this regard, the Commission and Digital Service Coordinators may work together on information and guidelines for the voluntary implementation of the provisions in this Regulation for micro or small enterprises. Furthermore, the Commission and Digital Services Coordinators are also encouraged to do so for medium enterprises, which while not benefitting from the liability exemptions in Section 3, may sometimes lack the legal resources necessary to ensure proper understanding and compliance with all provisions. _________________ 41 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium- sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
Amendment 220 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) Action against illegal content can be taken more quickly and reliably where online platforms take the necessary measures to ensure that notices submitted by trusted flaggers through the notice and action mechanisms required by this Regulation are treated with priority, without prejudice to the requirement to process and decide upon all notices submitted under those mechanisms in a timely, diligent and objective manner. Such trusted flagger status should only be awarded to entities, and not individuals, that have demonstrated, among other things, that they have particular expertise and competence in tackling illegal content, that they represent collective interests and that they work in a diligent and objective manner. Such entities can be public in nature, such as, for terrorist content, internet referral units of national law enforcement authorities or of the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (‘Europol’) or they can be non-governmental organisations and semi- public bodies, such as the organisations part of the INHOPE network of hotlines for reporting child sexual abuse material and organisations committed to notifying illegal racist and xenophobic expressions online. FSuch entities can also include businesses who have a vested interest in flagging counterfeit products of their brand thus ensuring the online consumer experience is safer and more reliable. Similarly, for intellectual property rights, organisations of industry and of right- holders could be awarded trusted flagger status, where they have demonstrated that they meet the applicable conditions. The rules of this Regulation on trusted flaggers should not be understood to prevent online platforms from giving similar treatment to notices submitted by entities or individuals that have not been awarded trusted flagger status under this Regulation, from otherwise cooperating with other entities, in accordance with the applicable law, including this Regulation and Regulation (EU) 2016/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council.43 _________________ 43Regulation (EU) 2016/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) and replacing and repealing Council Decisions 2009/371/JHA, 2009/934/JHA, 2009/935/JHA, 2009/936/JHA and 2009/968/JHA, OJ L 135, 24.5.2016, p. 53
Amendment 225 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) An online platform may in some instances become aware, such as through a notice by a notifying party or through its own voluntary measures, of information relating to certain activity of a recipient of the service, such as the provision of certain types of illegal content, that reasonably justify, having regard to all relevant circumstances of which the online platform is aware, the suspicion that the recipient may have committed, may be committing or is likely to commitcontent manifestly related to a serious criminal offence involving a threat to the life or safety of persons, such as offences specified in Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council44 . In such instances, the online platform should inform without delay the competent law enforcemrelevant competent authorities of such suspicion, providing all relevant information available to it, including where relevant the content in question and an explanation of its suspicion. This Regulation does not provide the legal basis for profiling of recipients of the services with a view to the possible identification of criminal offences by online platforms. Online platforms should also respect other applicable rules of Union or national law for the protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals when informing law enforcement authorities. _________________ 44Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (OJ L 335, 17.12.2011, p. 1).
Amendment 253 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) Very large online platforms should deploy the necessary means to diligently mitigate the systemic risks identified in the risk assessment. Very large online platforms should under such mitigating measures consider, for example, enhancing or otherwise adapting the design and functioning of their content moderation, algorithmic recommender systems and online interfaces, so that they discourage and limit the dissemination of illegal content, adapting their decision-making processes, or adapting their terms and conditions. They may also include corrective measures, such as discontinuing advertising revenue for specific content, or other actions, such as improving the visibility of authoritative information sources. Very large online platforms may reinforce their internal processes or supervision of any of their activities, in particular as regards the detection of systemic risks. Such reinforcement could include the expansion and resource allocation to content moderation in languages other than English. They may also initiate or increase cooperation with trusted flaggers, organise training sessions and exchanges with trusted flagger organisations, and cooperate with other service providers, including by initiating or joining existing codes of conduct or other self-regulatory measures. Any measures adopted should respect the due diligence requirements of this Regulation and be effective and appropriate for mitigating the specific risks identified, in the interest of safeguarding public order, protecting privacy and fighting fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices, and should be proportionate in light of the very large online platform’s economic capacity and the need to avoid unnecessary restrictions on the use of their service, taking due account of potential negative effects on the fundamental rights of the recipients of the service.
Amendment 328 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) ‘online platform’ means a provider of a hosting service which, at the request of a recipient of the service, stores and disseminates to the public information, unless that activity is a minor and purely ancillary feature of anotherr functionality of another service or the principle service and, for objective and technical reasons cannot be used without that other service, and the integration of the feature or functionality into the other service is not a means to circumvent the applicability of this Regulation.
Amendment 346 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Paragraph 1 shall not apply with respect to liability under consumer protection law of online platforms allowing consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders, where such an online platform prese. It is importants the specific item of information or otherwise enables the specific transaction at issueat hosting services adopt the highest standards of transparency to highlight, in a way that would lead an average and reasonably well-informed consumer to believeunderstand, that the information, or the product or service that is the object of the transaction, is provided either by the online platform itself or by a recipient of the service who is acting under its authority or control comes from a third party which is not offered by the hosting service.
