Activities of Petra KAMMEREVERT related to 2020/2022(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Digital Services Act: Improving the functioning of the Single Market - Digital Services Act: adapting commercial and civil law rules for commercial entities operating online - Digital Services Act and fundamental rights issues posed - Framework of ethical aspects of artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies - Civil liability regime for artificial intelligence - Intellectual property rights for the development of artificial intelligence technologies (debate)
Opinions (1)
OPINION on the Digital Services Act and fundamental rights issues posed
Amendments (4)
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls for the establishment of a modern understanding of fundamental rights, according to which fundamental rights are not only defensive rights against the State, but also protect freedom by limiting power; fundamental rights must therefore also impose obligations on those who exercise power through their technical infrastructures; in the case of such situation-based binding of private players by fundamental rights on a par with the State, account shall be taken of the degree of market domination, a market-dominating or quasi-monopolistic position, the degree of user reliance on the offer and the affected interests of users, of the powerful players themselves and of other third parties;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Suggests that special attention should be paid to the protection of children and young people and that this protection should also be safeguarded under data protection law and calls for online services for the protection of children and young people to be subject to the highest data protection restrictions;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Points out that soft coordination, support or supplementary measures, such as codes of conduct or self-regulation and co-regulation, may be efficient regulatory means, provided that government agencies monitor their impact and legal provision is made for State regulation where they are proved to be ineffective, since they often allow a swift response to changing circumstances also involving non-EU participants;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Points out that enforcement is in principle the responsibility of the national regulatory authorities also in cross-border cases and should not be relocated to the European level without good reason; further believes that the idea of the country of origin principle will be strengthened if the national regulatory authorities have effective enforcement tools and efficient cross-border cooperation procedures in place; at European level, this should be flanked by swift and efficient dispute settlement procedures that ensure lasting legal peace;