36 Amendments of Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA related to 2023/2019(INI)
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas Parliament requested that the Commission carefully assess the possible inclusion of electronically supplied services whose main feature is the provision of access to and use of copyright protected works or other protected subject matter into the scope of the Geo-blocking Regulation; whereas the Commission was bound by the Geoblocking Regulation Article 9, to perform such an evaluation by 23 March 2020; whereas the Commission report on the first short-term review of the Geo-blocking Regulation stated that, as regards audiovisual content, the Commission would engage in dialogue with stakeholders with a view to fostering the circulation of quality content across the EU; whereas this dialogue is included as Action 7 in the Media and Audiovisual Action Plan9 ; __________________ 9 COM(2020)0784.
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas citizens living in border regions and linguistic minorities are often prevented from accessing audiovisual content in their native languages due to geo-blocking, which hinders their access to and enjoyment of cultural content; whereas the ‘Minority SafePack’ European Citizens’ Initiative proposed an amendment with the effect of ensuring freedom of service and freedom of reception of audiovisual content in those regions where the minorities live;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
C b. whereas the European Parliament in its resolution of 13 November 2018 on minimum standards for minorities in the EU has called the Commission and Member States to take into account national and ethnic minorities when licensing media services and already encouraged the Commission to create the legal and regulatory conditions to ensure freedom of service, passage and reception of audiovisual content in regions where minorities live;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines the remaining untapped potential for cross-border economic activities that could be encouraged by the removal of all geo-blocking barriers and the continued promotion of the free movement of products and services in line with the principles of the Geo-blocking Regulation; emphasizes the need for increased consumer awareness and improved enforcement of measures at the national level to ensure the effectiveness of the Geo-blocking Regulation; calls for further actions aimed at removal of barriers and easing burdens to provide cross-border services, especially parcel delivery services, to realize the full potential of the Single Market for consumers and businesses;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines the importance of the Geo-blocking Regulation in building a more robust, coherent and accessible internal market for all citizens and businesses in the EU, regardless of their place of residence or establishment; stresses that further steps need to be taken to achieve the full potential of the Regulation, including by strengthening the legal framework supporting the cross- border exchange of goods and services; emphasizes the need for a comprehensive evaluation of the Regulation's effectiveness, taking into account the changes in consumers' and traders' behaviour triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Notes that the Commission published the First short-term review of the Geo-blocking Regulation’ (COM(2020)0766) and the accompanying staff working document (SWD(2020)0294) only on 30 November 2020, which is 7 months after the deadline set in the Regulation;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. Recalls that this dialogue was also mentioned in the Media and Audiovisual Action Plan adopted on 3 December 2020, where the Commission stated that this dialogue will take place in the course of 2021 and contribute to agreeing on concrete steps to improve access to and availability of audiovisual content across borders, that possible specific targets to increase the circulation of audiovisual works across the EU and ways to achieve them could be defined in the dialogue, and that the Commission, will monitor the progress in the achievement of the specific targets in cooperation with the audiovisual sector and decide on the follow-up, assessing various options, including legislative intervention;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2 d. Notes that the Commission effectively launched the dialogue on 9 November 2021 and that the fifth and the final meeting took place on 6 December 2022. Regrets that the Commission did not set out clear targets in regard to improving access to and availability of audiovisual content across borders at the beginning of the dialogue with the industry; Regrets that during past 3 years, from the announcement of the dialogue with the audiovisual industry at the end of 2020 until today, this exercise did not bring any concrete solutions, in terms of improving access to and availability of audiovisual content across borders, for the consumers;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 e (new)
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2 e. Calls the Commission to present to the Parliament the detailed outcome of its stakeholder dialogue on improving access to and availability of audiovisual content across borders, as a matter of urgency; asks the Commission to complement this report with an assessment of the proposed measures and its potential benefits for consumers;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recognises that the Commission carried out its first review prior to the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, which means that changes to both consumer and trading behaviour triggered by the pandemic were therefore not reflected in the 2020 Commission report; recalls the changes in consumer habits and the rising preference for online services that were additionally strengthened by the COVID-19 pandemic; underlines, therefore, the need to draw further conclusions based on the new data in this area, as 12 % of EU businesses10 started or increased efforts to sell goods or services online due to the pandemicsuggests a re- evaluation of the Geo-blocking Regulation in the context of the accelerated digital transformation induced by the pandemic, which has seen an increasing number of businesses moving online; recalls the changes in consumer habits and the rising preference for online services that were additionally strengthened by the COVID-19 pandemic; acknowledges the surge in online activities, including e-commerce, digital services, and remote work, underscoring the need for a robust and inclusive digital single market that caters to these evolving consumer habits; underlines, therefore, the need to draw further conclusions based on the new data in this area, as 12 % of EU businesses10 started or increased efforts to sell goods or services online due to the pandemic; emphasizes the importance of the Geo-blocking Regulation in facilitating cross-border online transactions and ensuring a fair and competitive digital single market, given the significant shift of businesses towards online platforms; __________________ 10 Eurostat, ‘Online sales efforts on the rise due to the pandemic’, 11 April 2022.