Amendment 347 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Providers of intermediary services shall not be deemed ineligible for the exemptions from liability referred to in Articles 3, 4 and 5 solely because they carry out voluntary own-initiative investigations or other activities aimed at detecting, identifying and removing, or disabling of access to, illegal content, or take the necessary measures for the implementation of community rules and guidelines of their services, or to comply with the requirements of Union law, including those set out in this Regulation, or national law in accordance with Union law.
Amendment 361 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Providers of intermediary services shall make public to trusted flaggers as well as users in all Member States the information necessary to easily identify and communicate with their intermediary services' single points of contact.
Amendment 415 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
The Commission and Digital Service Coordinators may work together on information and guidelines for the voluntary implementation of the provisions in this Regulation for micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC.
Amendment 416 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Online platforms shall provide to all recipients of the service, for a period of at least six months following the decision referred to in this paragraph, the access to an effective internal complaint-handling system, which enables the complaints to be lodged electronically and free of charge,. Complaints can be filed against the following decisions taken by the online platform on the ground that the information provided by the recipients is illegal content or incompatible with its terms and conditions:
Amendment 420 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) decisions to remove or, disable or restrict access to the information;
Amendment 421 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Complaints can also be lodged against decisions made by the online platform to not remove, not disable, not suspend and not terminate access to accounts.
Amendment 438 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The status of trusted flaggers under this Regulation shall be awarded, upon application by any entities, by the Commission or by the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State in which the applicant is established, where the applicant has demonstrated to meet all of the following conditions:
Amendment 439 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) it represents collective interests and is independent from any online platform except in the cases of businesses with a vested interest in flagging counterfeit products of their brand thus ensuring the online consumer experience is safer and more reliable;
Amendment 443 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3
Article 19 – paragraph 3
3. Digital Services Coordinators and the Commission shall communicate to the Commissioneach other and the Board the names, addresses and electronic mail addresses of the entities to which they have awarded the status of the trusted flagger in accordance with paragraph 2.
Amendment 445 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 5
Article 19 – paragraph 5
5. Where an online platform has information indicating that a trusted flagger submitted a significant number of insufficiently precise or inadequately substantiated notices through the mechanisms referred to in Article 14, including information gathered in connection to the processing of complaints through the internal complaint-handling systems referred to in Article 17(3), it shall communicate that information to the Digital Services Coordinatorauthority that awarded the status of trusted flagger to the entity concerned, providing the necessary explanations and supporting documents.
Amendment 447 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 6
Article 19 – paragraph 6
6. The Digital Services Coordinatorauthority that awarded the status of trusted flagger to an entity shall revoke that status if it determines, following an investigation either on its own initiative or on the basis information received by third parties, including the information provided by an online platform pursuant to paragraph 5, that the entity no longer meets the conditions set out in paragraph 2. Before revoking that status, the Digital Services Coordinator shall afford the entity an opportunity to react to the findings of its investigation and its intention to revoke the entity’s status as trusted flagger
Amendment 459 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Where the online platform cannot identify with reasonable certainty the Member State concerned, it shall inform the law enforcement authorities of the Member State in which it is established or has its legal representative or inform Europolhas its main establishment or its legal representative and also transmit the information to Europol for appropriate follow up.
Amendment 462 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Where an online platform allows consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders on the platform, it shall ensure that traders can only use its services to promote messages on or to offer products or, services or content to consumers located in the Union if, prior to the use of its services, the online platform has obtaintrader has provided the following information to the online platform:
Amendment 468 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Online platforms that facilitate the sale of harmonised consumer goods between a seller in a third country and a consumer in the EU and where there is no other manufacturer or importer in the EU, should verify that the product bears the required conformity mark (CE mark) and that it has other relevant documents (e.g. EU declaration of conformity). Traders from within the Union and from third countries should also have the option to voluntarily upload the relevant documents certifying that their goods meet the consumer protection standards of the EU. If the traders choose to do so, online platforms may then show proof of these documents to users as part of the user interface to instil more consumer confidence in the distance contracts conducted on their platforms.
Amendment 491 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Member States may request for the Commission to assess if an online platform that does not meet the threshold of 45 million active monthly users set out in Paragraph 1 may still cause significant and systemic societal risks. While an online platform may not meet the quantitative criteria to be categorised as a Very Large Online Platform, it may meet at least two of the following qualitative criteria: (a) it has a significant impact on the internal market; (b) it operates a core platform service which serves as an important gateway for business users to reach end users; (c) it enjoys an entrenched and durable position in its operations or it is foreseeable that it will enjoy such a position in the near future; (d) it repeatedly and systemically fails to take down illegal content, as evidenced in its transparency reporting as per Articles 13 and 24. If the Commission finds that the online platform does pose significant and systemic societal risks based on the above criteria, the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment may require the online platform to fulfil part of the obligations set out in Section 4 for a limited number of times until the risk has abated.
Amendment 525 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point f
Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point f
(f) where the audit opinion is not posiegative, operational recommendations on specific measures to achieve compliance. and risk- based remediation timelines with a focus on rectifying issues that have the potential to cause most harm to users of the service as a priority;
Amendment 560 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Member States shall designate the status of Digital Services Coordinator based on the following criteria: (a) the authority has particular expertise and competence for the purposes of detecting, identifying and notifying illegal content; (b) it represents collective interests and is independent from any online platform; (c) it has the capacity to carry out its activities in a timely, diligent and objective manner.