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Is concerned that a full-scale evaluation will face challenges due to the delay in application and a lack of data; notes, however, that the progress in the digitalisation of trade in goods and services should by its nature ease cross- border access and promote competition among different EU businesses to the benefit of consumerEmphasizes the need for a more robust data collection and analysis framework to better understand the impact and effectiveness of the Geo- blocking Regulation, including its effects on consumer behaviour and market dynamics;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Acknowledges the need for further evidence on the effectiveness, proportionality and dissuasiveness of the different enforcement measures in the Member States in the context of business- to-business transactions; encourages the Commission to conduct a comprehensive study on the impact of the Geo-blocking Regulation on business-to-business transactions, with a particular focus on small and medium-sized enterprises;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that one third of all complaints received by responding competent authorities were not actually covered by the Regulation, including, among other things, copyright-protected content and insurance services; acknowledges the need for further investigation into these areas, particularly in light of the Commission's study on the impacts of extension of the scope of geo- blocking regulation to audiovisual and non-audiovisual services giving access to copyright protected content; emphasizes the importance of considering the potential benefits of extending the scope of the Regulation to new areas such as copyright-protected content, particularly in relation to audiovisual content, the availability of which is often limited within national borders and access to which is often geo-blocked, as well as insurance services;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that the blocking of access to online interfaces and rerouting were the most common grounds for complaint in most Member States; recalls that the new Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 is meant to reinforce the cooperation of the Consumer Protection Cooperation network as it provides for new procedures and reinforced mutual assistance and alert mechanisms; calls for an evaluation of the effectiveness of these new procedures and mechanisms, and for the development of strategies to address the most common grounds for complaint; emphasizes the need to increase efforts put in the awareness raising campaigns for both traders and consumers;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recognises that certain price differences can exist for cross-border customers, which can be justified based on different value added tax (VAT) rates; and higher costs for cross-border delivery and running business operations; believes, however, thatt the same time, consumers should not be blocked from accessing competitive offers made available across the single market by the same or other providers; calls on the Commission and the Member States to take further steps to ease the access to and operations of cross-border parcel delivery services; encourages the Commission to continue analysing the changes of consumers' and traders' behaviours, triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic, that have not been sufficiently reflected in the 2020 Commission report;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Calls the Commission and Member States to work together to ensure that the benefits of the single market are fully realized by all consumers, regardless of their location;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Notes that during 5 years after the adoption of the Geoblocking Regulation important developments took place in the parcel delivery and express services market; calls, therefore, on the Commission to analyse current state of the market and assess to which extent identifying affordable cross-border parcel delivery services is still an issue for online sellers;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Recommends a broader and more detailed analysis to address concerns regarding the selective distribution and exclusive rights agreements that undermine the right of passive sale and competition in online and offline products and services distribution channels, with a particular focus on the impact of these agreements on SMEs; in this context, calls on the Commission to properly assess the effectiveness of Article 6 on agreements on passive sales, of the Geoblocking Regulation, which became fully applicable only from March 2020, and consider potential additional measures to ensure that agreements restricting passive sales do not hamper competition, consumer choice and market diversity;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Deplores the fact that some unjustified obstacles persist with regard to registration and payment methods online, so that. These obstacles result in cross-border customers are often not being able to register on websites requiring registration, or pay for the requested service without presenting an address or payment method linked to an address in the local country, thus diminishing the objective of the Regulation to ‘shop like a local’; calls on the Commission to conduct a comprehensive review of these obstacles and propose measures to eliminate them, in line with the principles of the Services Directive (2006/123/EC); calls the Commission to work closely with Member States and stakeholders to identify and address these and other obstacles, ensuring that the principles of the Geo- blocking Regulation are fully implemented and that consumers can truly 'shop like a local’; encourages the Commission to enhance cooperation with online service providers and payment processors to ensure that cross-border customers are not unfairly disadvantaged, in line with the principles of the Geo- blocking Regulation and the Services Directive (2006/123/EC);
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Recalls that, according to Article 1(5) of the Regulation, it should not affect copyright law; emphasises that Parliament requested, in line with the review clause of the Regulation, that the Commission assess whether the Regulation should also apply to electronically supplied services whose main feature is the provision of access to and use of copyright protected works or other protected subject matter, including the selling of copyright protected works or protected subject matter in an intangible form, provided that the trader has the requisite rights for the relevant territories11 ; __________________ ; calls the Commission to take into account the findings of the "Study on the impacts of the extension of the scope of the geo- blocking regulation to audiovisual and non-audiovisual services giving access to copyright protected content" in its assessment; in this context, recalls the findings of the First short-term review of the Geo-blocking Regulation, stating that, if distributors did not need additional licences for responding to unsolicited requests from individual consumers from outside territories where they are actively providing the service, cross-border demand would also be driven by consumers looking for new content or language versions not available in their Member State. In this scenario11a, overall revenues for online service providers could increase, because local content would find new audiences across borders; __________________ 11a SWD sec. 3.1.5.4 based on VVA et al (2020). 11 European Commission, ‘Study on the impacts of the extension of the scope of the geo-blocking regulation to audiovisual and non-audiovisual services giving access to copyright protected content’, 2020.
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. WelcomAcknowledges the progress made in terms of the cross-catalogue availability of music, e-book, video game and software products and services, both in subscription and transaction-based models; regrets the limited improvements regarding the cross- catalogue availability of video content and live sports events, which contribute to consumers’ perception that the audiovisual services sector is applying the highest level of geo-blocking;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes the popularity of different tools among consumers used to avoid geo- blocking restrictions, especially for audiovisual content; considers it important to recognise that the steady modernisation and adaptation of the audiovisual services sector, including existing business models, to new consumer expectations might be more effective than undermining the effective use of such tools;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Calls on the Commission to rapidly create the legal and regulatory conditions to ensure freedom of service, dissemination and reception of digital media content in regions where minorities live, so that they can watch and listen to content in their mother tongue, without geo-blocking of this content if it is broadcast or provided from another country;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15 b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that, in order to improve cross-border access to and availability of audiovisual content in the EU for linguistic minorities, audiovisual content licences are geographically extended to the nationally defined territory of the recognized linguistic minority of the neighbouring country, in which the same language is spoken, without calling into question the territoriality principle in general;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Believes that the Portability Regulation12 delivered substantialcertain benefits to consumers who expect to receive continued access to their services when they are temporarily present in another Member State; welcomNotes the Commission’s ongoing stakeholder dialogue on access to and the availability of audiovisual content across the EUReport on the application of Regulation (EU) 2017/1128 on cross-border portability of online content services in the internal market from June 2022, which elaborates that the legal fiction set out in Article 4 of that Regulation, has allowed the territorial constraints of copyright and related rights to be overcome without any significant revenue loss for rightholders12a; calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of applying similar approach in the Geoblocking Regulation; emphasises that further actions are needed to meet consumers expectations concerning the cross-catalogue availability of and cross-border access to sports events via streaming services; calls, therefore,is concerned that geoblocking also occurs in regard to the audiovisual productions funded or co- funded from the EU budget; is onf the Commission and the Member Statesopinion that whenever EU funds are involved there should be no place for depriving some EU citizens of access to the given content; calls on the Commission to carefully assess all options that willcould reduce the unjustified and discriminatory geo- blocking barriers for access to audiovisual services and sports events, while taking into account the potential impact on diversity and the available financing of the creative sector; reminds the Commcurrent business models of the creative sector; __________________ 12a The provisions in Article 4 mean that the provission to present Parliament with the outcome of its stakeholder dialogue on possibly extendingof an online content service to a subscriber who is temporarily present in another Member State than the Member State of residence, as well as the access to and the uscope of the Geo- blocking Regulation to audiovisual content; __________________ at service by the subscriber, are deemed to occur solely in the subscriber’s Member State of residence. SWD(2022) 173. 12 Regulation (EU) 2017/1128 of 14 June 2017 on cross-border portability of online content services in the internal market, OJ L 168, 30.6.2017, p.1.
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. In this context, urges the Commission to propose, at the latest by September 2024, the comprehensive revision of Geoblocking Regulation, consisting, in particular, of the inclusion of audiovisual services in the scope of this Regulation, and the deletion from Article 4(1)(b) of the exclusion of electronically supplied services, the main feature of which is the provision of access to or use of copyright-protected works or other protected subject matter;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16 b. Calls on the Commission to include, in this comprehensive Revision of Geoblocking Regulation, specific provisions on modalities related to how the prohibition of unjustified geoblocking will apply to audiovisual services and take into account in particular the need for assuring realistic timeframe allowing providers of audiovisual services to prepare for the implementation of new rules; calls on the Commission to make sure that all European citizens, in particular those living in border regions and linguistic minorities, have access to the content in their preferred language at all times; calls the Commission to take into account the need to provide consumers with a wider choice of content across borders, while acknowledging the need for further assessment of the potential impact on the overall dynamics of the audio-visual sector;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes that online music services (streaming or on-demand) are widely available across the EU, and that most of the major music streaming services are available in all EU Member States, mirroring the increasing consumer interest in cross-border access to music; is concerned that some obstacles still persist for consumers when accessing music streaming services in another Member State, in particular regarding the automatic change of applicable conditions; or acceptance of payment method; asks the Commission to carefully analyse this matter and propose adjustments of the Regulation, where appropriate;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Notes that the Commission should also present the results of the analysis for the potential extension of the Regulation to transport, financial, telecommunication and health services; with particular focus on the impact of geo-blocking practices on these sectors and the potential benefits of their inclusion in the Regulation; emphasizes that the Commission should consider the specific characteristics and regulatory frameworks of transport, financial, telecommunication and health services when analyzing the potential extension of the Regulation to these sectors, to ensure that any proposed changes are feasible and beneficial; urges the Commission to engage in a comprehensive consultation process with stakeholders in these sectors, as well as consumer representatives and academia, to gather insights and feedback on the potential extension of the Regulation to these services;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to regularly update and complement the figuresdata on complaints received by the national enforcement bodies in order to detectbetter identify possible areas of concern for consumers; emphasistresses that, in this context, aconducting regular mystery shopping exercise and a comparison with the 2015 and 2019 mystery shopping exercises could help identify persisting problems;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. UrgeCalls for a full assessment of possiblecomprehensive evaluation of potential synergies with other measures of the digital single market strategy, such asincluding the changes in the area of VAT for cross- border e-commerce that entered into force on 1 July 2021 and are supposed to reduce compliance costs for traders with cross- border operations and, hence, encourage more traders to deliver goods or services cross-border, and Regulation (EU) 2018/64413 on cross- border parcel delivery services that should help increase the transparency of cross- border tariffs; __________________ 13 Regulation (EU) 2018/644 of 18 April 2018 on cross-border parcel delivery services, OJ L 112, 2.5.2018, p. 19.